How will NVidia counter the release of HD5xxx?

[Scali]

As for the easy sell part, this is a tech-forum presumably filled with people willing to jump on the next cool tech. If it is this hard selling to them, how hard will it be to sell to the less tech-savvy?

I think it's much easier to sell visual stuff to not-so tech-savvy people, as they won't really know anything about the underlying technology or capabilities.
If it looks good, it is good.

 

[digitalwanderer]

How much memory was on those cards Chris? I got an OCed 1Gb 8800 GTS & a 512Mb 9800 GT and I'm thinking the 8800 should be my primary.

If I can get motivated and unlaziful that is.

 

[trinibwoy]

I think it's much easier to sell visual stuff to not-so tech-savvy people, as they won't really know anything about the underlying technology or capabilities. If it looks good, it is good.

Yeah exactly, most of the "tech-savvy" people arguing in this thread probably don't even play games that often, if at all

OT, but what are people using to play BAA? Xbox360 controller? I tried my Logitech rumblepad in the demo and the axis and button assignments were all screwed up.

 

[digitalwanderer]

Yeah exactly, most of the "tech-savvy" people arguing in this thread probably don't even play games that often, if at all

I have been trying to behave but if you're going to post up fighting words I will happily oblige you.

 

[trinibwoy]

I have been trying to behave but if you're going to post up fighting words I will happily oblige you.

My dukes are up!

 

[leoneazzurro]

Not really getting your point here. Your complaint is equally applicable to other IQ enhancing effects as has been mentioned previously. So what if a performance card can't max out the IQ, is this a new phenomenon or something?

My point is, if something needs a very high enthusiast card to run acceptably even at relatively low, it is not a "mass" product as the marketing wants it to be.
A lot of cards, even 80$ ones, can run most of today´s games even at high settings up to 1280x1024 or more, with AA. Even tough games like Crysis could be run well enough by $100 cards, but if running GPU accelerated Physx to have a little eye candy more requires a performance-high or high end card, then many users could find themselves simply disabling Physx, as I do with my desktop and GTS250.
Maybe it´s a bug, as ChrisRay says (I also said there could be indeed a bug), I only know that activating Physx transforms Batman: AA in a slideshow not only "sometimes" but "everytime" when Physx is activated. Same for Sacred 2 - and looking at the forums, I´m not the only one finding these performance hits. And someone, even with high end cards, could find anyway that they don´t like the performance hit if it does not return really enhanced visuals or gameplay improvement which is subjective). So I wonder if we need more powerful cards, capable to manage the physics acceleration (but not only one that barely affect the game experience like in Mirror Edge or Sacred 2) AND high resolution and detail at the same time, or if we only need more refined software.
Please note, I think GPU accelerated physics is a good thing, it´s only that I would like it to be more widespread, and much more effective on gameplay.

Anyway, now there´s also ATI Open Physics, so in the next years we will see how the battle will take form.

 

[trinibwoy]

My point is, if something needs a very high enthusiast card to run acceptably even at relatively low, it is not a "mass" product as the marketing wants it to be.

Yes but don't you invalidate the remainder of your post by leading off with a false hypothesis? You do not need a "very high enthusiast card" to run PhysX. Repeating it won't make it true.

Besides, it's not marketed as a "mass" product at all. It's marketed as a differentiating feature of Nvidia products. They actually recommend that you buy a second card just for PhysX, not sure how that can be considered marketing to the masses. However, a GTX 260 should handle it just fine at normal resolutions. And that is definitely in mass territory now ($150).

 

[ChrisRay]

Yeah exactly, most of the "tech-savvy" people arguing in this thread probably don't even play games that often, if at all

OT, but what are people using to play BAA? Xbox360 controller? I tried my Logitech rumblepad in the demo and the axis and button assignments were all screwed up.

Just use the mouse and KB. With my joystick hooked up it just spun rapidly. I could not find a way to calibrate the game to my joystick.

 

[ChrisRay]

How much memory was on those cards Chris? I got an OCed 1Gb 8800 GTS & a 512Mb 9800 GT and I'm thinking the 8800 should be my primary.

If I can get motivated and unlaziful that is.

9800GTX + and 9600GT are reference designs with 512 megs of memory.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Regarding the market-traction of Physx mentioned in this thread, I'd like to mention my view. I have also been a fan of Novodex since before the takeover, and I have been dreaming of physics in games. But the manner in which Nvidia promotes it leaves me cold. If I wanted more realistically fluttering capes in a game, I'd most likely be playing Sims 3: The cloth-shop extravaganza. This isn't what Novodex was promising. They promoted actual physics affecting and incorporated into the gameplay. Right now I'm angry at Nvidia for this (love spurned and all that ). There is also the the thing to note: PhysX MAY become something valid, I KNOW Dx11 is going to be valid. Futureproofing etc. As for the easy sell part, this is a tech-forum presumably filled with people willing to jump on the next cool tech. If it is this hard selling to them, how hard will it be to sell to the less tech-savvy?
Lastly, I think it is time to get our collective heads out of our butts. It is pretty clear to me that the next BIG tech for PC's has come in the unsexy harddrive-department. SSDs and all that. I know I'll be getting one and probably pay more for it then for a GPU, and it will most likely have a way bigger effect on my PC use then any of the presently sold GPUs.

There's still possibilities for Physics in games, IMO. While I hated that one star wars console game, DMM + Havoks made for some great Physics effects and interaction. So there's still some hope. And there's still devs doing interactive physics...

Personally I'm still more impressed with the level of Physics interactions in titles like Half-Life 2 and Red Faction than I have been with GRAW, Sacred 2, Mirrors Edge, etc. Granted I haven't given PhysX a drive in Batman yet, but I doubt it's going to change my mind significantly, but who knows.

Regards,
SB

 

[Sinistar]

They actually recommend that you buy a second card just for PhysX, not sure how that can be considered marketing to the masses. However, a GTX 260 should handle it just fine at normal resolutions. And that is definitely in mass territory now ($150).

Thats funny, thats what Ageia said. It seem the same people who attacked them for that, are now espousing it.

 

[leoneazzurro]

Yes but don't you invalidate the remainder of your post by leading off with a false hypothesis? You do not need a "very high enthusiast card" to run PhysX. Repeating it won't make it true.

Besides, it's not marketed as a "mass" product at all. It's marketed as a differentiating feature of Nvidia products. They actually recommend that you buy a second card just for PhysX, not sure how that can be considered marketing to the masses.

Sorry, but we saw that a GTS250 card with "very high" Physx in Batman : AA is brought to the knees. This when all works well, otherwise we have a "stuttering bug" (I have all the time, and you repeating it isn´t true doesn´t make it less true, unfortunately for me). Sacred 2 is in the same ballpark, if not worse as there is no "bug" but only low performances. So you need at least a GTX260 to run it at high settings. OK. So you need a card costing 170+$. This may be high cost, maybe not, certainly it is not a "mass" product.
And now you are saying I´m right, Nvidia is not marketing Physx as a "mass" product, and recommends even buying a separate card for the physics calculations? Well, what can I say, I see a lot of people buying couples of GTX260 only to run some enhanced visual in some games, do I? And I have to run an all Nvidia setting, as if Physx detects and ATI card in the system it does not work anymore? And maybe hordes of developers will jump on the Physx bandwagon, with the target market being not so widespread? And I was so silly as I always thought that success and market penetration were linked to the "widespread" term...

 

[Davros]

Sorry, but we saw that a GTS250 card with "very high" Physx in Batman :

You shouldnt be using very high with that card, if you run normal physx it will be playable

 

[leoneazzurro]

You shouldnt be using very high with that card, if you run normal physx it will be playable

Yes, if it works well: for me, even "medium" causes stuttering. But that is a bug.
Anyway, I was only stretching it a bit, as in medium settings there are enhancements but not so noticeable like in high setting.

 

[digitalwanderer]

So the great PhysX title showcase is a bomb with PhysX seems to be the upshot?

 

[trinibwoy]

Sorry, but we saw that a GTS250 card with "very high" Physx in Batman : AA is brought to the knees.

Consistency would help. A few posts ago you were incorrectly complaining about it being unplayable even at the lowest setting.

So you need a card costing $170.

And? How is that any different from any other game?

And maybe hordes of developers will jump on the Physx bandwagon, with the target market being not so widespread? And I was so silly as I always thought that success and market penetration were linked to the "widespread" term...

As opposed to what other bandwagon? You do realize PhysX is a complete middleware package, just like Havok right? Not sure what's up with the weird insinuations that somehow developers won't want to use PhysX on its own merits. Developers will keep using PhysX as long as it does what they need it to do and they will keep using GPU PhysX as long as they have the proper mo$iva$ion.

And given that last quote I assume you have joined with the folks saying DX11 is a waste of time? Considering its market penetration is absolute zero

 

[digitalwanderer]

And given that last quote I assume you have joined with the folks saying DX11 is a waste of time? Considering its market penetration is absolute zero

I think it's hard to compare a soon-to-be-released technology with an old and dying one.

 

[AlexV]

Sorry, shop is closed.