PhysX: PS3 can handle it; 360 features limited

[one]

It's a messy translation, but Lassanske mentions "Playstation 3" "PhysX PC" and "operation of the same level" in the same sentence Can anyone provide a more decent translation? Or even of the whole article (a lot to ask, I know!). There's another bit later on that mentions PS3 again when talking about a PhysX-enabled PC's performance with the boulders demo.

Well I don't translate all of it as your interpretation from babelfish is basically what it reports.

But the connotation of what AGEIA wanted to say is, IMHO, "Buy PhysX card this Christmas and play PS3-levels game before PS3 release with your $3000 PC with GF7800 + PhysX + dual-core CPU dammit!". The only problem is, there'll be no decent PC game that supports PhysX in this year. Or if you consider the fact that the audience of CEDEC is developers, "use NovodeX in your PS3 game and your market will expand to PhysX PC automagically".

 

[Titanio]

Well I don't translate all of it as your interpretation from babelfish is basically what it reports.

But the connotation of what AGEIA wanted to say is, IMHO, "Buy PhysX card this Christmas and play PS3-levels game before PS3 release with your $3000 PC with GF7800 + PhysX + dual-core CPU dammit!". The only problem is, there'll be no decent PC game that supports PhysX in this year. Or if you consider the fact that the audience of CEDEC is developers, "use NovodeX in your PS3 game and your market will expand to PhysX PC automagically".

Cheers, that's what I thought but it was difficult to make out.

Could you even just literally translate the specific quote from Lassanske? The ""PhysX loading PC if, physical operation of the same level as Playstation 3 announcingthe demonstration which used the apparatus of the PhysX on-board card, possible"" bit? I think I get the meaning now, but it'd be nice to have a literal translation..

You're of great service to the boards one, thank you!

 

[mckmas8808]

Well I don't translate all of it as your interpretation from babelfish is basically what it reports.

But the connotation of what AGEIA wanted to say is, IMHO, "Buy PhysX card this Christmas and play PS3-levels game before PS3 release with your $3000 PC with GF7800 + PhysX + dual-core CPU dammit!". The only problem is, there'll be no decent PC game that supports PhysX in this year. Or if you consider the fact that the audience of CEDEC is developers, "use NovodeX in your PS3 game and your market will expand to PhysX PC automagically".

WOW!! That's a big statement of them to make. Why choose to say PS3? It seems to me someone made a choice that the PS3 level physics through Aegia are comparable to a $3000 PC with a GF7800 and PhysX card dual cored out. That's big.

 

[one]

Could you even just literally translate the specific quote from Lassanske? The ""PhysX loading PC if, physical operation of the same level as Playstation 3 announcingthe demonstration which used the apparatus of the PhysX on-board card, possible"" bit? I think I get the meaning now, but it'd be nice to have a literal translation..

That part follows just after the excerpt I translated early in this thread.

Basically, what Lassanske stated means that even dual-core PC is behind PS3 in the spec aspect. Then, it's as if finally PC gaming reached the dead end, but he said "PhysX PC can do physics calculation at the same level as PS3" and showed the demo with a real PhysX PC.

 

[Titanio]

That part follows just after the excerpt I translated early in this thread.

Cheers again, one, thank you. It seems to be a relatively explicit parallel that he's drawing there.

 

[nasim]

look guys if you dont know anything then just shut up...some stupids are comparing a cell processor that has a dual processor in it with a normal pc dual core processor......do u even understand what you are saying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

lot of artcles were posted on cell ...this time by IBM themselves that claimed the cell being 10 times more powerful than xenos or the fastest processors in use today....at least say something that make sense....or read a blachford article for instance

joke of the century:- a normal dual core processor outperforms the cell in physics

lolllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

just because AGEIA has revealed that x360 is inferior.......some xbox ******s have surely gone mad and have started to talk rubbish

 

[Titanio]

look guys if you dont know anything then just shut up...some stupids are comparing a cell processor that has a dual processor in it with a normal pc dual core processor......do u even understand what you are saying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

lot of artcles were posted on cell ...this time by IBM themselves that claimed the cell being 10 times more powerful than xenos or the fastest processors in use today....at least say something that make sense....or read a blachford article for instance

joke of the century:- a normal dual core processor outperforms the cell in physics

lolllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

just because AGEIA has revealed that x360 is inferior.......some xbox ******s have surely gone mad and have started to talk rubbish

I'm afraid you are not the one making sense here.

No one ever said Cell was not as powerful as a dual-core Intel for this. In fact, quite the opposite:

"dual-core PC is behind PS3 in the spec aspect."

i.e. a dual-core PC is not as good as a PS3 in this regard.

Calm down!

 

[msia2k75]

Fouad, anyone?

 

[Lysander]

Some people here are doing wild PS3 biased implications from Lass. speach. Let`s reverse: SPE does not do OS, so probably SPE can not do OS; so it is dependable upon cell main core, which must do at least: system data, task delegation, game script, ai; therefore, main core shall be overworked. Unbalance in the system

 

[mckmas8808]

Some people here are doing wild PS3 biased implications from Lass. speach. Let`s reverse: SPE does not do OS, so probably SPE can not do OS; so it is dependable upon cell main core, which must do at least: system data, task delegation, game script, ai; therefore, main core shall be overworked. Unbalance in the system

Man that makes NO sense what so ever. You need to read the forum more before you start posting young chap.

 

[Lysander]

But why mckmas8808? Lass. claimed that the main benefit of spe in comparision with general core is that it does not need to run OS and DirX. I just went in other direction. Each good has its bad.

 

[Titanio]

Some people here are doing wild PS3 biased implications from Lass. speach. Let`s reverse: SPE does not do OS, so probably SPE can not do OS; so it is dependable upon cell main core, which must do at least: system data, task delegation

You might be interested in the slides from this link onwards:

http://research.scea.com/research/html/CellGDC05/24.html

All of the programming models presented there require little to no PPE intervention to keep the SPUs busy. The SPUs have mini-kernels that can pull jobs from memory on their own or to co-operate with other SPUs on sharing tasks. Cell is quite flexible, so I'm sure there are models where the PPE would have a larger role in task delegation and soforth, but it need not be the case, and may not be the best direction to take for some apps.

Besides, I don't think the concern was as simple as the OS and DX running on every core..I'd be surprised if that is the case (that the OS/DX occupies more than one core to some or any degree). The OS/DX issue mentioned was likely something else.

I also wouldn't restrict certain tasks to only the PPE as you outlined. Some of them would be PPE-only jobs, but I think some are also open questions (or parts of some, if broken down).

 

[mckmas8808]

But why mckmas8808?

Your answer right there. Titanio has given you the knowledge. As you read you will see what he is saying. Do a search here here too, if you want a more human understanding.

 

[Arty]

It's funny, it really is. Yesterday, almost everybody(mostly Sony fans) crucified onetimeposter about his e-mail response being valid and asking for more 'proof'. Now that you and I got the same e-mails, it's MS on the horn with Ageia covering up their mistake and throwing PR BS.

Incredible.

Glad you are wearing the tin foil hat, beware of the too many conspiracy theorists on this board.

 

[aldo]

Ageia Withdraws Xbox 360 Comparisons

ExtremeTech closes the book on this one (for those that felt the book still remained open) via Ageia vice president of marketing Andy Keane.

In an interview, Keane acknowledged that the original claims regarding the Xbox 360, as reported by ExtremeTech, were a part of the presentation. However, the Ageia employees that presented at the European GDC did not develop the presentation, and did not provide the information in its proper context, Keane said. The slide has since been removed, he added.

We really have no clue, Keane said in an interview, regarding the capabilities of the Xbox 360 and its ability to process the Ageia physics SDK, known as Novodex.

However, the company has tested Novodex on single-core and dual-core PC processors, as well as the Ageia chip, so those comparisons remain valid, Keane said. The benchmarks run on the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 simply tested to see if the SDK would run, and do not provide performance data, unlike the performance tests run on the PC systems.

Plausible Deniability anyone? [[size=-1]cue xfiles music] The truth is out there. [/size]


-aldo

 

[scificube]

ExtremeTech closes the book on this one (for those that felt the book still remained open) via Ageia vice president of marketing Andy Keane.



Plausible Deniability anyone? [[size=-1]cue xfiles music] The truth is out there. [/size]


-aldo

Back-tracking at it's best...although most here can infer what is true in reality we're likely never to get anything substantial to back up our assumptions from Aegia. Game over. Only cool developers can give us some love now, but even they may succomb to pressures to be quiet about certain things.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The benchmarks run on the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 simply tested to see if the SDK would run, and do not provide performance data, unlike the performance tests run on the PC systems.

So gives us the results from these SDK tests

 

[scooby_dooby]

Maybe it's just possible that what they are saying is the actual truth, did anyone consider that?

From a high-level view, the CELL would immediately appear to be more robust for physics processing, and from a high-level view the X360 may be seen as lacking in physics processing power, i.e. if one of the cores has to run an os and do everything else, all you are left with is 2 fairly weak dualthreaded IO cores vs 7 SPE's, so IMO the info on the slides could easily have come from assumptions and NOT tested benchmarks.

That's also exactly what Ageia has said since the first time they were contacted by email, and it continues in this interview, they haven't benchmarked the software on the consoles, they know both platforms will run the SDK kit, but from a high-level the X360 may not have the brute force to pull it off, however that's not a fact, it's probably just speculation.

And I'm sure, next year, lo and behold we will see X360 games using this engine in some games, and it will work just fine, maybe not as much potential as the PS3, but they'll make it work.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

They may not have benchmarked the platforms to determine relative speeds, but I'm sure they have comparative results which no amount of pressing will get them to release.

 

[Nemo80]

They may not have benchmarked the platforms to determine relative speeds, but I'm sure they have comparative results which no amount of pressing will get them to release.

Of course they have, they even said it:

The benchmarks run on the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 simply tested to see if the SDK would run...

So i guess the poor employees said more than they were allowed to, and AGEIA now tries to limit the damage, not to prevent anyone from using their engine, even if performance differs between the two.