Originally Posted by Vardant
Games are not taking advantage of any of it really. Cuda is obviously tailored to NV hardware, closed standard means the development is faster and professional applications don't need unified standards, because the companies buy their HW depending on their future use.
Closed standard, overtook OpenGL exactly because it's controlled by one company, same way PhysX, NV 3D and Cuda is developed.
First of all, PhysX is not an API. Other physics engine are also owned by a single company, Havok only has CPU support, Bullet is not really going anywhere recently.
PhysX 3.0 has re-worked CPU optimizations, better support and more tools for developers.
We have and still, the NV version is the best.
Point is, we don't need more specialised hardware within a GPU if it means compromising it's graphics performance relative to the competition on the many games that are already released or will be released and don't use this feature period, and GPU based PhysX is present is 6 games released over a period of several years, while the CPU version is used a lot more, so that says it all really now doesn't it?
And why Direct X overtook OpenGL is precisiely because OpenGL allowed the ability to add all sorts of new features on graphics cards thru driver extensions, creating a mess of who supported exactly what for developers and their game projects, so yes unification in that area once DX10 rolled in and made everything mandatory, with no ability to add extra features was a blessing that made game developers lives easier.....And last i checked, microsoft has a lot more leverage on the market since most systems run their O/S's, with linux and the MAC/OS very far away in second and third, so Nvidia could only dream of having that kind of leverage.