the PhysX processor

gatoensumano · 05-18-2006, 01:23 AM

what do you guys think of the PhysX? I heard about it today and was wondering whether you guys could tell me your opinions and anything you've heard. i read it's pretty good but i ain't gonna jump the gun and go straight to 'how do i get this thing' without info from people who know stuff about it. so get back to me when you can

Choupolo · 05-18-2006, 01:47 AM

Heya

I reckon dedicated hardware physics is coming eventually, just like harware graphics and hardware sound.

Personally though, I'm not going to be getting a PhysX card any time soon. One thing is that there aren't going to be many games to support it in the 'near' future (PhysX in GRAW isnt that great, and Cellfactor is just a demo), although I imagine there'll be a lot of support from games over the next couple of years. A lot of game developers seem to like the idea. The other thing is that by the time those games come out, Ageia (or other competitors - Havok?) may have come out with better versions with more clocks, feature sets etc.

Of course for companies to proceed with r&d in hardware physics, someone has to buy their cards! But at £200+ for their first effort, I think I'll leave that to the early adopters.

KamisoriX · 05-18-2006, 08:32 AM

didn't we have that threat already? Well, Nvidea is planning to release one with Hovak. and I bet other prgsters are gonna follow.
The problem ist that physic engines uses it's own algos say either you use PHX or Hovak (well, actually you can op them for both but douptfully they are going to)
so, which one is gonna make it. I somehow have the better feeling with hovak because they already have the software experience in their pocket. Dunno about the
CellFactor folks...

and what's up with the price range of 200-300 bucks...I can rent a helicopter with that money and experience real life force feedback and crash'n'burn FX that no card can do

05-18-2006, 10:18 AM

The hardware is excellent, but it is well accepted that they may have driver issues causing slow down when the physics renders lots of debris. Also to put into context its reaource requirements off the main memory bus. It has recently been announced by creative that their Xi-Fi struggles to get enough calls onto the bus after the graphics cards have had their say, where on Earth will the physics fit into this equation on high-end machines? If I were you I would invest the money in another gpu and wait for Nvidia/ATI and Havoc to showcase some Hardware-Assisted physics rendering with their drivers.

KamisoriX · 05-18-2006, 02:06 PM

chances are also better that ATi n Nvidea have in future Graphic cards build in Physics
as a secondary processor since it's also a graphical thing . Not that they said that but
would make sense to me...

ValidatorXYZ · 05-19-2006, 01:22 PM

PhysX sucks :bucky!:

Depressure · 05-24-2006, 08:20 PM

hey all.
well the physx sounds good to me and the price (in norway) is not too scary, but ill think we have to wait before the games will suport it properly. i'm looking foreward to nvidia's next move...

denbot · 05-24-2006, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Choupolo@May 18 2006, 12:47 AM
Heya

I reckon dedicated hardware physics is coming eventually, just like harware graphics and hardware sound.

Personally though, I'm not going to be getting a PhysX card any time soon. One thing is that there aren't going to be many games to support it in the 'near' future (PhysX in GRAW isnt that great, and Cellfactor is just a demo), although I imagine there'll be a lot of support from games over the next couple of years. A lot of game developers seem to like the idea. The other thing is that by the time those games come out, Ageia (or other competitors - Havok?) may have come out with better versions with more clocks, feature sets etc.

Of course for companies to proceed with r&d in hardware physics, someone has to buy their cards! But at £200+ for their first effort, I think I'll leave that to the early adopters.

dude i dont think ghost recon uses physx, as far as i know if the game uses physx your going to need a physx card i tryed the demo and it dont even install without a physx card and anyways i think computer these days will be able to come out with the same effect without a physx card. until i see something that makes it worth getting im not going to bother.

denbot · 05-24-2006, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by KamisoriX@May 18 2006, 01:06 PM
chances are also better that ATi n Nvidea have in future Graphic cards build in Physics
as a secondary processor since it's also a graphical thing . Not that they said that but
would make sense to me...

ok if any of you bother to look at dx10 compatible games you would laff at this physx. stick with directx trust me . this physx will either fail in the early stages with not good games. the only way this card is going to sell is if its copatible with current directx or has a good game to show of its stuff.

Magus · 06-08-2006, 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by denbot+May 24 2006, 09:10 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (denbot @ May 24 2006, 09:10 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--KamisoriX@May 18 2006, 01:06 PM
chances are also better that ATi n Nvidea have in future Graphic cards build in Physics
as a secondary processor since it's also a graphical thing . Not that they said that but
would make sense to me...

ok if any of you bother to look at dx10 compatible games you would laff at this physx. stick with directx trust me . this physx will either fail in the early stages with not good games. the only way this card is going to sell is if its copatible with current directx or has a good game to show of its stuff. [/b][/quote]
Ever heard of the card maybe working in DirectX10?

Much too expensive for me, and i think in the near future games and gfx cards will have it built in.