[OT] Physics Processor?

Typhaon · 07-03-07, 04:30 AM

The power of this Ageia PhysX card is impressive... but like the others said... it's limited to very few games... as the name says it's only for physics in games and it can handle a lot of objects at a time... and most impressive the ability to calculate fluids in real time... but at the moment it is not worth, because there are too few games to play with it...
But if you want to take a look you can watch some videos at their homepage:
http://www.ageia.com/physx/videos.html

JREX53 · 07-03-07, 10:08 AM

According to the Advertisement, it is a PCI card - which ancient history in the PC world, especially for video cards. The newest and greatest form is the PCI-Express which is an entirely different slot than the PCI slot..

SteamWake · 07-03-07, 10:25 AM

Only game that I know of that promotes this product is Rainbow Six GRAW.

I play GRAW without the physics processor and am happy with its performance.

I imagine though as games become more and more demanding it (the processor) will be a handy gizmoe and help with offloading the CPU to some degree.

Also note that games have to be designed to take advantage of the processor or else it is ignored.

EAGLE_01 · 07-03-07, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JREX53

According to the Advertisement, it is a PCI card - which ancient history in the PC world, especially for video cards. The newest and greatest form is the PCI-Express which is an entirely different slot than the PCI slot..

Roger that.

I was under the impression this was just a Physics processor..if not, why haven't the other big graphic card makers started pushing this along I wonder.

EAGLE_01 · 07-03-07, 01:47 PM

Just saw your post, SingeDebile.

That makes sense.

If you watch the Heavy Rain vid, I'm wondering if that detail would be present without the PhysX job..

It would be too great to have environments like that in our subs, or in flight sims..

Garion · 07-03-07, 02:39 PM

Quote:

According to the Advertisement, it is a PCI card - which ancient history in the PC world, especially for video cards. The newest and greatest form is the PCI-Express which is an entirely different slot than the PCI slot..

The physics card is not a graphics card, yoo need a separate graphics card, PCI-Express or AGP to actually display the graphics.

PCI slots are still fitted in modern PC's along side the PCI-express slots. I am currently running 2x nvidia cards in SLI mode and would put the Physics card in a spare PCI slot. But as as has already been said, the games have to actually support the physics cards for them to be usefull.

I also read in a tech journal that Nvdia and ATI may be adding physics chips to future graphics cards.. only time will tell though. :hmm:

Cheers

Garion

SteamWake · 07-03-07, 02:56 PM

Might want to consider one of these as well

1,000 watt power supply

http://store.pcpowerzone.com/pccotu1k10po.html

switch.dota · 07-03-07, 03:00 PM

You know, this reminds me about the whole 3Dfx VooDoo thing some 10 years ago: Back then people had like 4-8Mb video cards and they'd slap on a graphical accelerator IN ADDITION to their video card. nVidia's all-in-one (video card + 3D accelerator) set the standard and basically put 3dfx out of buisness.

EAGLE_01 · 07-03-07, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Typhaon

The power of this Ageia PhysX card is impressive... but like the others said... it's limited to very few games... as the name says it's only for physics in games and it can handle a lot of objects at a time... and most impressive the ability to calculate fluids in real time... but at the moment it is not worth, because there are too few games to play with it...
But if you want to take a look you can watch some videos at their homepage:
http://www.ageia.com/physx/videos.html

Thanks for that link. Some of those vids are pretty cool, but the one for "Heavy Rain" was VERY interesting.

I'm betting this will be weitten into most games before too long..I only hope Simulation Devs use it...

Typhaon · 07-03-07, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EAGLE_01

Thanks for that link. Some of those vids are pretty cool, but the one for "Heavy Rain" was VERY interesting.

I'm betting this will be weitten into most games before too long..I only hope Simulation Devs use it...

I have already testet two games which support a PhysX card without it...
The first ist Roboblitz, a small game about a robot which saves the world... cute... but I could not see anything which would require special hardware... the second is Cellfactor... there was a public free beta out some time ago and I tested it...
first the game was slow as hell... ok my pc is already quite old (it can hardly handle SHIV) but it did take a lot of performance... the second thing is, that many features could not be uses without a PhysX card, like for example advanced particles, real time fluids or masses of objects calculated in real-time (there are levels, which cannot be played without a PhysX card...
But I think this kind of hardware will not be standard in the future... I think advanced processors and graphic-cards will do the job in the future...

Typhaon · 07-03-07, 05:57 PM

Ah and i almost forgot... there are special clips showing a direct comparison between a scene with and without a PhysX card... it is noticable... but to be honest... I also thing some effects are overdone... to unrealistic... but still impressive:
http://www.ageia.com/physx/sbs.html

CaptainHaplo · 07-03-07, 07:12 PM

The idea of a physics card is NOT directly graphix related here folks. While they do contribute to better graphics - the idea is more along the idea of deformable terrain, destructable objects, etc. The ability to process calculations for HOW an explosion or object would react in real life is the whole goal. For many, with SH4 - a large "chain reaction" set of explosions can cause a brief hiccup or stutter - like when an ammo bunker pops. The goal of physics processing is to accurately model what happens to the shockwave, and all the objects affected by it. PGU's are built with a different instruction set than a graphics card.

What the result is - is more "lifelike" and "realistic" effects - which SHOWS thru the graphics. But stuff like bloom, transparency, etc are still handled by the GPU. Right now - most "physic" calculations are still done by the main CPU - which is not the optimal solution.

The first generation of PhysiX cards are limited due to support having to be built IN Game. However, there is rumbles that DX10 may (in theory) autosupport such hardware in that physic calcs are offloaded to the PGU. I haven't definitive proof, but w/ DX10 and a card - SH4 doesnt stutter on sequenced explosions. Same rig under xp w/ DX9c - small stutter... DX11 is supposed to fully support this. When the hardware is available for it - DX will use it. Its technically reasonable of an idea to force that thru an extension standard like DX. I don't know enough to be able to say for sure - but I would bet that it will be fully in 11 given what i have seen in 10.

As for GPU's mounting a physics card - while its possible I would expect that they would avoid it. As it is, the throughput speed across the interface (AGP/PCIe) is usually the limiter - trying to offload more data to the card just uses up that pipeline that is already maxed pushing the vid data. Why suck up bandwidth that you need to make the card faster? Doesn't make sense.

With multi-threading and prediction pipelines already in place - its not unreasonable to use a (relatively) slow PCI interface to allow a PGU to process data and return results to the cpu for use as needed. As an example - you fire a HE shell at a destructable target, the CPU instruction set "predicts" the impact as the shell is fired and travels. It estimates the impact area, then offloads the explosion calcs to the physics card - which processes it and returns it - so by the time the shell impacts, the pc has already done the explosion and just has to draw it. While the travel time to us is short - to the PC its more than enough time to perform the task as laid out. And so you are given a "deformed" impact area along with more realistic explosions - eye candy that wouldn't be possible without stutter except with the use of a physics card.

As games continue to get more and more complex, the need to handle such events will be more advanced. So yes - expect "PhysiX" cards to become more and more prevalent as time passes. Hope this helps clarify why they may be included on your next gaming rig wish list.

Typhaon · 07-04-07, 05:22 AM

You're right, but if you look at the videos I doubt that the physics processors are already fast enough to be fully used... the fluid and object calculating seems to be a little to slow at the moment... sure it will be better soon, but at the moment I think it's not worth the money...
although it would be nice in games like SHIV.
A physics accelerator would enable more realistic effects like dynamic waves (with influence of objects and force like 3D ship wakes or waves from explosions and impacts, realistic and large amound of shapnels and particles from explosions, realistic deformation and visual damage from attacks etc. pp... you see... advanced physics would really rock simulations... not only actiongames.

buzzinbill · 07-04-07, 09:14 AM

Hey I know of a few games that use it "Company Of Heroes" and I think "Splinter Cell Double Agent" (on down) does.... ButI tend to agree with a few others on here... Your prob better off going SLI or Crossfire (whichever your MoBo uses) Saver your money (for now) let the tech "mature" a bit ... and see if the Devs jump on the bandwagon , so to speak .....

XLjedi · 07-05-07, 01:49 PM

Shoot, it's only $150?
I might give it a shot just on a whim...:hmm:

Half the folks here have spent at least half that much buying broken collector edition games...

07-03-07, 07:12 PM	#12
CaptainHaplo Silent Hunter Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4,404 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 0	The idea of a physics card is NOT directly graphix related here folks. While they do contribute to better graphics - the idea is more along the idea of deformable terrain, destructable objects, etc. The ability to process calculations for HOW an explosion or object would react in real life is the whole goal. For many, with SH4 - a large "chain reaction" set of explosions can cause a brief hiccup or stutter - like when an ammo bunker pops. The goal of physics processing is to accurately model what happens to the shockwave, and all the objects affected by it. PGU's are built with a different instruction set than a graphics card. What the result is - is more "lifelike" and "realistic" effects - which SHOWS thru the graphics. But stuff like bloom, transparency, etc are still handled by the GPU. Right now - most "physic" calculations are still done by the main CPU - which is not the optimal solution. The first generation of PhysiX cards are limited due to support having to be built IN Game. However, there is rumbles that DX10 may (in theory) autosupport such hardware in that physic calcs are offloaded to the PGU. I haven't definitive proof, but w/ DX10 and a card - SH4 doesnt stutter on sequenced explosions. Same rig under xp w/ DX9c - small stutter... DX11 is supposed to fully support this. When the hardware is available for it - DX will use it. Its technically reasonable of an idea to force that thru an extension standard like DX. I don't know enough to be able to say for sure - but I would bet that it will be fully in 11 given what i have seen in 10. As for GPU's mounting a physics card - while its possible I would expect that they would avoid it. As it is, the throughput speed across the interface (AGP/PCIe) is usually the limiter - trying to offload more data to the card just uses up that pipeline that is already maxed pushing the vid data. Why suck up bandwidth that you need to make the card faster? Doesn't make sense. With multi-threading and prediction pipelines already in place - its not unreasonable to use a (relatively) slow PCI interface to allow a PGU to process data and return results to the cpu for use as needed. As an example - you fire a HE shell at a destructable target, the CPU instruction set "predicts" the impact as the shell is fired and travels. It estimates the impact area, then offloads the explosion calcs to the physics card - which processes it and returns it - so by the time the shell impacts, the pc has already done the explosion and just has to draw it. While the travel time to us is short - to the PC its more than enough time to perform the task as laid out. And so you are given a "deformed" impact area along with more realistic explosions - eye candy that wouldn't be possible without stutter except with the use of a physics card. As games continue to get more and more complex, the need to handle such events will be more advanced. So yes - expect "PhysiX" cards to become more and more prevalent as time passes. Hope this helps clarify why they may be included on your next gaming rig wish list. __________________ Good Hunting! Captain Haplo

07-04-07, 09:14 AM	#14
buzzinbill Seaman Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: West Virginia , USA Posts: 41 Downloads: 582 Uploads: 0	I know of a few.... Hey I know of a few games that use it "Company Of Heroes" and I think "Splinter Cell Double Agent" (on down) does.... ButI tend to agree with a few others on here... Your prob better off going SLI or Crossfire (whichever your MoBo uses) Saver your money (for now) let the tech "mature" a bit ... and see if the Devs jump on the bandwagon , so to speak ..... __________________ "A wink is as good as a nod, to a blind horse."

07-05-07, 01:49 PM	#15
XLjedi Ace of the Deep Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Palm Beach, Florida Posts: 1,243 Downloads: 53 Uploads: 8	Shoot, it's only $150? I might give it a shot just on a whim...:hmm: Half the folks here have spent at least half that much buying broken collector edition games... __________________

07-03-07, 04:30 AM	#1
Typhaon Sailor man Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 47 Downloads: 24 Uploads: 0	The power of this Ageia PhysX card is impressive... but like the others said... it's limited to very few games... as the name says it's only for physics in games and it can handle a lot of objects at a time... and most impressive the ability to calculate fluids in real time... but at the moment it is not worth, because there are too few games to play with it... But if you want to take a look you can watch some videos at their homepage: http://www.ageia.com/physx/videos.html

07-03-07, 10:08 AM	#2
JREX53 Frogman Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 300 Downloads: 353 Uploads: 13	According to the Advertisement, it is a PCI card - which ancient history in the PC world, especially for video cards. The newest and greatest form is the PCI-Express which is an entirely different slot than the PCI slot..

07-03-07, 10:25 AM	#3
SteamWake Rear Admiral Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 13,224 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	Only game that I know of that promotes this product is Rainbow Six GRAW. I play GRAW without the physics processor and am happy with its performance. I imagine though as games become more and more demanding it (the processor) will be a handy gizmoe and help with offloading the CPU to some degree. Also note that games have to be designed to take advantage of the processor or else it is ignored.

07-03-07, 01:47 PM	#5
EAGLE_01 Machinist's Mate Join Date: May 2007 Location: Dayton, OH. Posts: 127 Downloads: 46 Uploads: 0	Just saw your post, SingeDebile. That makes sense. If you watch the Heavy Rain vid, I'm wondering if that detail would be present without the PhysX job.. It would be too great to have environments like that in our subs, or in flight sims..

07-03-07, 02:56 PM	#7
SteamWake Rear Admiral Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 13,224 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	Might want to consider one of these as well 1,000 watt power supply http://store.pcpowerzone.com/pccotu1k10po.html

07-03-07, 03:00 PM	#8
switch.dota Captain Join Date: May 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 492 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	You know, this reminds me about the whole 3Dfx VooDoo thing some 10 years ago: Back then people had like 4-8Mb video cards and they'd slap on a graphical accelerator IN ADDITION to their video card. nVidia's all-in-one (video card + 3D accelerator) set the standard and basically put 3dfx out of buisness.

07-03-07, 05:57 PM	#11
Typhaon Sailor man Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 47 Downloads: 24 Uploads: 0	Ah and i almost forgot... there are special clips showing a direct comparison between a scene with and without a PhysX card... it is noticable... but to be honest... I also thing some effects are overdone... to unrealistic... but still impressive: http://www.ageia.com/physx/sbs.html

07-04-07, 05:22 AM	#13
Typhaon Sailor man Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 47 Downloads: 24 Uploads: 0	You're right, but if you look at the videos I doubt that the physics processors are already fast enough to be fully used... the fluid and object calculating seems to be a little to slow at the moment... sure it will be better soon, but at the moment I think it's not worth the money... although it would be nice in games like SHIV. A physics accelerator would enable more realistic effects like dynamic waves (with influence of objects and force like 3D ship wakes or waves from explosions and impacts, realistic and large amound of shapnels and particles from explosions, realistic deformation and visual damage from attacks etc. pp... you see... advanced physics would really rock simulations... not only actiongames.