PhysX: PS3 can handle it; 360 features limited

[Carl B]

If you don't mind me asking, what forum is that?

Mckmas... I don't have a problem with you asking. But I just don't know if it's a good idea for me to post a link. It's bad enough there's cross-forum warfare of the console sort. I once took a vow never to get involved in political/social debates on the technical forums I belong to, but I broke that vow and it was a BIG mistake. Now I'm stuck in a thread consisting of fourteen pages of anger.

You can PM me if you really want it - I'm always looking for additional reasonable people - but for now I think we should all stick to issues like physics performance (which amazingly when you think about it is *way* too contentious in it's own right).

 

[pso]

hmmm check this out guys:

Hello Asand:



We appreciate your asking about this subject. From what we gather, being that it is 3am in Europe, is that this was a statement taken out of context from a presentation at GDC Europe.



The Xbox 360 currently processes our SDK, and therefore supports the simulation of fluids. We believe this statement was refering to a generic long term statement about types of architectures for handling certain types of fluids. I know of no detailed analysis regarding the advantages or disadvantages of the different architectures in physics processing. We will be getting in contact with the presenter in Europe to get further clarification tomorrow when everyone is up and about.



Does this clarify things for you?



Kim
From: Hasan Ahmad [mailtoxxxxx@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2005 5:18 PM
To: kim@kimstowe.com; general@ageia.com; bizdev@ageia.com
Subject: Clarification of Company Comments

Looks like another statement being misquoted ala The Ing & Evilavatar regarding the RSX blunder from yesterday.

 

[mckmas8808]

Mckmas...
You can PM me if you really want it - I'm always looking for additional reasonable people - but for now I think we should all stick to issues like physics performance (which amazingly when you think about it is *way* too contentious in it's own right).

For some reason I don't have rights to PM people. How would I get those rights?

 

[Carl B]

For some reason I don't have rights to PM people. How would I get those rights?

I don't know about all that, but I'll go ahead and PM you the thread.

EDIT: Strange, I can't send you one due to your settings either.

 

[Tap In]

I don't know about all that, but I'll go ahead and PM you the thread.

EDIT: Strange, I can't send you one due to your settings either.

I asked the mods to have his PM rights suspended after he kept asking if he could come over to play some X360 with me when it releases. He made me promise not to tell anyone.

 

[Titanio]

Looks like another statement being misquoted ala The Ing & Evilavatar regarding the RSX blunder from yesterday.

Or it sounds like they're just not in the loop about what went on in these presentations - they admit as much themselves. These presentations did happen, and there have been a number of independent articles from two different conferences now reporting the same thing.

 

[mckmas8808]

I asked the mods to have his PM rights suspended after he kept asking if he could come over to play some X360 with me when it releases. He made me promise not to tell anyone.

Hey man that's not true. But really though what happened to my PMing rights?

 

[Titanio]

1. Speculation on make-believe numbers is not speculations!

2. You are interpretting. From the above statement you seem to clearly indicate the issue is a gap (in performance) and thus resulting in the "cutting" of a feature.

This assumes it is a performance issue; instead the question seems to be *architecture*. The feature dropped, fluid dynamics, has specific needs to perform at a high level. The 360 architecture and the Novodex SDK seem to hit a wall here.

They say they could do it but it would take too much resources on X360. This doesn't sound like a performance issue to you?

You are the one inserting comments about 1. make believe numbers and 2. expanding the issue beyond what has been officially stated.

I think you'll remember that I was responding to (in my opinion,less likely) "make believe" numbers from this chap here:

post of the year

I'm simply making comments on what the AGEIA guys said, ignore mine if you wish, and we'll let them speak for themselves. They're clear enough as it is.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Not really, its just that I think you will see graphics processors get increasingly used for physics processing the as they get more ALU capable - Fluid Dynamics has had a lot of input into it on the graphics front as well and ATI already has a demo

How much would that gobble up GPU resources and take away from the graphics rendering though? GPU's ought to be being used as intensly as possible. It's not like there's lots of spare cycles to dedicate to other tasks, unless they can be somehow integrate with the graphics work. eg. If collision detection can be worked withthe GPU's transformation process or some other part of the graphics pipeline that'll occur for the graphics, piggybacking the physics.

I can't see the PhysX thing taking off because at that price it's only the top-end gamers who'll bother and the market won't be there, though using the software SDK people can still play the Aegia-powered games and thus maybe think to upgrade. Plus small form factor is fashionable and there's not too much room for extra boards. GPU accelerated physics also probably won't take off as you'd be cutting into the visuals, and it's more important to have top-end screenshots to attract attention than lots of fluid animations that aren't apparent in stills. I can't see physics taking off until it's incorporated into the processor design, or included deliberately on the GPU. Until then it'll be software solutions I guess.

 

[Alpha_Spartan]

They say they could do it but it would take too much resources on X360. This doesn't sound like a performance issue to you?



I think you'll remember that I was responding to (in my opinion,less likely) "make believe" numbers from this chap here:

I'm simply making comments on what the AGEIA guys said, ignore mine if you wish, and we'll let them speak for themselves. They're clear enough as it is.

I think it's obvious that you're a Playstation Pimp. You seem to have a hard time distinguishing between an architectural issue that leads to a performance issue and a flat-out performance issue.

Hasn't it already been established that Ageia's PPU shares some physical similarities to the Cell architecture? If this is indeed true, then there may be some logical similarities as to how the SDK is implemented leading to better performance on the Cell in a stand-alone physics environment (shit, we don't know if the real-world performance will be the same since the Cell will NEVER be used as a stand-alone physics processor). All we know is that the Cell runs this implementation of the Novonyx SDK better than the Xenon. In the grand sceme of things, this means absolutely jack shit. It's just one SDK. ONE.

 

[one]

Hasn't it already been established that Ageia's PPU shares some physical similarities to the Cell architecture?

It's not confirmed AFAIK... anyone with source?

All we know is that the Cell runs this implementation of the Novonyx SDK better than the Xenon. In the grand sceme of things, this means absolutely jack shit. It's just one SDK. ONE.

Unreal Engine 3 uses NovodeX. NovodeX is virtually free for all PS3 developers.

 

[aldo]

Or it sounds like they're just not in the loop about what went on in these presentations - they admit as much themselves. These presentations did happen, and there have been a number of independent articles from two different conferences now reporting the same thing.

The head guys at Ageia are prolly trying to do damage control. I don't think it would be wise for them to let X360 developers know that their engine does not function 100% with the system and perhaps they know they will get it working or else...

This is most likely a case of one of their sheep revealing information without Ageis being aware of it, after all I think it would be naive to believe that the individual delivering the presentation could have misstated himself this badly:

Only the PlayStation 3 and a PhysX PC will have the horsepower to process all of the technology's features, Ageia executives said. The Xbox 360 will not be able to process the fluid-based technology, because of the limitations of its architecture.

The only thing I can see as a possible interpretation in X360's favor (to some extent) is that FD may be supported on the X360 version, but the above reference may have been made in regard to one of the complex FD demos that were being shown. PS3/PhysX PC could run the demo; X360 not powerful enough to run this particular demo. Obviously it would be nice to see the statement in its original context.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

In the grand sceme of things, this means absolutely jack shit. It's just one SDK. ONE.

Well I wouldn't be so quick to discount the worth of this information totally. One Physics solution out of how many for next-gen? There's Novodex, and Havok. What others? Maybe half a dozen tops? The real impact of Aegia's performance between platforms is dependant more on how many studios choose Aegia, not how physics solutions are available. It's the same with UE3.0. It's just ONE engine but as there seems to be some heavy use of it, any console that could run UE3 better than the others will have the upper hand in UE3 based games. Even though Novodex's is but one solution, if it's the one used in 90% of cross-platform games, one would expect, if the XB360 implementation is hampered by architectural limitations, that 90% of cross platform games with a reliance on heavy physics will run better on PS3.

That's what happens with different hardwares tackling problems in different ways. MS added priority for uniformly high IQ for XB360. If the PS3's graphics solution can't handle AA as well as Xenos, one could assume that maybe 90% of cross platform games will have an IQ AA advantage on XB360. That's what makes the next-gen consoles interesting (finally!) - that there are differences. They're not going to both run exactly the same games with exactly the same results.

One can also question from this information, how much of this PS3 advantage in physics is Novodex only, and how much can be applied to ALL physics engines? That's an unknown, but seeing as that was something tooted as Cell being very good at it's not far reaching to believe that one of PS3's strengths over it's ric]vals would be in simulations. That's something Sony were aiming for so it wouldn't be surprising if they succeeded.

 

[Titanio]

The head guys at Ageia are prolly trying to do damage control. I don't think it would be wise for them to let X360 developers know that their engine does not function 100% with the system and perhaps they know they will get it working or else...

Or else they're very confident this isn't an issue isolated to their engine, but something any physics engine will come up against on X360. And they have to let devs know what to expect, and that's what they were doing at GDC etc.

I wonder why they don't just leave it as an option for devs to take that hit and use FD if they want. Perhaps they feel its use would be unrealistic in the context of any amount of other reasonable levels of simulation (i.e. having the "regular" rigid body stuff + FD would be too much).

 

[scooby_dooby]

Oh give it a rest...it's really getting annoying watching you grasp at straws to try and put down X360 and elevate PS3. These are video game consoles...who cares???

Give it a break.

So CELL is going to have more power for simulating physics, what else is new? Didn't we already consider this one of CELL's main strengths?

Of course the x360 dev's will figure out methods for Fluid Dynamics just fine, if the PS3 guys can manage to deal with 7 SPE's then I'm sure teh x360 guys can figure out how to get some badass FD performance out of their box.

Why don't you just pony up and buy both consoles? Then you can actually look forward to both and maybe, just maybe give up your thinly veiled crusade against a white plastic box called X360?

 

[one]

Of course the x360 dev's will figure out methods for Fluid Dynamics just fine, if the PS3 guys can manage to deal with 7 SPE's then I'm sure teh x360 guys can figure out how to get some badass FD performance out of their box.

Eh... in this case PS3 guys don't touch 7 SPEs, AGEIA develop the library with 7 SPEs and typical PS3 guys just use it. Big difference here. It's called abstraction.

 

[Jawed]

I'd hope that PS3 wouldn't need all 7 SPEs to run a high-end physics engine for a game - otherwise what's left for the next-gen AI and graphics?

Jawed

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Like all finite hardware it's for the devs to decide how to use it. If they want to spend all 7 SPE's on a super-simulation and keep the rest only on the PPE it's their call. I imagine a sort of super 3D Tetris, piling blocks on each other in water, with no real game complexity might consider this. Or they can reign it in to just a good simulation and consume 2 SPE's, for some FPS barrel bashing and ragdolls. Or keep it simple and dedicate just one SPE to the job in something like a racer, using the other SPE's for reflections, procedural texturing and runtime object synthesis for the scenery. No-one's forcing the use of the Cell's (or XeCPU's) resources to a particular task.

 

[Alpha_Spartan]

Well I wouldn't be so quick to discount the worth of this information totally. One Physics solution out of how many for next-gen? There's Novodex, and Havok. What others? Maybe half a dozen tops?

Half a dozen and then a few dozen developers (especially Japanese) who will do their own thing. I agree though, this only bodes well for the PS3 if Novodex takes off.

That's what happens with different hardwares tackling problems in different ways. MS added priority for uniformly high IQ for XB360. If the PS3's graphics solution can't handle AA as well as Xenos, one could assume that maybe 90% of cross platform games will have an IQ AA advantage on XB360. That's what makes the next-gen consoles interesting (finally!) - that there are differences. They're not going to both run exactly the same games with exactly the same results.

You hit the nail on the head, my friend. However, what will everyone emphasize? They'll emphasize what they can see, namely visuals. I doubt that people are going to buy a game because of the awesome physics. This generation could end up seeing PS3 having the edge in graphics if Novodex spreads like a wildfire while the Xbox 360 pulls ahead graphically. Sounds like a technical stalemate to me. In the end though, I believe that there won't be a large difference in games across platforms graphically or physics-wise.

One can also question from this information, how much of this PS3 advantage in physics is Novodex only, and how much can be applied to ALL physics engines? That's an unknown, but seeing as that was something tooted as Cell being very good at it's not far reaching to believe that one of PS3's strengths over it's ric]vals would be in simulations. That's something Sony were aiming for so it wouldn't be surprising if they succeeded.

This is a question that is left unanswered. What if findings are released that show that Havok runs better on Xbox 360. What could we conclude? Nothing, nothing at all. In fact, if it is true that the PhysX chip and the Cell are similar architecturally (still waiting for this to be confirmed), then that may be all the explanation we need. I doubt sincerely that Ageia would spend time optimizing code for the Cell and Xenon when they are trying to pimp their own hardware. It's a cross-platform SDK but you better bet your dollar that this thing runs better on the PhysX chip than any piece of hardware out there. If the Cell matches the PhysX chip physically and logically, then that may explain the performance similarity.

I don't think Ageia busted their asses coding for either of the consoles. Maybe it just turns out that the Cell architecture was more port friendly. I doubt that the Novodex SDK is 100% architecture agnostic.

 

[Jawed]

Hasn't Ageia had more time with Cell, too?

Jawed