PDA

View Full Version : Whatever happened to Physx. Is it still a dead duck?


Pages : [1] 2 3

XDanger
05-27-07, 09:07 PM
Are they just waiting for a better driver/app ?

Seadogs
05-27-07, 09:14 PM
I do believe they are dead. And they are talking about GPU phisics now right? Double dead.

Trademark
05-28-07, 12:28 AM
Maybe not, I think there's a difference between integrated physx and dedicated physix. Dedicated performing better

jAkUp
05-28-07, 12:35 AM
I think we will see once UT2007 releases :D

nekrosoft13
05-28-07, 12:39 AM
i wouldn't call physx dead, more and more titles have it implemented

Joe Public
05-28-07, 06:05 AM
The card is too costly for me to even be interested in it.

XDanger
05-28-07, 07:35 AM
I think at one point a 128mb card was 99 in the uk ,now its jumped back up to 129.

Eliminator
05-28-07, 08:51 AM
a local store has it on sale for $197 cdn... i would only buy it if it was around $50 tops

john19055
05-28-07, 10:06 AM
I think it is dead ,I look for it to be built in to the new GPU chips.

Kayden
05-28-07, 04:10 PM
I think we will see once UT2007 releases :D


I gotta agree here. The ageia physics software has been incorperated into the Unreal 3 engine and look at how many development sudios have licensed it. I took a spin with the Cell Factor game and it was meant for there card to be installed. It ran horribly even on a machine like mine but I have to admit the game was designed around it and I was running it at 1920x1200. Looking at some bench marks online it shows a 30 to 40 fps increase with it and if the results are the same with the unreal 3 engine even though it wasn't designed around that card I will spend the $200 but if it's only 5fps or so forget it.

kevJ420
05-28-07, 06:08 PM
I gotta agree here. The ageia physics software has been incorperated into the Unreal 3 engine and look at how many development sudios have licensed it. I took a spin with the Cell Factor game and it was meant for there card to be installed. It ran horribly even on a machine like mine but I have to admit the game was designed around it and I was running it at 1920x1200. Looking at some bench marks online it shows a 30 to 40 fps increase with it and if the results are the same with the unreal 3 engine even though it wasn't designed around that card I will spend the $200 but if it's only 5fps or so forget it.

I agree also, the ps3 also has the sdk for it. The much-hyped cell will be using the sdk.

2 major parts of the future strongly support physx.

Of course, I don't give a **** about the performance increase, i'm stoked about the fact that there's such thing as a ppu, and of course the advancements in physics it could bring.

I'm going to buy one as soon as they make it pci-e.

I can't quite comprehend why it's only using legacy pci.

KasuCode
05-28-07, 09:55 PM
Instead of calling it "legacy pci". Why not call it the Walmart version.

Now if only walmart actualy sold a pci ppu.

I can see the people now. "Where do I plug my monitor in at?"

Arioch
05-28-07, 09:59 PM
No room for one on my motherboard - I would rather keep the X-Fi wedged in between my SLI cards than use one of those.

Kayden
05-29-07, 06:47 AM
I'm going to buy one as soon as they make it pci-e.

I can't quite comprehend why it's only using legacy pci.

I heard that they were working on pci-e model though I didn't hear much in the way if it will be pcie 1x, 4x or use a full slot. I for one only have 1 pci "walmart" slot left but I do have a pcie 1x and 4x open and would like to see it made for one of those because my other 2 16x slots are taken up with my monster video cards :skeleton2

superklye
05-29-07, 07:11 AM
No room for one on my motherboard - I would rather keep the X-Fi wedged in between my SLI cards than use one of those.
Roger that.

radekhulan
05-29-07, 07:47 AM
PhysX makes games run slower ;-) I hope this wrong concept will never ever succeed, we do not need special power-hungry accelerators for something that GPU/CPU can do themselfs; especially when PhysX will be utilized something like 0.1% of computer time.

http://www.hothardware.com/articles/BFG_Ageia_PhysX_Physics_Card/?page=5

http://www.hothardware.com/articleimages/Item816/Ghost.png

Rakeesh
05-29-07, 10:09 AM
This technology will make it - just give it time to mature. Right now it isn't going to go anywhere until we start seeing more games that make hardcore use of physics effects. This is why I haven't bought a PPU yet, and probably won't for some time.

radekhulan
05-29-07, 10:46 AM
This technology will make it - just give it time to mature.

GPUs can do the same and more, via DX10. PhysX is doomed. And I do not want to have yet another specialized card in my PC, which does nothing 99.999% of time. Do not want to support this wrong concept technology, even if card price would be $1.

Kayden
05-29-07, 10:49 AM
GPUs can do the same and more, via DX10. PhysX is doomed. And I do not want to have yet another specialized card in my PC, which does nothing 99.999% of time. Do not want to support this wrong concept technology, even if card price would be $1.

They said the same thing about agp.... (pimp)

radekhulan
05-29-07, 11:40 AM
They said the same thing about agp.... (pimp)

What? AGP is interface, same as PCIe, has nothing to do with accelerators. Any card can be connected via AGP and/or PCIe (if producer wants). This has nothing to do with GPU versus PhysX accelerator (well, rather deccelerator)... Silly..

If you think about it (a bit), it is really stupid to have PhysX in your computer being used 0.001% time, while DX10 GPU can do the same (while not taking additional slots and not needing more power, unlike PhysX). PhysX is just another "CPU", but we already have 2 CPUs (CPU and GPU) being able to do physics stuff.

Kayden
05-29-07, 11:52 AM
What? AGP is interface, same as PCIe, has nothing to do with accelerators. Any card can be connected via AGP and/or PCIe. This has nothing to do with GPU versus PhysX accelerator (well, rather deccelerator)... Silly..

If you think about it (a bit), it is really stupid to have PhysX in your computer being used 0.001% time, while DX10 GPU can do the same (while not taking additional slots and not needing more power, unlike PhysX). PhysX is just another "CPU", but we already have 2 CPUs (CPU and GPU) being able to do physics stuff.


Right I know that but they said that agp would die because pci was superior at the time and when 4x agp came out it took off because games took advantage of it. The same could be said for Physx it just needs support before it will take off, though I am waiting to see what happens when the unreal 3 engine comes out.

radekhulan
05-29-07, 12:05 PM
Right I know that but they said that agp would die because pci was superior at the time and when 4x agp came out it took off because games took advantage of it.

No. AGP 8x would be still ok even for 8800GTX. Look for GPU tests / performance at PCIe 16x vs. PCIe 4x, not a big difference.

Of course PCIe has a sense, for SLI, for additional components, and for lower costs, but it is still just a different interconnect. Same as PATA vs. SATA. Not a component change (HDDs are the same, just have different interface, serial instead of parallel one).

As I said, current CPUs and GPUs (remember 128 stream processors in 8800GTX?; CUDA?) can do any kind of processing including physics. So it is very silly to introduce "specialized physics card" just for games, and that is why nobody uses it.

Some engines, like Havok, can use CPU/GPU and/or PhysX for physics calculation, and this is the best approach, not something that requires PhysX. PhysX does not show any substantial lead in terms of performance... It will (fortunately) die, and DX10 cards will do its job.

Rakeesh
05-29-07, 12:39 PM
GPUs can do the same and more, via DX10. PhysX is doomed. And I do not want to have yet another specialized card in my PC, which does nothing 99.999% of time. Do not want to support this wrong concept technology, even if card price would be $1.

Yes but that means sacrificing shader units for physics, while simultaneously increasing the amount of polygons that need to be rendered, thus needing yet more shader units available for graphics rendering. The end result is a heavily reduced framerate. This isn't going to be immediately apparent in todays games, but sooner or later it will really start to sink in.

The argument you just made is comparable to the arguments I was hearing people make not long ago about how dual core processors will always be useless for games. And for the time being, it is for the most part, but that is already changing. You are essentially saying you'd rather just turn off the second core in protest of the concept.

No. AGP 8x would be still ok even for 8800GTX. Look for GPU tests / performance at PCIe 16x vs. PCIe 4x, not a big difference.

Of course PCIe has a sense, for SLI, for additional components, and for lower costs, but it is still just a different interconnect. Same as PATA vs. SATA. Not a component change (HDDs are the same, just have different interface, serial instead of parallel one).

No. PCI-e is a serial connection, whereas PCI is parallel. All of the devices in a PCI setup have to share bandwidth, including the AGP port. The AGP port merely has the top priority. With PCI it was going to be necessary to continue to increase the bandwidth of the overall bus to unreasonable numbers in order to support the newer devices that would eventually come around.

The solution to this problem was to give each device its own data connection (e.g. PCIe x1,) or several of its own data connections that it can combine (e.g. PCIe x16.) That said, PCIe operates much differently from that of PCI.

Again, much like the PPU cards, this is in preparation for technology to come. In this case it isn't necessarily faster than what it replaced, but in a few years you won't be able to do without it.

radekhulan
05-29-07, 12:46 PM
No. PCI-e is a serial connection, whereas PCI is parallel.

Well, if you read correctly, this is exacty what I wrote (AGP->PCIe is same as PATA->SATA; parallel to serial and multiple components) ;-) But nevermind, it has nothing to do with PhysX (except the fact that PhysX does not exist for PCIe, yet)..

Tr1cK
05-29-07, 01:01 PM
If they dropped a PCI-E 1x card at around $99 USD. I'd give it a shot, til then, I think it's crap even if supported by games. Who wants to continue using or even spend what they want for PCI that's being phased out?