Asus makes PhysX boards

Discussion in 'GPGPU Technology & Programming' started by tEd, May 18, 2005.

  1. Entropy

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Messages:
    3,098
    Likes Received:
    1,064
    One problem is that games programmers for PCs have a high performance target. Thus they miss out on capitalizing on the greatest strength of the PC as a games platform, its installed base. How big would SIMS have been if it had targeted a top-of-the-range PC?

    By escalating system demands, PC developers are locking themselves into an ever tighter niche. Still, that niche may be sustainable. But I do think there is an opportunity for those who buck the trend, and instead target something like the latest Intel integrated graphics.
     
  2. scificube

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    9
    That's a dire way of putting things but yes...if it sells more games and moves more HW. No...if it doesn't. I believe it will so I like the PPU. I also don't look at the complexity issue alone within itself. While there will be greater complexity there should also come greater flexibly and freedom. Here again I feel the good out weighs the bad.

    Target platform variation is a persistent problem that will be here with or without the PPU. I feel as long as physics doesn't seep into gameplay during the interim the PPU should populate or die in the PC realm that it an issue that can be dealt with...just like supporting HDR for specific GPUs or high end parts, it should be another aesthetic layer over normal physics until that bound can be broken. I am for devs pushing the HW I buy be it the CPU, GPU or in this case the PPU but of course I don't want it to be at the expense of being to game at all for those less fortunate than I lest I one day be one of them...again.

    Cost of entry...this will be high if you're a serious PC gamer as stock parts just won't due most of the time even if your shooting for the mid-range. In any case though...if not paying for a PPU one would need to pay for a uber CPU that I feel is not coming for a while in order for the physics to translate over from consoles ports. It's either this or don't do physics to this level as there is no free lunch.

    Hope that helps you better understand how I feel about it :wink:
     
  3. IgnorancePersonified

    Regular

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2004
    Messages:
    778
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    Sunny Canberra
    I wonder how long ms and sony are going to subsidise console hardware costs?
     
  4. DudeMiester

    Regular

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    636
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Well seeing as IBM intends to sell CELL as a workstation CPU, and considering the breadth of CELL software that PS3 is going to produce, I think desktops with CELL are certainly reasonable. In this case you can throw your PPU out the window, and just throw in another CELL. As CPUs become more flexible and optimisable, perhaps one day we'll even see the GPU go bye-bye in the favour of additional CPUs. Basically, I'm sure the PC will catch up and stay in the lead but rather through a radical advancement of the PC itself, not just throwing in more components.
     
  5. IgnorancePersonified

    Regular

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2004
    Messages:
    778
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    Sunny Canberra
    Sure.... 'just' throwing in an extra cell unit sounds simialr to either placing it on some sort of 'bus' or intregrating either more cell units into the main die or having it somehow integrated onto the mobo or what constitutes the 'south bridge' of a console platform.....
    Does that mean they gunna throw in extra cell units regularly = are there going to be different spec consoles out there removing the main advantage to pc's?? How about the xbox - they gunna throw a cell unit in there or go with a ppu style unit for xbox2.5?

    Since my pc is not a closed form factor - rather than buy a mobo with it intergrated and the associated hardware with it, or since they are not intergrated into a cpu die or 'south bridge' chip right now I would like the option to buy one and connect it up to my existing pci bus and then future pciex1 connector - that really does sound cool. Seeing how the avalanche of AGP -> PCIE early adopters and Joe Bloggs overwhelmed a company like ATI...I'm thinking "old" platforms will be around for awhiles. really - the most interesting thing to me in games would be to get one that has good support, run it on an old pci only system with ppu, a new dual core system, a new single core system etc etc - swap the parts around and write a good article on it. With - without ppu.
     
  6. Dave B(TotalVR)

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Essex, UK (not far from IMGTEC:)
    IMO that's the only way this will be successful.
     
  7. Dave B(TotalVR)

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Essex, UK (not far from IMGTEC:)
    I wanna see a similar comparison with a multiplayer character being Gibbed :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
     
  8. scificube

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    9
    I'd could go with a Cell over a PPU if they become desktop parts. It wouldn't be specialized for physics but would be more flexible and have benefits elsewhere over current desktop CPU's. It'd take it if I got the chance and could afford it. Cost would be about the only major issue when deciding which way to go as I expect a PPU to be a whole lot cheaper on the average and wouldn't require me to toss my other system parts in order to use it. (definitely going to need a new mobo with a hella fast bus to support it, and very fast system memory. That's a new CPU, mobo, memory, and heck a new vid-card as to not bottleneck the system...so you see my point.)

    It's a hard call. I wish I could say both but I don't have that kind of money. I'll be buying an Xbox360, a PS3, GAMES, and "A" PC part for good ports or games that require similar horsepower most likely as that's a lot money right there. A PPU most likely but if the Cell makes it to the desktop, is affordable and I can get some sucker to buy my old rig...I'd go that way too, but then my new Cell rig wouldn't be making an appearance for a good long while.
     
  9. Nemesis77

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why? What if PCI-E gives you no beenfits at all? there are ALOT more PCI-slots out there than there are PCIe-slots! If PCI is more than enough, the only reason for wanting PCIe would be to take part in a virtual "my penis is bigger than yours"-competition.

    Considering that the damn thing is not even available right now, I fail to see the problem. Since NVIDIA and ATI have driver-problems with SHIPPING products, I wouldn't get too worried if some unreleased piece of hardware has driver-problems as well.

    Why not wait untill the product is available at retail before using the "Jump to conclusions"-mat? So their beta-hardware with beta-drivers do not have all features enabled. Color me surprised!

    You are NOT "paying them now". The product is not yet available. Why won't you wait untill you can actually buy the damn product and THEN decide whether it sucks or not.

    Hey, I heard that 3Dfx had problems with first versions of the Voodoo Graphics, and their early drivers (that were used internally) did not work that well. Clearly, Voodoo Graphics sucked! And I heard NVIDIA's NV1 was dead in the water as well!
     
  10. Unknown Soldier

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2002
    Messages:
    2,238
    Likes Received:
    33
    I downloaded the demo's from mashies post and this site . .and am not that impressed with it overall. I thought HL2's physics looked way better. It's still in beta though so should get better.

    US
     
  11. TheBubba

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 25, 2005
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry I'm a long time lurker. Thought I'd throw in my half cent. I agree with a lot of the sentiment here.. These won't fly. The Inquirer (I know they aren't the most reliable) said these would go for 250-300 bucks!

    Inquirer Link

    I'm sorry but that is insane (IMHO). Maybe they'll sell a few to the guy who has to have everything but that isn't going to amount to much. They won't be be adopted in any sort of volume past the 4 or 5 guys previously mentioned.

    Like people have been suggesting, integration is the only way these things will ever be adopted. Not as a $250+ card. The hype will die and so will the idea of a seperate PPU board... I think I read it in the stars, planetary alignment or some such.... :lol: If this were to ever become a requirement it would certainly make people think about jumping ship to the console world... But that will never happen. (*sigh of relief*)
     
  12. mashie

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Peterborough, United Kingdom
    I have a feeling it will be quite the opposite, when people start to play games on x360 and ps3 with a new maginitude of physics they will start to demand it in PC games as well.

    Time will tell, not the stars ;)
     
  13. Dr. Ffreeze

    Regular

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Messages:
    335
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nemesis77,

    Where did I say I wanted a PCI-E for extra performance? PCI-E does give you a benifit regardless of performance. I don't want to buy any new PCI cards so I can protect my investment for motherboards I buy in the future. I buy upgrades vary rarely, so I will want mine to last a good number of years, say 5 or so. I don't upgrade all the time like many gamers so it really matters to me if I am going to drop $300 on a card.

    It does not work now, in beta. That means it might or might not work in the shipping version. See the possible problem?

    Well, I would guess that Nvidia had issues with beta hardware with PureVideo. Now that it is shipping, it still doesn't work in the 6800 line. That is a problem. If a beta piece of hardware does not work 100%, while understandable, it 'could' also not work in shipping parts. I said I was concerned, not that it was doomed to fail. If I had heard of PureVideo not working in the 6800 line while it was in beta form, I would have been concerned. NVidia was unable to fix PureVideo, maybe AGEIA will be unable to fix this driver issue. I think it bears watching.

    Did you not read the quote?
    At launch the PPU cards will not have all features enabled until early 2006. When you buy the card in Q4, they will not have all the features enabled.

    Pay for the card in Q4 2005, get soft-body acceleration in Q1 2006. Who said the card sucks? Not I! There are areas of concern.
     
  14. DudeMiester

    Regular

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    636
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Selling a card for a large amount of money, with incomplete drivers, and no intention of exposings it's true general purpose flexibility, is insane. If AGEIA thinks this is going to be a success they're out of their minds. Get the drivers fully working, fully expose the general purpose floating point processors, and then MAYBE I'll buy one. Otherwise, hell will have to freeze over first. Not that I don't think a CELL like co-processor (which is what the PPU is basically) isn't a bad idea, I just thing AGIEA is going about it very badly.
     
  15. Nemesis77

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, if you have PCI-only devices, then you need to choose MoBo's that have PCI-slots. And besides, PCI is NOT going to disappear in a long time.

    I guess that's why they call it BETA? Instead of getting your panties in a bunch over a piece of hardware that is not yet even available, why not wait untill it's actually available? How well it works right now is next to irrelevant to us consumers, since we cannot buy this product yet. Developers might care, but I don't see a reason why we should care.

    I'm talking about some games not working properly and such. Since they keep on having that kind of problems with shipping products, I wouldn't be too worried about some glitches with unreleased hardware. there is a reason why the hardware is unreleased.

    Show me one piece of hardware that worked perfectly from the very beginning. ALL hardware has such problems. that is why they are not released before their time.

    Well, if you are concerned because unreleased piece of hardware doesn't yet work perfectly, then you have alot to worry about. CPU's, vid-cards MoBo's, soundcards etc. etc. all face problems in the early versions. Are you worried about those as well? Why not? Because those problems are not mentoined publicly in some website?

    You can think of it like that it DOES have all the features enabled. in 2006 it gets an update that gives you some bonus-features.

    Why not wait untill Q1 2006 before making the purchase? Why not buy it in Q405, use it like it is then, and then get extra features in Q106? Only problem here is that they mentioned that some funtionality will be enabled in 06. Had they not said a word about that, people would be happy as a clams right now. But now that they mentioned that they will enable more functionality later, people are screaming "OMG! It's not working!".
     
  16. TomW

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2004
    Messages:
    30
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is likely to be impossible to port some PS3 games directly to PC (without modifying the content) due to the physics they will employ, unless the PC is equipped with some kind of maths coprocessor, be it a PhysX or something else (or lots of normal x86 cores). I think the move ideally needs to come from AMD or Intel for it to be successful - they could incorporate 1 or more coprocessors into their multicore chips. It's happened before with the 387 coprocessor...

    PC CPUs are only going to have the horsepower to match the physics ability of PS3's CELL in the fairly distant future. What do we do in the meantime? Dual core and even quad core can't handle many rigid bodies compared to PS3 and especially PhysX.

    UE3 engine games may fall into tiers of how much power you need for the physics - at the bottom level, a single core PC, next tier will be dual or quad core PC and XBox 360, top tier will be PS3 or PhysX PC. Assuming that UE3 makes porting games easy (and I hope it does), you're still going to need the necessary physics horsepower to keep up with the original CPU the game was designed for.

    Tom
     
  17. Moose

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 16, 2003
    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    3
    buy a console???

    That's my plan at this point.

    :(
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...