Can Ageia's PhysX Card Bring Real-World Physics to Games?

[Prey]

Just because it may be fast and have a lot of potential that isn't to say that Ageia Physx PPU would be the best solution.

An example of this would be when RIMMs came out.. wicked fast.. lots of potential.. but there were too many downfalls (i.e. heat, dummy moduals)

Again the discussion at hand isn't so much if a PPU is or isn't a good thing for gaming... it is if Ageias PhysX solution is flawed and at it's current point the cost benefit ratio is skewed in an un-favorable way for Ageia. While yes games that are for Ageia are going to look good.. doesn't mean that a $300 dollar card is the answer

But physics in a game that make the game more enjoyable (after all if they didn't then what the hell would really be the point) is a great idea whatever the solution may be.

 

[xgas]

After all this ranting, we seem to forget that the CPU still needs to feed Geometry data to the GPU, even if CPU has enuf power to do as much as the PPU, its not design to run physics data, not even a Quad core Opteron can do 20 Giga Instructions per sec, not even a GPU, cause their not design to do that kind of data processing, still, even if you have Physics Effects on GPU, then interactive physics on CPU, you will still have gigantic slow downs on big explosions with lots of objects near the explotion get either blown to pieces or pushed. So its like the article said, most of us prefer to wait and see.

 

[r0x0r]

Another problem with the PhysX is that it takes up the PCI-X slot which would otherwise house a 2nd graphics card.

CPU's, GPU's and PPU's are (theoretically) the same. They all crunch data, 1's and 0's, and it's up to the programmer to tell the CPU/GPU/PPU how that data gets crunched. I'm not convinced that a dedicated physics card is even required yet; look at the benchmarks that TH usually post. 100fps in all but the most graphically-intensive games (Oblivion, FEAR, TR:L) is achievable on the TH PC's and if your PC isn't so beasty then adjust the settings; it's only more shiny stuff that you probably won't miss anyway. The PhysX would work well on a mid-range system (programmed correctly), but the problem is it's aimed at enthusiasts, who probably won't need it anyway as they'll never experience slow-down so great that they can tell the difference between one frame and the next.

This paragraph is for you, Ragger. Please, please, PLEASE make an attempt at using proper English. If you want people to take you seriously then you must remove that idiotic "txt spk" you so love to use from your vernacular. Excellent (but not necessarily proper) English commands respect and will make people want to listen to you and read your posts. Condensing what you need to say into fewer sentences is also extremely helpful, as the majority of "ppl" have short attention spans and will not read page upon page of verbal diatribe.

 

[GOTzMADsKILLz]

One thing I can't stand is the fact that in all these games with their "real" physics, is objects STILL can't seem to stop moving once put in motion. Take Oblivion for example... bodies roll/slide down even the most miniscule incline whether it's a grassy plain or cobblestone street. For some reason no reviewer anywhere seems to mention this fact or how odd it is. If they can fix that in the Havoc engine, then go with that.

Good article it shed some light on this whole Physics add-in card (non)issue.

 

[lp231]

Another problem with the PhysX is that it takes up the PCI-X slot which would otherwise house a 2nd graphics card.

What are you talking about?
The Ageia PhysX uses a standard PCI slot not a PCI-X.
Also for graphic cards it's called PCIe x16 not PCI-X!
PCI-X is the higher version of the standard PCI which is mostly
found on server or workstation motherboards.

As for the Agiea ppu card...

For all those AGEIA fans out there I have good news and bad news. The good news is that PCIe versions of PhysX are on the way this year...Now the bad news: it's still going to cost $280.

:lol:

 

[Prey]

PCI Express just isn't known by PCIe, I don't know how many people have heard it called 3rd Generation IO or 3GIO but that is another name for PCI express. Since you have PCI, PCI-X or PCI Extended, and then PCIe or 3GIO.

Another thing just to remember is the interface difference between PCI and PCIexpress is parallel vs serial.

What I would like to know is instead of using a PCI why not use one the 4x or 1x PCIe slots.. I guess it would be easier on them but.. I think it would be better for consumer

 

[Ragger]

r0x0r: i understand your concern, since i cannot learn to type perfect english in a day i will stop posting, but i hope people will try to learn more about the product and its capabileties and what it was meant for instead of saying it reduses FPS and thinking its made to accelerate grafix and fps when its something completely different.

I also agree with others saying this solution can be made in a different way, but i dont think CPUs, or GPUs are the solution. I would like to see a PPU on the moderboards or built in with the grafix card instead. An CPU or GPU cannot do what a dedicated chip for psysics can, if they could noone would buy those expensive physics or calculation cards that exists for professional applications if they could buy a 4Ghz dual core to perform just as good =D A PhysX card is not to far away from some of the cheaper ones of those cards, and they probably cost more then an average computer. Its not just as simple as 1s and 0s either, its chip achitecture and alot of other factors, im no chip just a gamer but i think its not that simple =(

Anyway since my posts are so bad i will simply stop posting now.. sorry for littering! ^^

 

[stolennomenclature]

I prefer general purpose solutions to specific ones. I don't like the idea of having to buy a dedicated card for each specific purpose. A graphics card, a physics card, a grenade card, a bomb card, a speech card, etc. To me this seems obviously the wrong way to go.

The multi-cored CPU is a step in the right direction, but what would be better is equiping each PC with a CPU BUS, similar to PCI-Express, with perhaps 8 slots, that allow one to add in as many CPU cards as one wishes. If each CPU card could hold several multi-cored CPU's, you could achieve tons of number crunching power - as much as you need or even want.

The general purpose solution is better since the extra power can be utilised by nearly all the software being run, not just those bits written for a specific card.

Surely this is a better long term solution.

Really, who wants to have to buy new bits of hardware just to run a new piece of software?

:roll:

 

[xgas]

Seeming how there is a hack for Ghost Recon that allows the same effects without using a PhysX card, I don't see their solution coming out on top.

It will be interesting to see what UT2007 gets from the PPU.

Actually, I'm a bit surprised that MS hasn't come out with a Direct X standard for physics.

Microsoft Licenced Ageia PhysX for their DX Physics.

 

[CannedTurkey]

StolenNomenclature, it's all about using the right tool for the job. It's the same reason you don't use a honda accord for rock-crawling, or see too many lamborghini's in monster truck rallies. They all do the same thing (provide transportation for 1 or more occupants) like different cards all crunch numbers, but they are all purposely built to do something well.

Graphics Processing, Audio Processing, Physics Processing.
Race Car, School Bus, Monster Truck.

A generic processing solution will never outperform dedicated solutions in their areas of expertise.

 

[xonda]

Every body seems a little skeptical about Ageia processing capabilities. In most is Ghost Recon video's fault.
We demand a THG video of new CellFactor game. Maybe it will answer some questions.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

StolenNomenclature, it's all about using the right tool for the job. It's the same reason you don't use a honda accord for rock-crawling, or see too many lamborghini's in monster truck rallies.

Pretty silly analogy since ATV aren't necessarily the best All Terrain Vehicles, often as it seems you should know, the modified Truck/Jeep is the better rock-crawler. And what vehicle gets you up to ther top and then over a mountain quickest?

.... A helicopter!

Which isn't made for rock climbing but does the job better than any rock climber out there if the task is large enough. :tongue:

Graphics Processing, Audio Processing, Physics Processing.
Race Car, School Bus, Monster Truck.

A generic processing solution will never outperform dedicated solutions in their areas of expertise.

Only if the one that' geared for a specific job can do it well in the first place. What's faster at rendering 32bit graphics; a Virge, Paradise or MilleniumII graphics card or a Conroe?

That the PPU is dedicated doesn't make it the best solution, if a VPU can do better fluid and visual physics, and what's left over is only a smattering of interactive calculations for the CPU (which for dual core is often left idle).

Being a dedicated solution doesn't mean it does it better, it would usually follow that way, but it appears that the VPUs can calculate the 'shiny physics' alot faster than the PPU, their only current limitation is the interactive phsyics, which may or may not be an issue after DirectPhysics and the next generation VPUs start entering the scene.

The only current games IMO that would require a heavy load of interactive physics over siny physics are flying games, driving games, and things like sbow/skateboarding games, where physics is paramount to those games being realistic. And of course those weren't the early launch titles, despite being demoed at E3.

At this point it's too early to even have a clear idea who will have the edge in dedicated games, however one thing that seems apparent, is that unless you are a GRAW addict, there's little complelling reason to spend $250+ on something that otherwise acts as another heat source and air flow restricter in your rig.

Things may change but that's the reality of the card as it stands right now, the biggest problem for Ageia IMO is unmoved inventory, that can't be helping them finance future endevours, and they'll have to rely heavily on anything they can get from Sony and the PS3, which isn't looking to rosey right now either.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Every body seems a little skeptical about Ageia processing capabilities. In most is Ghost Recon video's fault.

It's not the developers of GRAW's fault, Ageia should be happy that they have a title at all, it's their own doing that they have nothing in the system with their own physics engine (which they bought from another company) and had to tack their onto Havok's

We demand a THG video of new CellFactor game. Maybe it will answer some questions.

That would be like saying an ATi or nV created benchmark would be acceptable for comparing graphics cards. If it's not a game it doesn't matter. The only way to be fair would be to use the CellFactor hack that allows CPU-based rendering of the physics, and I doubt Ageia wants people to see that comparison as it wasn't very flattering last time I saw it, definitely not $250+ flattering.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

And not sure if it's been mentioned here before or that the response forms get read, but just FYI to everyone Oblivion doesn't use HavokFX it's Havok4 IIRC, and Both Havok adn Bethesda have pretty much said that there are no plans to add it now or in the future. Of course that could change, but I doubt it. So phsyics for ESIV:Oblivion looks like it will remain on the CPU, and really I don't see may complaints about it other than the sliding bodies (which are a little unrealistic) and hey the grass and cobblestone may be wet :twisted: .

 

[stolennomenclature]

StolenNomenclature, it's all about using the right tool for the job. It's the same reason you don't use a honda accord for rock-crawling, or see too many lamborghini's in monster truck rallies. They all do the same thing (provide transportation for 1 or more occupants) like different cards all crunch numbers, but they are all purposely built to do something well.

Graphics Processing, Audio Processing, Physics Processing.
Race Car, School Bus, Monster Truck.

A generic processing solution will never outperform dedicated solutions in their areas of expertise.

Yes and no. I agree that all other things being equal, dedicated hardware will usually always outperform generic hardware/software solutions, but generic cpu's are becoming so powerful that often they are fast enough. One example might be video.

As an example, the first video on PC's used dedicated cards with the video codec (mpeg, whatever) done in hardware. As CPU's got more powerful it was possible to decode mpeg video in software - thats the way it is nearly always done nowadays and dedicated hardware has all but dissappeared. It only shows up in consumer electronics devices. However even that is changing. With the advent of multi-cored cpu's, the tide is turning in favour of generic hardware/software solutions.

Although hardware solutions might be faster, they are far less flexible. You can't simply reprogram them. I would imagine games developers would much rather have purely software solutions if they can.

I think that by the time 4 and even 8 cored cpu's are available, interest in dedicated hardware will on the wane. At least I sincerely hope so.

 

[rwinches]

Yes it is GRAW's fault they just slapped together some cheap changes.
Cell Factor Demo shows what can be done with his tech.
Lucky to get GRAW? Nooo 20 titles are expected this year.
$300? who pays full price?

I agree frame drop is not an issue with the high frame rates available.

This is new so give it a chance.

The article was not very good, too bad this is a new trend at Tom's.

Will this tech end up in the gfx card? Not if the tech is not encouraged.
BFG has money riding on this so I think it has a chance.

I think since most installed gfx cards are pci they made a good choice.

I don't have pcie and don't miss it futhermore none of my friends have pcie we all invested in agp cards and MBs, and our game play has not suffered. We don't play at 16x12, we use CRTs.

 

[azncoduyen]

"AN ANONYMOUS games developer claimed that ATI, Nvidia on GPU physics is not even close to what you can get with Ageia's Physics card.

He tried to implement the physics and said that to his horror he learned that ATI and Nvidia "cosmetically" affects the physics. The developer added that only Ageia can handle game play physics. The same level of physics quality cannot be achieved using GPU physics, and even high end cards such as X1900 XT or 7900 GT cannot handle it. " TheInquirer


I guess software physic isnt as good as hardware physic.... it would be interesting to see who is better in the next 1-2 years