Go Back   nV News Forums > Graphics Card Forums > NVIDIA GeForce 400/500 Series

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-05-10, 11:01 PM   #37
Rollo
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,719
Default Re: Physx Games Coming out?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ninja Prime View Post
Couple things here rollo, in metro 2033 you can turn on the advanced physics effect if you have a NV card or not. Probably runs a lot slower, but nonetheless.

Secondly, whats so great in the terminator video there? I see... a bunch of crap flying around, that doesn't interact. I see a smoke effect that could be done on a CPU... hell it could be done on a game from 2004. I see some wavy cloth in front of windows or doors that doesn't serve any purpose and has no reason to be a physics effect, it could be a static animated thing and no one could tell or would care. Kinda looks like a lot of fail to me, I wouldn't showcase anything with that. In fact, I bet I could dig up some non-physx games that have every one of those "advanced effects" in them, if I were so inclined.
NP- Metro 2033 is a very demanding game with a high end NVIDIA rig. It would be totally unplayable on an ATi system with the PhysX effects. (and the 3d Vision would be impossible)

Same deal onTerminator- won't run playable on ATi.

Whether it "could" is a moot point.
__________________
Rig1:
intel 990X + 2 X EVGA 3GB GTX580 + 3 X Acer GD235Hz
3D Vision Surround

Rig 2:
intel 2500K + NVIDIA GTX590 + Dell 3007 WFPHC

[SIZE="1"]NVIDIA Focus Group Member
[B]NVIDIA Focus Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the Members.[/B][/SIZE]
Rollo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-10, 11:25 PM   #38
Ninja Prime
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Utah
Posts: 2,263
Default Re: Physx Games Coming out?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
NP- Metro 2033 is a very demanding game with a high end NVIDIA rig. It would be totally unplayable on an ATi system with the PhysX effects. (and the 3d Vision would be impossible)

Same deal onTerminator- won't run playable on ATi.

Whether it "could" is a moot point.
I don't know, I've never tried, but when I find out it will be worth revisiting.

What do you have to say about the effects though on terminator? Are those what physx is all about? Theres really nothing going on there that a CPU couldn't do. Theres really nothing going on there that adds anything to the game honestly.
Ninja Prime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-10, 11:25 PM   #39
JasonPC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,103
Default Re: Physx Games Coming out?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
If I had an ATi card, I'd only be able to decide if I could use "advanced" features like "AA" and "AF" that I was using back in GF2 days.
Or you could download the patch that enables physx when an ATI card is the primary card and use your 8800 GT to still get the same physx performance...

I also like how all the advanced physics in the world doesn't really help Metro's problem with braindead AI.
JasonPC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 12:01 AM   #40
Rollo
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,719
Default Re: Physx Games Coming out?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp0QbZWY67s
__________________
Rig1:
intel 990X + 2 X EVGA 3GB GTX580 + 3 X Acer GD235Hz
3D Vision Surround

Rig 2:
intel 2500K + NVIDIA GTX590 + Dell 3007 WFPHC

[SIZE="1"]NVIDIA Focus Group Member
[B]NVIDIA Focus Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the Members.[/B][/SIZE]
Rollo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 12:20 AM   #41
Ninja Prime
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Utah
Posts: 2,263
Default Re: Physx Games Coming out?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
Good way to dodge the question while feeling superior. Too bad everyone else can see through it and just thinks you're a douche dodging the question. So, you're saying that I'm crapping on physx because I can't have it? Newsflash rollo: I have two NV cards right now. One is a GTX 280, one is a GTX 285. If I wanted to, I could jump through the various hoops to get physx working with my 5870. If I wanted to, I could use the 285 and have the 280 for physx. Why would I choose not to if physx is so great? Because I'm a ATI fanboy, right? Thats why I bought that GTX 280 and 285 and the 8800 ultra before that, right? Riiiiight. Maybe physx isn't that great... nah can't be.

If it was awesome, a must have feature that you couldn't live without, and everyone loved it, I would have it. I play games, I like games, I like good graphics in games. I like things that add anything interesting and fun to games. Physx doesn't seem to do any of that.
Ninja Prime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 01:15 AM   #42
Viral
Registered User of Women
 
Viral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,523
Default Re: Physx Games Coming out?

All this arguing is great and all, hell, things were better when more fanboys were banned; I welcome those individuals to encourage another ban. Fact is though, Physx won't take off while it's a closed standard. Yes, the average CPU isn't ready for advanced physics processing but by the time all these stupid proprietary standards are left in the dust quad cores will be low end so physics might as well be done on the CPU since the GPU will still be the limiting factor for games in most cases.

Bring on the open standards already, if not, let people use their damn CPU to its potential, we'll have 8 cores on the desktop next year - hell, x86 server/workstations are already at 12 core.
__________________
Q9550 w/ Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme | 4GB Team Xtreme Dark 800MHz CL4 | Gigabyte X48-DS5
ASUS Radeon 5870 | 240GB OCZ Vertex 2 | 1TB WD Green Power | BenQ V2400W 24" LCD
Corsair HX-1000w | LG GGW-H20L 6x DL Blu-Ray Burner/HD-DVD Reader | Coolermaster Cosmos S

Acer TravelMate 4002WNLCi: Pentium M 725 @ 1.6GHz | Mobility Radeon 9700/64MB | 2GB DDR400 | 15.4" WXGA
Viral is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 01:27 AM   #43
Slytat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 354
Default Re: Physx Games Coming out?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viral View Post
All this arguing is great and all, hell, things were better when more fanboys were banned; I welcome those individuals to encourage another ban. Fact is though, Physx won't take off while it's a closed standard. Yes, the average CPU isn't ready for advanced physics processing but by the time all these stupid proprietary standards are left in the dust quad cores will be low end so physics might as well be done on the CPU since the GPU will still be the limiting factor for games in most cases.

Bring on the open standards already, if not, let people use their damn CPU to its potential, we'll have 8 cores on the desktop next year - hell, x86 server/workstations are already at 12 core.
Seriously, and while you're at it Nvidia, if people pay good money for an Nvidia card, they should be able to use it for whatever they see fit, regardless of the other components in their respective systems
Slytat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 01:34 AM   #44
noko
noko
 
noko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Orlando Florida
Posts: 735
Default Re: Physx Games Coming out?

Rollo, fermi is not strong enough by itself to run PhysX and the game Metro 2033? Must have a separate PhysX dedicated card? That is way beyond what most folks would do. Kinda cool but misses by a mile except for a niche market.

Developers will probably get tired of PhysX anyways and make their own physics routines using OpenCL or Direct Compute and pass it along, maybe a bullet game will finally come out. I am glad Nvidia is pushing PhysX and seeing developers use it, gives folks an option to have these effects if they want which is good. For me a single 260 card didn't do well with physX and rendering at the same time unless one degrades everything which made PhysX pointless.
noko is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 04-06-10, 01:44 AM   #45
JasonPC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,103
Default Re: Physx Games Coming out?

Very good point noko. One of the selling points of fermi is physx, but is the card capable of running full physx and full graphic settings in most games with a single card? I very much doubt it. They should focus on standalone cards for physx and write standalone drivers... Allow it to work on ati setups as well and maybe even market/specifically design one of their cards to be optimum for physx.
JasonPC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 01:58 AM   #46
Viral
Registered User of Women
 
Viral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,523
Default Re: Physx Games Coming out?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonPC View Post
Very good point noko. One of the selling points of fermi is physx, but is the card capable of running full physx and full graphic settings in most games with a single card? I very much doubt it. They chould focus on standalone cards for physx and write standalone drivers... Allow it to work on ati setups as well and maybe even market/specifically design one of their cards to be optimum for physx.
Yes, if they did what Ageia were doing then I'd be all for it. If they decided to add these chips onto their GPU's that would be fine also, as long as they also offer the standalone chips with comparable performance. Funny thing is they'd most likely make more money and definitely have more dev support using this method.
__________________
Q9550 w/ Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme | 4GB Team Xtreme Dark 800MHz CL4 | Gigabyte X48-DS5
ASUS Radeon 5870 | 240GB OCZ Vertex 2 | 1TB WD Green Power | BenQ V2400W 24" LCD
Corsair HX-1000w | LG GGW-H20L 6x DL Blu-Ray Burner/HD-DVD Reader | Coolermaster Cosmos S

Acer TravelMate 4002WNLCi: Pentium M 725 @ 1.6GHz | Mobility Radeon 9700/64MB | 2GB DDR400 | 15.4" WXGA
Viral is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 02:24 AM   #47
Xion X2
Registered User
 
Xion X2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: U.S.
Posts: 6,701
Default Re: Physx Games Coming out?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viral View Post
Fact is though, Physx won't take off while it's a closed standard.
It's really that simple, people. And since ATI is prevalent in the market right now, GPU PhysX is as good as dead. You'll have a title here or there that may use it for a few "ah, neat-o" effects that get tired after a few minutes and that's about it. Developers simply aren't going to delegate resources to something that won't be leveraged by everyone. As they shouldn't.

If I were Nvidia, I would probably try to do the same thing by keeping GPU PhysX in my hands, but they cannot win this game as long as ATI is a player in the industry. And it doesn't look as if that's changing any time soon.

Open standard is the only way to go at this point.
__________________

i7-2700k @ 5.0 GHz
Nvidia GeForce 570 2.5GB Tri-SLI
Asus P67 WS Revolution (Tri-SLI)
OCZ Vertex SSD x 4 (Raid 5)
G.Skill 8GB DDR3 @ 1600MHz
PC Power & Cooling 950W PSU
Xion X2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-10, 02:38 AM   #48
XMAN52373
Registered User
 
XMAN52373's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 534
Default Re: Physx Games Coming out?

Quote:
Originally Posted by noko View Post
Rollo, fermi is not strong enough by itself to run PhysX and the game Metro 2033? Must have a separate PhysX dedicated card? That is way beyond what most folks would do. Kinda cool but misses by a mile except for a niche market.

Developers will probably get tired of PhysX anyways and make their own physics routines using OpenCL or Direct Compute and pass it along, maybe a bullet game will finally come out. I am glad Nvidia is pushing PhysX and seeing developers use it, gives folks an option to have these effects if they want which is good. For me a single 260 card didn't do well with physX and rendering at the same time unless one degrades everything which made PhysX pointless.
Couple things to consider here. For DC, you almost need Microsfot to get involved and to be honest, about as far as I want them involved in gaming is making the API as they have killed off a few good lines of games already because they "got involved in gaming".

For OCL, it still needs a front end such as PhysX to to the stuff. OCL was supposed to be getting worked into Havok, ATI has truely droped that ball. 3 years and 1 demo of a single color water droplet affect on water, yawn.

CryTek who by far has built the best in house physics engine to date, yes it is even better than PhysX(will get into that in a sec), has just upped the anty even more with Cry Engine 2 but sadly no devs are very interested in uing their engines, sad really.

As for PhysX, pay close attention Rollo cause while I like PhysX it has severe draw backs. While PhysX can and does add some very nice and realistic interactive affects to games, the problem is that the devs who use it tend to focus way to much on 1 aspect of it to add 1 or 2 disticnt PhysX features to a game for added eyecandy and fail to go for a more balanced of the same. Examples of what I refer to:
B:AA-Smoke/fog and debris that is interactive and reactionary, but absolutely nothing else
Crostasis-Awesome water affects and some weapon based physics, nothing else
GRAW2-With a patch added some cool environment affects that makes the game replayable and enjoyable, but nothing else
Then there is the game with teh glass and flags, interactive and reactionary but very little else is added to the game.

As one can see from my examples, the focus on one or 2 tings and ignore other aspects that could add even more. Toss in the fact the PhysX SDK is the same for consoles and PCs, they seem to be very lazy in coding for multi core usage for PC but yet take the extra time and effort for consoles. Metro 2033 being the lone exception to date but even it suffers when no dedicated PhysX card is in the machine but is still playable without as multi core WAS coded to work and time takien to make sure it worked.

Now for havok. Havok is yet another physics engine that could be as good as physx IF games that used it wouldn't script 100% of all physics basd stuff and constantly reuse it and call it reactionary. It could also use some GPU support to maybe help that along(see my point on OCL and ATI above).
__________________
C2Q6600@3.3
ASUS GTX570
eVGA 780i SLi AR
8GB DDR2 PC8500
Windows 7 U x64
XMAN52373 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.