AGEIA PhysX

[Briab Guy]

AGEIA PhysX

came with Ghost Recon 3. Does anyone know much about it?

[pam123]

Not yet.
I'm waiting on reviews.

[spartan015]

thers a ghost recon 3?? or it that advanced warfare game?

[wolfie]

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2751

from anandtech, talks a little about it

wolfie

[Two|Bit]

The card comes with Ghost recon? or it is compatible with it? It seems dumb to me...

[TwoRails]

Here's one link:

http://forum.pcmech.com/showthread.p...ighlight=physx

Seems like it will make gaming a lot more "real," but now you'll need to spend bucks for both a high end vid card, then a physics card...

[spartan015]

hmm isn't Cell Factor using Aegis Engine? cept it was a quad SLI feature... 7900 gts... wish i had money for that.

[MakeYourslf2012]

Is the concept of a PCI Physics card new?

I just found out about it last week when I decided to have fun and see how much a high end Dell gaming system would cost. I saw the Ageia PysX card included with the system and though it was some proprietary Dell crap that they include in thier systems to make some extra money (until I came across this thread).

[pam123]

Yes it's new it was first announced a year ago and it started a scramble by ATI (integrated into their GPu) and nVidia (they're working with Havok).
If it really off loads alot of in game physics from the processor it should make photo-realism common place.
For now there's nothing to do but wait for reviews and benchmarks and just generally follow the news.

[Briab Guy]

spartan015, GR3 is advanced warfare.
Two|Bit, I just got some software. I am only playing the demo, but I really doubt that they are giving a card with the game.
I remember when AGP came out and everyone had to have it. Which ment for most ppl, a new MB. $$$$$$
Then I read at Sharky Extreme, they did a test using identical PC's one with AGP, one without. And the differences were so small, it made no big deal. Maybe after AGP was out for awhile, it made a difference. But not at first (and I have doubts about later).
Thanks for the replies

[786ARS]

so like a processor for graphics then?

[Alaron]

It is a dedicated card for physics in games. Your video card still renders the picture, but instead of relying on the already busy CPU for physics (explosions, moving debris, etc), the PhysX card would do the work.

[pam123]

Originally Posted by 786ARS so like a processor for graphics then?

No, it's actually going to be the third processor in your case.
The video card, GPU, unloads a lot of the work from the cpu and now the physics card, PPU, unloads even more.
So you've got the central processing unit, the graphics processing unit and now the physics processing unit.
Apparently all that advances turns into a processor.
Whether that's because of something inherent in the architecture when it increases in complexity or because that's the major model we have just now (If it works copy it. ) I don't know.

[flawedreality5]

Did anyone else read about Microsoft developing their own physics drivers and incorporating them into DirectX?

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=31385

[Entsure]

There's a review of the Asus PhysX P1 here, which suggests it probably isn't worth it at the moment... unless you have money to burn of course!

http://www.itreviews.co.uk/hardware/h973.htm

[blue60007]

Yeah, here's another:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/06/19/can_ageia/

"Oh, is that it?"

[rspassey]

Apart for whats said above... the PPUs are also going to allow game developers to make the environments much more interactive so that one can knock over the contents of a shelf, or even dent metail cabinets and stuff because it's going to be easier to process the lighting effects on multiple objects at once as opposed to just concentrating on making a select few objects look and interact as they would in real life. Sounds pretty sweet to me and I will probably pick up a card as soon as there is one must-have game that will use it (Unreal 2k7 anyone ).

[pam123]

Originally Posted by blue60007 Yeah, here's another: http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/06/19/can_ageia/ "Oh, is that it?"

So as things stand now it's a nice idea whose time hasn't come.
I won't even be planning my new computer till late next year and those customers I build budget games machines for will balk at the price.
It's hard to tell if AGEIA just has to hang on for another year or two or if it's just not going to happen for them.

[Stretchman]

Sounds pretty sweet to me and I will probably pick up a card as soon as there is one must-have game that will use it (Unreal 2k7 anyone

That's what i'm thinking right now, too. Wait for that killer app that really demonstrates the Ageia Physx advantage over conventional setups.

[TwoRails]

Originally Posted by pam123 So as things stand now it's a nice idea whose time hasn't come. I won't even be planning my new computer till late next year and those customers I build budget games machines for will balk at the price. It's hard to tell if AGEIA just has to hang on for another year or two or if it's just not going to happen for them.

I agree. If it weren't for the additional cost, I'd be behind it 100%. But the additional cost is a reality, so I'm... maybe 80% behind. Soon, it'll take a quad SLI (or Crossfire) and dual PPUs to play a game. Not to mention a dedicated 20 amp outlet. I love "newer" games, and all the eye candy, but still, if it's a junk game, it's a junk game. I still have a proverbial ball having fun re-playing older games. It seems like too many modern games don't have the re-playability as some older ones have. Look at DooM 3. (kinda) great the first time, but not much re-play value to it. It's getting to the point where it takes a $500 computer, but $1,500 worth of extra goodies to play games at the max. Like a friend at work says, "what about the rest of us? Don't game makers know they could make a lot more money if they made games for puny computers?" Seems like HL2 managed, but why not others?

[rspassey]

Originally Posted by TwoRails I agree. If it weren't for the additional cost, I'd be behind it 100%. But the additional cost is a reality, so I'm... maybe 80% behind. Soon, it'll take a quad SLI (or Crossfire) and dual PPUs to play a game. Not to mention a dedicated 20 amp outlet. I love "newer" games, and all the eye candy, but still, if it's a junk game, it's a junk game. I still have a proverbial ball having fun re-playing older games. It seems like too many modern games don't have the re-playability as some older ones have. Look at DooM 3. (kinda) great the first time, but not much re-play value to it. It's getting to the point where it takes a $500 computer, but $1,500 worth of extra goodies to play games at the max. Like a friend at work says, "what about the rest of us? Don't game makers know they could make a lot more money if they made games for puny computers?" Seems like HL2 managed, but why not others?

They do make games for the masses. It will be a long time before Quad SLI and dual PPUs are required to play a game. To get the most graphically out of a game, that is where higherend hardware comes into play.

Its also very difficult to produce a 'LARGE' game (maps, terrains, different levels), manipulate life like AI, and make the graphics look decent (or really good) that can run smoothly on today's 500$ PC - this is undeniable. The 500$ PCs now adays barely cut it for me to do the basics...

[jeromebrill]

Physics card? Computers go back and forth. One minute it's ok to have all this separate components then the next everything is integrated. Am I going to need a separate card some day just for my power button too? kidding.. If the main processor was powerful enough to handle this sh** in the first place I wouldn't need to spend more money lol. I mean I like playing the best looking games. That's why I just bought the Gefore7800 GS OC to play oblivion.There is a point to how much it's really worth to play though. I just think console games are getting up there and the pc game industry is being challenged to push the limits so it stays on top. Also the quad SLI stuff? Why not just stack four pcs together with each quad cards and connect them together with a cable resembling a 0 gauge power wire from car amps. Yeah! Now that's a PC! Sorry for rambling on but the industry is to impatient. I guess I'm use to the whole console thing where game get betting looking with same hardware. That's innovation I think. "at store" So sir? would you like a bag for you're new AGEIA PhysX card? hands master card... oops "Declined" Oh well not today!

[Nuclear Krusader]

And, as it stands now, there're only two engines for physics acceleration, that of AGEIA and that of Havok. But good ole Microsoft is already developing DirectPhysics, which would do to the field of game physics what DirectX did to the 3D graphics arena: unify it. So, it may be that in the end we will have no need of physics cards at all. If developers keep being reluctant to make games that take advantage of the cards and rather wait for the API that unifies it all, I'm sure graphic cards makers will in time incorporate physics calculations into the GPUs, and the physX cards will go the way of the dodo and the Voodoo 3D accelerators.

[blue60007]

nVidia and ATi are also developing their own API's. I think phyiscs may take off one day, but there'll be a war between the API's...eventually one will dominate and that'll be standard. Phyiscs probably won't take off until there is one or two main APIs.

[Nuclear Krusader]

And until there are more game developers willing to support it, and also, until the physics acceleration really offers real and awesome advantages, rather than the crappy "enhancement" of effects it does now.

[Briab Guy]

hey, jeromebrill,
Do you know where I can get that seperate card for ther power button? :-) because from what I am reading "more" is better. Personaly I am waiting for the quad card system.

ATI will allow users with a duo or trio of PCI-e cards to choose Graphics cards from their 1k Series and link either:
A: two in crossfire configuration with a third for physics, or
B: one for graphics and one for physics.

see:
http://www.thecombatzone.net/news.php?news_id=401

thanks for all the info.