Nvidia's secret weapon against ATI?

[duffy_chucky]

Originally Posted by Redeemed

Crysis doesn't utilise PhysX.

lawl , that 's what i answer every time .

[Skinner]

Their weapon is high (est) min framerates due one core.

I'm still tossing wether to take the HD4870 in CF or one GTX280 and it will probably be the last. The min fps and smoothness is something not to forget.

[3DBrad]

Originally Posted by mailman2

Wrong, they used Havoc which supports multiple core CPUs. Which is why some UT3 based games tax 4 cores. Bioshock used another physics engine however.

To me PhysX isn't more important than getting 95% of the GTX 280 performance for $320. Gimme a 4870.

wrong

Epic and Ageia had a partership so Physx is part of the engine, however, Biostink used Havok physics and a few other games, but most UE3 games use Physx.

[3DBrad]

Originally Posted by mailman2

There are only 2 maps that you have to download that support PhysX lol. Not every map even supports PhysX. So I guess the shader re-write of the driver would be the reason why UT3 has a huge FPS increase, it has nothing to do with PhysX.

The 177.39 + PhysX combo only works with G92 and GT200 series and ONLY in Vantage (which is sorta cheats cause it uses the GPU to run the Physics benchmark and not the CPU like it should) and the UT3 addon maps ("Tornado" and "LightHouse". - download here http://www.gameupdates.org/details.php?id=1917) for PhysX.

There is no universial PhysX support for the Nvidia cards yet.

You don't get it, Unreal Engine 3 uses Ageia's (now Nvidia's) software for physics, the "Physx" maps are just showing a lot of those physical interactions.

But on regular maps, when a Scorpion blows up and pieces bounce around, what do you think it uses for those "physical" interactions with the 3d world?

[Maverickman]

My 3DMark vantage score went from 9380 to 12151 after I installed the 177.41 drivers and the Nvidia PhysX software. I agree that this not due to Nvidia "cheating" as the ATI fanboys would have us believe. Nvidia is not hiding anything, and Futuremark is more to blame than Nvidia for the inflated score which isn't really that inflated when you factor in the PhysX support. I'm certain that this will become a HUGE factor in games in the near future. I've played UT3 with PhysX enabled, and I was very impressed with the detail and overall look of the game.

Originally Posted by rhuala

Bahh, sounds like they're loosing focus... they'll probably mess things up more by trying to add this into the mix, the quad core cpu's give us enough bandwidth to do the physics on the cpu, leave it off the gpu please, just focus on giving me a really stable SLI powerhouse card please...

rh

QFT.

[Villa]

Nvidia PhysX runs on AMD Radeon 3870, scores 22,000 CPU marks in Vantage

Damn, there goes the secret weapon.

[G-Man]

Originally Posted by Villa

Nvidia PhysX runs on AMD Radeon 3870, scores 22,000 CPU marks in Vantage

Damn, there goes the secret weapon.

for some reason this made me LOL haha

[JH24]

Originally Posted by Villa

Nvidia PhysX runs on AMD Radeon 3870, scores 22,000 CPU marks in Vantage

Damn, there goes the secret weapon.

Wow, that's certainly interesting, I don't think Nvidia will be happy with this but I don't know how these kind of things work legally.


I don't have much knowledge of computers or the latest developments, but is there a risk that this physics stuff goes the same way as the rivalry between Blueray and HD-DVD? For example, a person has an ATI card, would this mean he/she would not be able to enjoy the benefits of enhanced physics if the game only supports PhysX?


I'm kinda hoping there will be a general standard eventually.

[LordJuanlo]

AFAIK, enhanced PhysX will run in both ATI and nVidia cards, Chris Taylor from nVidia said this when they bought AGEIA:

Taylor was talking a lot about the principle of having a non-proprietary, free API, as opposed to an exclusive Nvidia physics API. Let's face it; this is what you'd need if you wanted game developers to take your API seriously over Intel's. 'The industry is crying out for a non-proprietary physics API, and there isn't one today,'

What has happened now is unofficial, I think it will be fully, officially supported in a future ATI driver release.

The problem is for nVidia, because Havok is property of Intel and only ATI will have hardware acceleration for it, at least that's the situation today

[Viral]

It's kind of ironic that ATI's "partnerships" with Intel are some of the big plus points for them over nvidia. Ironic because they're now owned by AMD, of course. All ATI needed was a well performing GPU and bam, they have a better platform than nvidia.

[particleman]

Originally Posted by LordJuanlo

AFAIK, enhanced PhysX will run in both ATI and nVidia cards, Chris Taylor from nVidia said this when they bought AGEIA:



What has happened now is unofficial, I think it will be fully, officially supported in a future ATI driver release.

The problem is for nVidia, because Havok is property of Intel and only ATI will have hardware acceleration for it, at least that's the situation today

I don't think this will be a problem for nVidia, infact I think this will push the adoption of physx. If physx gets hardware support both nVidia and ATi, and havoc only has support from ATi; I think developers will flock to physx (that is unless Intel does some arm twisting and exerts its influence).