[OT] Physics Processor? - Page 2

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.

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 .....

EAGLE_01 · 07-04-07, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buzzinbill

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 .....

Agreed. Like I said, I hope simulations start using this technology.

Phantom Mark · 07-04-07, 12:44 PM

You can add ghost recon advanced war fighter to that list, demo I saw was pretty cool, but not nearly cool enough to warrant an extra slot in my box or the price.

Rilex · 07-04-07, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

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.

SH4 is not a DX10 game. It takes no advantage of DX10 and has no knowledge of DX10. It uses DX9Ex (on Vista). Thus, a PPU would make no difference (not that DirectX has any support for PPUs in the first place, unless you can find something relating to PPUs here that I'm not seeing).

Quote:

As for GPU's mounting a physics card - while its possible I would expect that they would avoid it.

Nope, nVidia and AMD are already pushing in this direction. GPUs are becoming more general purpose thus using them as PPUs in the near future.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070222-8906.html

minsc_tdp · 07-04-07, 08:32 PM

AGEIA is pioneering a new direction, but the product is a complete flop. Many people want what it can do and have the money, but they don't want the PhysX. Lack of game support killed it and it will never recover from that.

NVidia/AMD are pushing in different directions and they'll probably win. The first one to come up with a way to accelerate the physics of all games, regardless of developer participation, will win big. But that is probably impossible. If the next product like this requires developer participation, they'll have to have a hell of a lot of major titles supported and publicly acknowledged commitment from major publishers like EA and Ubi and major dev groups like CodeMasters, etc to sell any.

GT182 · 07-04-07, 08:59 PM

The one sim I have that has game physics is MOH Pacific Assault. If you kill an enemy soldier you can run into him and his body moves. Kill one in the water and he floats, plus he moves when you run into him. Water is so real looking that the dead floating can be seen above and below the water's surface. Shoot boxes and barrels and they move. And, I'm running it with an XFX 6800 XTreme 256mb 256bit card. If this is part of the physics advancement in graphics, it sure is cool.

EAGLE_01 · 07-04-07, 10:12 PM

The article in that link states they feel they are at the point that 3DFX was with video cards. I take that to mean the technology is barely beginning, and I think you guys are right, as systems grow to quad and 8X core systems, the physics will be handled in a different way, and having another card in a slot will be a thing of the past in a hurry.

It will be nice, though. The more realistic, the better

.

WernerSobe · 07-04-07, 11:56 PM

Physics Cards are not to improve the graphic. They are designed to calculate the movement of objects, fluids, gases etc... They relieve the CPU not the GPU. CPU is not designed to calculate such things.

However basicly it will improve the graphics in some way. Explosions, Fires and Fluids looks much more real. Objects that are being destroyed look much more realistic. Many things can be moved and fly around at same time.

in example you can have a game where you see cars crashing in each other and you can calculate the deformation in real time making every crash look different.

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...

XanderF · 07-05-07, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaronblood

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...

Ummm...why?

You can get a complete list of games the card supports on Ageia's website. It's a ridiculously short list, even discounting the fact that they count a few games several times (once for each expansion pack), and include games on the PS3 and 360 which have "Ageia PhysX" but obviously do not benefit from a piece of PC hardware.

07-03-07, 07:12 PM	#19
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	#21
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."

07-04-07, 08:32 PM	#25
minsc_tdp XO Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 411 Downloads: 1 Uploads: 0	AGEIA is pioneering a new direction, but the product is a complete flop. Many people want what it can do and have the money, but they don't want the PhysX. Lack of game support killed it and it will never recover from that. NVidia/AMD are pushing in different directions and they'll probably win. The first one to come up with a way to accelerate the physics of all games, regardless of developer participation, will win big. But that is probably impossible. If the next product like this requires developer participation, they'll have to have a hell of a lot of major titles supported and publicly acknowledged commitment from major publishers like EA and Ubi and major dev groups like CodeMasters, etc to sell any. __________________ June 29 2016 - shSpeech v2.55 - Voice Command for Silent Hunter 4! View Thread

07-04-07, 08:59 PM	#26
GT182 Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2005 Location: New Castle of Delaware Posts: 3,231 Downloads: 658 Uploads: 0	The one sim I have that has game physics is MOH Pacific Assault. If you kill an enemy soldier you can run into him and his body moves. Kill one in the water and he floats, plus he moves when you run into him. Water is so real looking that the dead floating can be seen above and below the water's surface. Shoot boxes and barrels and they move. And, I'm running it with an XFX 6800 XTreme 256mb 256bit card. If this is part of the physics advancement in graphics, it sure is cool. __________________ Gary No Borders, No Language, No Culture =s No Country I'm a Deplorable, and proud of it.

07-05-07, 01:49 PM	#29
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, 03:00 PM	#16
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	#18
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	#20
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.

07-04-07, 12:44 PM	#23
Phantom Mark Bosun Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 69 Downloads: 3 Uploads: 0	You can add ghost recon advanced war fighter to that list, demo I saw was pretty cool, but not nearly cool enough to warrant an extra slot in my box or the price.

07-04-07, 10:12 PM	#27
EAGLE_01 Machinist's Mate Join Date: May 2007 Location: Dayton, OH. Posts: 127 Downloads: 46 Uploads: 0	The article in that link states they feel they are at the point that 3DFX was with video cards. I take that to mean the technology is barely beginning, and I think you guys are right, as systems grow to quad and 8X core systems, the physics will be handled in a different way, and having another card in a slot will be a thing of the past in a hurry. It will be nice, though. The more realistic, the better .

07-04-07, 11:56 PM	#28
WernerSobe Commodore Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 625 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	Physics Cards are not to improve the graphic. They are designed to calculate the movement of objects, fluids, gases etc... They relieve the CPU not the GPU. CPU is not designed to calculate such things. However basicly it will improve the graphics in some way. Explosions, Fires and Fluids looks much more real. Objects that are being destroyed look much more realistic. Many things can be moved and fly around at same time. in example you can have a game where you see cars crashing in each other and you can calculate the deformation in real time making every crash look different.