Originally Posted by Xion X2
Am I missing something here? Allow me to suggest that you look up the definition of "prevalent." To me, 38% of the market who own ATI or Intel is "prevalent" as in "widely existing." It's not the majority (which I never said it was,) but that is certainly "widely existing."
Now, if you think that a developer is going to spend time coding a feature that 38% of the market will never get to experience, then you go on and believe it. However, the fact that you can only pull 15 titles that either exist or are in development using GPU-based PhysX pretty much proves my point.
And that 31% for ATI will most likely grow given the disappointment that Fermi has turned out to be thus far.
But keep in mind Xion, SM3 games didn't hit store shelves in droves until about the time ATI had support for it. But the reason they hit around that time was because Nvidia gave us SM3 and teh game Devs had 2-3 years to code for it before ATI supported it. Wwhoes to say GPU based physics wont be the same. Granted Nvidia is using and pushing PhysX, but they also already have, in waiting, OCL drivers for GPU based physics for the day that someone decides to do something to compete with PhysX. Ati promised it to us and they still have yet to produce anything save for a single Demo.