What type of latest high-end ATI or Nvidia graphic you have? "Year 2005+"

Discussion in '3D Hardware, Software & Output Devices' started by Shtal, Sep 21, 2008.

?

What type of latest high-end ATI or Nvidia graphic you have? "Year 2005+"

  1. Both Radeon HD 4800 series & GeForce 200 series

    4 vote(s)
    3.5%
  2. Radeon HD 4800 series

    37 vote(s)
    32.7%
  3. Radeon HD 4600 series

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. Radeon HD 3800 series

    12 vote(s)
    10.6%
  5. Radeon HD 3600 series

    2 vote(s)
    1.8%
  6. Radeon HD 2900 series

    2 vote(s)
    1.8%
  7. Radeon HD 2600 series

    1 vote(s)
    0.9%
  8. Radeon X1900 series

    4 vote(s)
    3.5%
  9. Radeon X1800 series

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  10. Radeon X1600 series

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  11. GeForce 200 series

    9 vote(s)
    8.0%
  12. GeForce 9800 series

    2 vote(s)
    1.8%
  13. GeForce 9600 series

    2 vote(s)
    1.8%
  14. GeForce 9500 series

    1 vote(s)
    0.9%
  15. GeForce 8800 series

    28 vote(s)
    24.8%
  16. GeForce 8600 series

    1 vote(s)
    0.9%
  17. GeForce 7900 series

    3 vote(s)
    2.7%
  18. GeForce 7800 series

    1 vote(s)
    0.9%
  19. GeForce 7600 series

    2 vote(s)
    1.8%
  20. Not on the list!

    2 vote(s)
    1.8%
  1. AlphaWolf

    AlphaWolf Specious Misanthrope
    Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Messages:
    8,476
    Likes Received:
    325
    Location:
    Treading Water
    AMD supporting physx is a suckers bet. They'd have to be morons to do it.
     
  2. Razor1

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,232
    Likes Received:
    749
    Location:
    NY, NY

    well what will happen if most of the popular licensee engines use it? Will it still be a sucker's bet? Yeah right now not much out there, but it can change pretty fast. AMD is slowing down the inevitable, physics will be done on a GPU one way or another, until they go with something they will be at the short end. But nV has alot more pull with developers so its more then just a 50% chance of going towards physX.
     
  3. kyleb

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,165
    Likes Received:
    52
    The sucker's bet is in accepting the offer to compete in a market where your opponent holds the sole right to creating the rules.
     
  4. Razor1

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,232
    Likes Received:
    749
    Location:
    NY, NY
    well its still a sucker's bet if they have nothing in the short term too :smile:, reminds me of crossfire, took em long enough to get it out and then get it right, all that time, nV was able to solidify SLi as the best multigpu platform, and its going to take time for Crossfire to take that marketshare back.
     
  5. AlphaWolf

    AlphaWolf Specious Misanthrope
    Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Messages:
    8,476
    Likes Received:
    325
    Location:
    Treading Water
    How popular will the engines be if they only work on one vendors hardware,

    Game development doesn't change fast. It takes a while. There will be a couple new lines of graphics cards (and maybe even a new api) before any game started today reaches store shelves. Ya there will be a few games that perform a bit better on nv hardware with physx just like there will be some that run better on AMD on with directx10.1. Developers still have to support hardware that's several years old, I can still buy NV hardware that doesn't support phys-x even.
     
  6. Razor1

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,232
    Likes Received:
    749
    Location:
    NY, NY
    but it does work on all hardware, just that its not always on a GPU.

    Hmm physx has been around for a while now, so that doesn't really hold water.
     
  7. AlphaWolf

    AlphaWolf Specious Misanthrope
    Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Messages:
    8,476
    Likes Received:
    325
    Location:
    Treading Water
    ah well then it works fine on AMD hardware right?

    nice try. How long have nvidia GPU's supported physx? 3 months?
     
  8. Razor1

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,232
    Likes Received:
    749
    Location:
    NY, NY
    Of course just be slower or have less features.



    any game that used the Ageia physX will work on nV hardware. When did Novadex become PhysX?
     
  9. Scali

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,127
    Likes Received:
    0
    AMD makes x86 CPUs, they're experts at making sucker's bets like that :)
    Seriously though, the thing is just that nVidia got to PhysX first. ATi had been promoting physics via GPU for a long time, I think even longer than nVidia. But nVidia actually delivered a product. In a way it's ATi's own fault that they let nVidia create the rules.
     
  10. ChrisRay

    ChrisRay <span style="color: rgb(124, 197, 0)">R.I.P. 1983-
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,234
    Likes Received:
    26
    PhysX didn't have an install base until Nvidia took over the company. Install bases change the way developers see things.
     
  11. XMAN26

    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    702
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'll agree with that statement. Before, PhysX had maybe 1% install base from sold PhysX PPU cards, now with current drivers, virtually all G8x and newer cards have become the install base or about 50% of the gaming croud machines.

    My numbers are rough as I have no real idea what % of machines had PhysX cards in them or how many gamer rigs have G8x or newer hardware either.
     
  12. ChrisRay

    ChrisRay <span style="color: rgb(124, 197, 0)">R.I.P. 1983-
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,234
    Likes Received:
    26
    Around editors day. The last quote was around 70M. But I'm sure thats gone up as its been a while since then.
     
  13. RichardHuddy

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2008
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Scali - please send me an email at Richard.Huddy@amd.com about this and I'll see if I can deal with your concerns. It was never my plan to mis-represent what games developers are doing. But then, I don't actually know which comment I may have made that upset you. And, no, I couldn't claim to know every detail about what's happening inside every AMD DevRel technical conversation. But then I don't think I've met a software engineer in the last 5 years who knew everything that was going on inside the graphics side of his/her engine. Rendering code and DevRel are too complex for any of us to know everything even about our very narrow subject areas.

    As for PhysX? I'm not planning to join the debate here - but I would say that ATI/AMD greatly prefers approaches based upon open standards. Don't be fooled into thinking that PhysX is an open standard. PhysX is not an open standard (and the claim that NVIDIA gave AMD "ample opportunity" is patently false). And as such, it's my opinion that PhysX will have only a short lifetime and very limited relevance. [I'll also try to anticipate the first objection: And, no I'm not claiming that Havok is "open" here. Just that it is much less closed than PhysX.]

    And finally - I didn't vote in the poll - but I have an HD4850. Great card! I love its performance, the driver quality and the support for standards like DirectX 10.1. But then I'm biased aren't I? :lol:
     
  14. Scali

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,127
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's right. Basically half of the enthusiast/gamer market has a G8x+ GPU, hence has PhysX support.
    For AMD there simply is no alternative, and it can take years until there is one, if one ever arrives at all. Havok runs on the CPU only, but PhysX can do that aswell.
    So the developer faces two choices:
    1) Use PhysX and have AMD cards run on CPU, but nVidia cards with enhanced physics effects (roughly half of the intended audience).
    2) Use Havok and have both run on the CPU, no enhanced effects at all.

    Option 1) is more attractive because it can make your game stand out from the crowd. I think most developers are convinced that the next big thing in gaming is physics, and if you can make the 'killer app' in terms of physics, you have a good chance of having a VERY successful title.
    I'm quite sure that's why PhysX was used for Unreal Engine 3. I recall some early footage where they demonstrated various physics effects, including deformable objects.

    So I really don't see a reason for NOT choosing PhysX. You're taking advantage of a new feature on nVidia cards (which will make your game more attractive to half of your target audience), but it's not like you put AMD at a disadvantage. They simply don't have an alternative... nothing changes on the AMD side.
     
  15. Dave Baumann

    Dave Baumann Gamerscore Wh...
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2002
    Messages:
    14,079
    Likes Received:
    648
    Location:
    O Canada!
    I'd take a look at the Havok annoucement again.
     
  16. Scali

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,127
    Likes Received:
    0
    You mean this one:
    http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,51_104_543~126548,00.html

    Sounds like their priority is with the CPUs (obviously, since Intel owns Havok and has nothing to gain from GPU acceleration anyway).
    The part about GPU acceleration is very vague... Words like 'investigate' and 'in the future' don't quite sound like there's a working product coming our way anyday now.
    I doubt that you could send me a Havok SDK today with working GPU support, even if it were still in alpha stage.
    It's probably months, if not years away from a final release. In which case I'll worry about it with the next generation of products. PhysX on the other hand has been available for quite a while now, first with PPU support, now with GPU support. Havok has always had only CPU support, and it looks like it will take a while until that changes (perhaps Larrabee?).
     
  17. Davros

    Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    14,891
    Likes Received:
    2,309
    Shame on you Amd, one of your top dudes and you only give him a HD4850, no wonder humus left :D
     
  18. Dave Baumann

    Dave Baumann Gamerscore Wh...
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2002
    Messages:
    14,079
    Likes Received:
    648
    Location:
    O Canada!
    Knowing Richard’s benevolent nature I’m sure he sampled his personal 4870 to a needy developer out there. ;)
     
  19. Farid

    Farid Artist formely known as Vysez
    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,844
    Likes Received:
    108
    Location:
    Paris, France
    You used to be cool, Richard. What happened to you man?

    At the very least you could have stuck two of these feeble man toys in Crossfire... to soften the blow on the community that looked upon you as a God made man when it came to GPU weaponry.

    Now, what am I going to tell the kids when they gather around me asking for more amazing stories about Onc' Richard's raw GPU perfs? What am I supposed to say? That he left all that behind, that an HD4870X2 is not for him anymore, that it's part of his past, that mainstream enthusiast cards are more than enough for him these days?

    You changed, man. You changed.
     
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...