View Single Post
Old 04-06-10, 12:34 PM   #79
XMAN52373
Registered User
 
XMAN52373's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 534
Default Re: Physx Games Coming out?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinz68 View Post
Absolutely wrong comparison. Nothing is stopping NVIDIA to use multi monitors and they will. No need to get permission from AMD, pay for license and be dependent on ATI drivers.

As for the other physics you mention, they are not limited for use by one company only.

Yes PhysX is absolutely worthless for millions of gamers that use ATI product, funny you say NVIDIA is doing legwork.

Just about everybody who doesn't buy NVIDIA product ONLY is critical about how the PhysX is being used by NVIDIA. People like to see in game physic that are not limited for use by one company ONLY.

Anyway hope to see some open standard part of DirectX soon, in the meantime as I said before, HAVOC is 100% better it runs on my PC without any hacking and buying an additional Graphic Card.
And nothing is stopping ATI from supporting PhysX cept for ATI. Havok is crap, half assed physics. truely a shame when gamers would rather settle for prescripted, prerendered rail based, repeating crap over something that CAN add much more to a game. Nothing Havok can do hasn't been done before by pregrammed effects. Oh wait, THAT IS WHAT HAVOK DOES!

CryTek has by far the best physics based engine available. Next best solution for physics is PhysX Havok is a very distant third.

The comparison is valid. ATI is working with Devs to include support for 3600x1920 resoltions. This is not a DX standard resoltion but may be in the future. GPU based physics is the same way, its not there now, could be in the future. Will it be PhysX, highly unlikely, but someone has to do it before MS will adopt it. this has always been the case. PS 3 is an example.

Now I agree Nvidia shouldn't have prevented their GPUs from doing PhysX with an ATI card doing teh rendering. But I will refer you to a post I made on page 6 concerning that issue as an example as to why they did it.

And what is so funny about nvidia doing the legwork for GPU based physics? Tell me again just WHERE is ATI and THEIR GPU based counter solution? Oh, that right, you can't because they DONT ****ING HAVE ONE even tho they promised all ATI users one 3+ years ago. And now they have a means to do it with OpenCL (FYI Nvidia has already ported and is ready to use an OCL GPU physics based solution driver) and YET all ATI user are still waiting for something more than that 1 demo they did 2+ years ago. Again, another example of ATI dropping the ball and letting someone else do teh Legwork.
__________________
C2Q6600@3.3
ASUS GTX570
eVGA 780i SLi AR
8GB DDR2 PC8500
Windows 7 U x64
XMAN52373 is offline   Reply With Quote