AMD 5800 series to introduce hardware physics acceleration

[Creig]

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1450905

Originally posted by: The Cobra on HardForums
ATI/AMD Event USS Hornet

The NDA lifts on September 23, 2009. Most of the rumors you have read are true. I went to the USS Hornet in Alameda, CA (nice to see you again Kyle) the cards I saw (ATI 5870) should be out around the time windows 7 goes retail. The 5870 will be able to drive 3 30 inch monitors at the same time. I was one of 15 people to be dragged to the bowls of the ship and saw some really nice tech demos. ATI also is going open source with this product. Open CL and direct input. The physics were amazing as well. All Open CL originated. The Physics are going to be run on BOTH the GPU and CPU. Really nice scaling. I think nvidia is in trouble this round. The Price points are gonna be really competative as well.

More later. Good night.

 

[RussianSensation]

Release date October 22? ... I thought it'd be quicker than that

 

[gigahertz20]

I can't wait to see benchmarks on Sept. 23rd, should be interesting.

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: gigahertz20
I can't wait to see benchmarks on Sept. 23rd, should be interesting.

Me too

 

[imported_Shaq]

In that thread a poster says the underlying API is Havok. I don't see how that helps matters having two competing physics API's. So will Nvidia adopt it and keep PhysX or is the consumer hosed again?

 

[thilanliyan]

Is GPU Havok actually coming soon or is this just another tech demo?

 

[OCGuy]

Physics acceleration is a great thing. I really wish they could come together so game developers could concentrate on one avenue.

To be honest I have only played GRAW:2 with physics, but I was still impressed.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: OCguy
Physics acceleration is a great thing. I really wish they could come together so game developers could concentrate on one avenue.

To be honest I have only played GRAW:2 with physics, but I was still impressed.

Were does it say hardware physics?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: thilan29
Is GPU Havok actually coming soon or is this just another tech demo?

That is the question I want answered. I was under the impression Intel is in no hurry to bring Havok to the GPU. At least not until they have a GPU that is capable of such a feat.

 

[aka1nas]

Originally posted by: Shaq
In that thread a poster says the underlying API is Havok. I don't see how that helps matters having two competing physics API's. So will Nvidia adopt it and keep PhysX or is the consumer hosed again?

If both APIs end up supporting OpenCL, it won't be relevant to the consumer. Both physics packages are middleware, they don't cost you as a consumer anything and having a game use one doesn't preclude another game from using the other.

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

Nice!

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: thilan29
Is GPU Havok actually coming soon or is this just another tech demo?

That is the question I want answered. I was under the impression Intel is in no hurry to bring Havok to the GPU. At least not until they have a GPU that is capable of such a feat.

Intel may not be . But Havok is working with AMD/ATI. Havok is like GF is to AMD. They run seperately, Havok ATI been working long and hard on this stuff. But both AMD and INTEL have to make sure NV can't use there GPU for physics. along with there cpus. Nv wanted to go it alone . No reason for intel /AMD to share with NV . Simple lock out as NV has done with sli and PX.

 

[Bill Brasky]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation
Release date October 22? ... I thought it'd be quicker than that

Oh holy shit... I was hoping to be finishing the new rig by the end of September.

Still stuck with the x1900gt that can barely play counterstrike at 1280 4xAA.

 

[Nemesis 1]

We will have DX11 games to play right away. So we can see if Havok indeed uses Both the GPU and CPU for Physics.

http://www.pcgameshardware.com...lien-vs-Predator/News/

 

[v8envy]

If I read this correctly, ATI is doing GPU accelerated physics right. Havoc will run on CPU if the GPU is unable, and be accelerated by GPU if possible. Exactly how it should be -- a development shop can opt to use physics for integral game play and recommend a fast GPU for best results. And that approach should be current gen console friendly. With the current PhysX solution developers are forced to use physics only for non-essential add on glitz, or risk locking out a big portion of their market (including consoles).

In other words, instead of forcing customer lock-in ATI is hoping to create a need for fast GPU hardware and then fill that need by offering the most attractive product.

There's no denying that the age of GPU accelerated physics in games is upon us, and the future doesn't look bright for PhysX. If ATI does this right we'll be using a 58XX for a primary card and our old 8800GTs for OpenCL-based Havoc physics before you know it!

 

[aka1nas]

Originally posted by: v8envy
If I read this correctly, ATI is doing GPU accelerated physics right. Havoc will run on CPU if the GPU is unable, and be accelerated by GPU if possible. Exactly how it should be -- a development shop can opt to use physics for integral game play and recommend a fast GPU for best results. And that approach should be current gen console friendly. With the current PhysX solution developers are forced to use physics only for non-essential add on glitz, or risk locking out a big portion of their market (including consoles).

In other words, instead of forcing customer lock-in ATI is hoping to create a need for fast GPU hardware and then fill that need by offering the most attractive product.

There's no denying that the age of GPU accelerated physics in games is upon us, and the future doesn't look bright for PhysX. If ATI does this right we'll be using a 58XX for a primary card and our old 8800GTs for OpenCL-based Havoc physics before you know it!

1) PhysX works exactly the same way. Legacy games just didn't implement a hardware-accelerated path.

2) ATI isn't doing anything other than enabling OpenCL on their drivers. It's not their middleware.

 

[Sylvanas]

I am very excited about the next gen cards from both camps- it seems we will be getting many more features out of a GPU than just 'this generation does it faster and you can do more AA'.

 

[v8envy]

Originally posted by: aka1nas

1) PhysX works exactly the same way. Legacy games just didn't implement a hardware-accelerated path.

No, PhysX does not work unless you have nothing but NV hardware in your system. It won't run on CPU, nor will it run on your GPU if ATI hardware is present in your machine. While we don't know everything about ATI's solution, I feel highly hopeful it'll run no matter whose video cards are installed, and be accelerated if the GPU supports OpenCL.

2) ATI isn't doing anything other than enabling OpenCL on their drivers. It's not their middleware.

Very true. It's not their compiler producing the drivers either. However the crucial difference is they are supporting and pushing OpenCL, not a proprietary, locked down standard. Very subtle but incredibly important difference.

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: v8envy


No, PhysX does not work unless you have nothing but NV hardware in your system. It won't run on CPU, nor will it run on your GPU if ATI hardware is present in your machine. While we don't know everything about ATI's solution, I feel highly hopeful it'll run no matter whose video cards are installed, and be accelerated if the GPU supports OpenCL.

Ouch, that strikes me as desperation. Wouldn't be surprised to see a class law suit, from all those that bought a nvidia card and now want to use it for physx only - but would also like a 5870 to go with those extra monitors we all have in our closet.

 

[bryanW1995]

how is somebody going to sue them? Unless you could somehow prove that physix on non-nvidia cards was a primary driving force in your decision to buy an nvidia card you wouldn't have any grounds to sue in the first place. If you could somehow prove that then nvidia still can do whatever they want b/c it's their own proprietary application. They paid aegia a lot of money for it, they can do whatever they want with it.

 

[ronnn]

Not a lawyer, but if physx was on the box when you bought it, you have a right to feel cheated, when frozen out.