G80 Quantum Physics Engine:what do you think about it??

[INKster]

I'd like them to propose their own solution though, believe it or not, because Havok and Havok FX aren't exactly cheap, so it makes it less than ideal for indie devs...

Uttar

Humm...

http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35068

Was it a simple 3rd party PR mistake, or something else ?
Of all places, how does an AGEIA PhysX card turn up at a Nvidia Physics demo in their own booth ?


edit
Never mind...

 

[Razor1]

And in other breaking news, BEYOND3D HAS A FRONTPAGE!!!
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=32160


Uttar

LOL It could be under wraps, I heard people inside nV and ATi talking about something coming from MS on the lines of physics last week. Or they are expecting MS to do something, is more in the direction they were coming from.

 

[trumphsiao]

there is a good chance MS is making a direct physics, but of course only for Windows pc systems, I too am with Utter, it would be better to have one of the IHV's make a generic physics API or engine.

if physics feature enabled on G80. the Graphic performance would be decreased to certain degree ?

 

[Geo]

LOL It could be under wraps, I heard people inside nV and ATi talking about something coming from MS on the lines of physics last week. Or they are expecting MS to do something, is more in the direction they were coming from.

Well, there's been some hints that D3D10 is more physics-friendly than D3D9 in the first place. Plus there's the bit where the MS guy specifically denied they were doing their own API just a few months ago.

Tho I suppose that wouldn't preclude them making a deal to include an existing one. . .

 

[Razor1]

if physics feature enabled on G80. the Graphic performance would be decreased to certain degree ?

Yes it will but its highly dependent on programming, the g80 should be able to do both very well if both the physics engine and game are designed for it. Using both at the same time on the GPU will slow it down but will still be very playable, and its not really cosmetic physics like what we saw in early showings of the g71, no real way around that, but its definitely possible to have next gen graphics with high level physics going. Crysis will be focusing on these aspects.

 

[trumphsiao]

Yes it will but its highly dependent on programming, the g80 should be able to do both very well if both the physics engine and game are designed for it. Using both at the same time on the GPU will slow it down but will still be very playable, and its not really cosmetic physics like what we saw in early showings of the g71, no real way around that, but its definitely possible to have next gen graphics with high level physics going. Crysis will be focusing on these aspects.

GTX 7 TCPs
GTS 6 TCPs
G82 4 TCPs

maybe 7950GX2 style ( one G80 dedicated for Graphics. another (G82) dedicated for physics )

 

[trinibwoy]

Yes it will but its highly dependent on programming, the g80 should be able to do both very well if both the physics engine and game are designed for it. Using both at the same time on the GPU will slow it down but will still be very playable, and its not really cosmetic physics like what we saw in early showings of the g71, no real way around that, but its definitely possible to have next gen graphics with high level physics going. Crysis will be focusing on these aspects.

I have to assume physics calculation and 3D rendering won't happen in parallel ... there'll be a physics pass that updates objects and then the rendering will occur in parallel with the writeback of the updated objects to system RAM? Hope PCIe is up for it. I guess in a SLI situation one card could be doing physics for the next frame while the other is rendering the current frame.

 

[Razor1]

I have to assume physics calculation and 3D rendering won't happen in parallel ... there'll be a physics pass that updates objects and then the rendering will occur in parallel with the writeback of the updated objects to system RAM? Hope PCIe is up for it. I guess in a SLI situation one card could be doing physics for the next frame while the other is rendering the current frame.

True, yeah there are alot of situations programmers have to be careful of and some advantages to GPU physics aswell. But as things mature I think we will see this be a mainstream need. Same way Discrete graphics card started off and now its a must for gamers to have.

 

[INKster]

Since it's apparently connected with NV's physics card, here it goes:

http://66.249.93.104/translate_c?hl...owcont.asp?news_id=30347&prev=/language_tools

Could this Asus P5N32-SLI actually be a NF680i, instead of a NF590 ?
I know they are pin-compatible.

It kind of makes sense, since the launch of NF680i is so close now, and the only reference to NF590 on Asus' site is in tiny lettering at the bottom of the press-release (leading to speculation that they couldn't yet use the official name, just like they couldn't go beyond "a third PCI Express x16 slot for Nvidia's upcoming Physics card" on their Sep. 20th press release.


One other thing:
In the translation, it appears as if the "Middle" PCI-Express slot is the X8 one (the Asus slot colouring convention has been blue->primary, black->secondary -P5W DH is the curious exception, as the primary on that board is orange-, and this middle slot is yellow).
Does having the "physics card" installed in the middle of the two graphics cards makes sense to you guys ?

 

[INKster]

So, no opinions ?