AMD's Roy Taylor: PhysX/Cuda doomed?

[NIGELG]

You should tell that to:

• EverQuest Next
• Batman: Arkham Origins
• Witcher 3: The Wild Hunt

All unrelased AAA titles.
ARMA 3 devs are also looking into GPU-pHysX.

What did you call dead again? ^^

What is the ratio of GPU PhysX games to non GPU PhysX games released since 2006?

You will find it to be a very small number.Adoption rate is almost zero because the tech is simply not that appealing financially or visually to the majority of the market.

Change 'dead' to 'extreme niche' if you want to.....or 'slow agonizing death'.

 

[Lonbjerg]

What is the ratio of GPU PhysX games to non GPU PhysX games released since 2006?

You will find it to be a very small number.Adoption rate is almost zero because the tech is simply not that appealing financially or visually to the majority of the market.

Change 'dead' to 'extreme niche' if you want to.....or 'slow agonizing death'.

So niche it still gets AAA titles...your "logic" is funny

How many alternatives PGU phyiscs are out there?
I'll give you a hint:
It's 0%...even if AMD wants to play along:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfrM973spw0

They just don't have anything to show...other than TressFX.

Make no mistake...GPU physics isn't dying...it's just that NVIDIA got a ~5 years lead on the competition.

And AAA titles not happy with old-days scripted physics...only have one place to go.

I'll enjoy the new games with FULL PhysX...others will just whine....offering NO alternative ^^

 

[cmdrdredd]

As far as TressFX is concerned in tomb raider, it does drop the fps quite a bit but even when you turn it off, you still have trouble with Nvidia cards barely keeping 30fps minimums unless you have a GTX 780 or Titan. It isn't TressFX that hinders performance on Nvidia cards, although it doesn't help. The game isn't favorable on Nvidia hardware, new drivers possibly change this.

Ultra preset no tressfx

 

[BallaTheFeared]

That might be old and worthless. 770 SLI OC matches my 1235/1675 run with TressFX.

Performance hit for me with two 7950s is

154 min 196.9 avg 1150/1600 @ Ultra

98 min 126.6 avg 1150/1600 @ Ultimate

Only difference between Ultra nd Ulimate is TressFX.


Performance hit is seriously huge for the effect it delivers.


58% faster min fps without TressFX


55% faster avg fps without TressFX




Here is the thing though, as lackluster as the effect is and how great it's performance impact, just like PhysX the game is better with than without, and I will enable it long before I enable performance crippler/card seller SSAA.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Here is the thing though, as lackluster as the effect is and how great it's performance impact, just like PhysX the game is better with than without, and I will enable it long before I enable performance crippler/card seller SSAA.

This is exactly my thoughts.

 

[Red Hawk]

As far as TressFX is concerned in tomb raider, it does drop the fps quite a bit but even when you turn it off, you still have trouble with Nvidia cards barely keeping 30fps minimums unless you have a GTX 780 or Titan. It isn't TressFX that hinders performance on Nvidia cards, although it doesn't help. The game isn't favorable on Nvidia hardware, new drivers possibly change this.

Ultra preset no tressfx

Old benchmark; it's well-documented that Nvidia had driver and other issues with Tomb Raider on release, but since then they've improved so they are on par or better than the AMD equivalent cards.

 

[Mr Expert]

Old benchmark; it's well-documented that Nvidia had driver and other issues with Tomb Raider on release, but since then they've improved so they are on par or better than the AMD equivalent cards.

HD 7850 runs TR 2013 really nice on ultra. I think there is a problem with the rain effects happering framerates on any rig though.

 

[2is]

At around 1% adoption rate by game developers it's a clear indicator that "The market" did not embrace Physx. The numbers don't lie Physx is in far to few games to be considerd a mainstay or powerhouse in the PC gaming realm.

Too bad that has nothing to do with what you and I were talking about which was dedicated physics cards vs integrated into existing graphics cards. You wanted dedicated cards and said the market supports you. That market doesn't even exist anymore, so how could it possibly support you? It doesn't. Period.

 

[3DVagabond]

As an aside I will be non biased and hate on AMD Radeon HD in that when they tried to claim that TressFX was the first time the we have seen realistic looking hair in game. Well actually it was nivida with Alice madness Returns that did the same thing with realistic hair movement and tress FX hair sucks in the same way as Physx because it takes some serious hardware to even keep the framerate above 30fps when it is turned on.

Do you really think the hair effect in Alice is as good as TressFX? :\

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Do you really think the hair effect in Alice is as good as TressFX? :\

Does Alice have a force field around her shoulders and constantly get stabbed through the neck and shoulder by death hairs?

 

[3DVagabond]

Does Alice have a force field around her shoulders and constantly get stabbed through the neck and shoulder by death hairs?

I asked if he thought the hair effect in Alice was better than Tomb Raider. Not if the collision detection was perfect. Which it's not in either of them.

 

[Mr Expert]

Too bad that has nothing to do with what you and I were talking about which was dedicated physics cards vs integrated into existing graphics cards. You wanted dedicated cards and said the market supports you. That market doesn't even exist anymore, so how could it possibly support you? It doesn't. Period.

You mis interpreted what I had said and turned it into something different all together.

 

[Mr Expert]

Do you really think the hair effect in Alice is as good as TressFX? :\

I think they are very similar. Let me take a quick look again to be sure.... TressFX is better but then again the graphics are brand new and far better in TR 2013 than they were in Alice. nvidia did in fact have relistic moving hair before AMD did though.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

I asked if he thought the hair effect in Alice was better than Tomb Raider. Not if the collision detection was perfect. Which it's not in either of them.

Isn't that part of the effect?

TressFX does a good job creating strains of hair, everything else is awful compared to Alice.

Or were you asking which art/hair style is preferred in which case we're talking apples in oranges.

 

[3DVagabond]

Isn't that part of the effect?

Look at the 2 games and tell me which effect is better done, more realistic. Too simple for you?

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Look at the 2 games and tell me which effect is better done, more realistic. Too simple for you?

Why the hostility?

Alice if I had to pick one. I don't like the hair style of Alice, but the effect is far better from a quality standpoint.

With TressFX you have a wealth of issues from clipping to coloration issues as well as clear physics violations. So from a tech standpoint Alice hair was in every way superior to TressFX.

 

[3DVagabond]

I think they are very similar. Let me take a quick look again to be sure.... TressFX is better but then again the graphics are brand new and far better in TR 2013 than they were in Alice. nvidia did in fact have relistic moving hair before AMD did though.

I'll agree that Alice had a hair effect before TR. It's not the same as what TR does though as far as realism. So, I don't think we are really in disagreement. I just wanted to be sure you didn't think they were the same level.

 

[3DVagabond]

Why the hostility?

Alice if I had to pick one. I don't like the hair style of Alice, but the effect is far better from a quality standpoint.

With TressFX you have a wealth of issues from clipping to coloration issues as well as clear physics violations. So from a tech standpoint Alice hair was in every way superior to TressFX.

No hostility. You need to stick to the subject of the post and quit trying to drag the conversation in a direction that doesn't exist.

You think the hair effect in Alice is better? I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion, but I can't see or think for you.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Sure there was. Clipping is part of the effect and part of the discussion we were having.

From a technical standpoint yes, I like the style better in TR but I'm not confusing the two.

 

[Carfax83]

Do you really think the hair effect in Alice is as good as TressFX? :\

TressFX looks better to my eyes, but the significant drop in performance from enabling it and the fact that the hair has a tendency to "freak out" and defy gravity fairly often does not bode well for the technology imo.

I don't know if the performance is an indictment of DirectCompute itself or just this particular implementation, but can you imagine multiple TressFX characters?

They have to come up with a solution that enables realistic hair and doesn't result in a massive drop in frame rates.

NVidia supposedly has some new hair and fur simulation coming out soon. Witcher 3 will be the first game to have it, so we'll see how it stacks up against TressFX..

NVidia's cloth module is very optimized, and a low end dedicated PhysX card like the GTX 650 Ti can easily handle multiple instances of cloth physics on screen at the same time, like in Batman Arkham City..

That's the kind of performance they should be shooting for, because hair physics should not just be limited to one character only..

 

[Final8ty]

This back and forth reminds me of nVidia card owners trashing TressFX. In the end nobody really cares about PhysX or TressFX. All they care about is their team. If anyone really cared they'd petition the game devs to include it. Complain to them if it wasn't present. Instead we fall in line with the marketing and turn it into nVidia vs. AMD. If we truly wanted the feature we'd complain to AMD, for example, for not having PhysX, complain to nVidia for keeping it locked down. Instead we say company X is better than company Y because they support these features. As long as we do that gamers will remain polarized and it won't go anywhere except into games that the card manufacturers write the code for them and pay the devs for the privilege of promoting their game. That alone is going to limit it's usage to a handful of games a year, at best.

This is what makes

+1

 

[Lonyo]

This back and forth reminds me of nVidia card owners trashing TressFX. In the end nobody really cares about PhysX or TressFX. All they care about is their team. If anyone really cared they'd petition the game devs to include it. Complain to them if it wasn't present. Instead we fall in line with the marketing and turn it into nVidia vs. AMD. If we truly wanted the feature we'd complain to AMD, for example, for not having PhysX, complain to nVidia for keeping it locked down. Instead we say company X is better than company Y because they support these features. As long as we do that gamers will remain polarized and it won't go anywhere except into games that the card manufacturers write the code for them and pay the devs for the privilege of promoting their game. That alone is going to limit it's usage to a handful of games a year, at best.

This is what makes

Except TressFX works on any DX11 GPU.

What would be interesting to see is whether you could run TressFX on your IGP (that all modern CPUs have) with the game running on your "real" GPU. Like PhysX can, but with any old random DX11 GPUs being used.
Which is also why GPU physics should be hardware agnostic.
Nearly everyone here probably has a DX11 GPU sitting in their computer doing little to nothing all day every day, including when they game. If it was possible to offload some calculations to that GPU, it would be great.

That GPU is made by AMD or Intel, and is included in your CPU.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7032/...-gpu-on-the-desktop-radeon-hd-8670d-hd-4600/4
For now they might not be powerhouses, but they will get more powerful over time, and that's why people should care about the future.

Who cares if there are a whole three PhysX games when in 6 months time we will have 2 new consoles with all AMD hardware, and in 12~18 months time we will have IGPs which are faster than low end GPUs of today.
PhysX might not be dead now, but it should be either dead or hardware agnostic in 2 years time.

 

[boxleitnerb]

We can clamour but the overwhelming majority of the market will decide if they want any GPU physics from any vendor.

No, who ultimately decides are the devs by using it or not. So far they don't use OpenCL GPU-physics.

 

[zlatan]

Alice hair is not based on PhysX. It was a pure software solution with a CPU-based physics pipeline (not PhysX). The only problem that they don't let you to turn on the hair effect alone.
TressFX was the first GPU-based hair simulation effect in a game.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Who cares if there are a whole three PhysX games when in 6 months time we will have 2 new consoles with all AMD hardware, and in 12~18 months time we will have IGPs which are faster than low end GPUs of today.
PhysX might not be dead now, but it should be either dead or hardware agnostic in 2 years time.

I care; though I don't care about consoles... Perhaps we're just different.

PhysX is in the consoles this coming gen same as last. I do appreciate the amount of AMD propaganda that is taking place, I guess with such insanely low margins on the actual hardware they need to make something else of it.

PR is saying AMD cpus will no longer be bad, and AMD gpus will no longer be slower... lol!