Hybrid physx (ati and nvidia card in same box) hilarity!

[T2k]

Why do people with ATI cards want to use physx when they say it sucks so bad?

Nobody wants to use it - I own an AGEIA card and one day this morally crooked company (NV) turned my card off because I also happen to use ATI card for my primary VGA.

 

[T2k]

...

and with comments like this, it reminds me that Voltaire was right

:biggrin:

 

[Madcatatlas]

Is there going to be one? Or are you hinting at the probability or chance?

Come to think of it, it does sound wrong that your item shouldnt work together doing something it was designed to do, just because your main graphics accelerator isnt from the same company.

Please let the crap known as proprietary stuff die out.

 

[tviceman]

Why do people with ATI cards want to use physx when they say it sucks so bad?

This exactly. Most ATI fans/ card owners say it sucks and is worthless and adds nothing but when they can't use it they complain. It has me scratching my head the same way when I read pirates saying they didn't buy the game they just played through because it sucks. Well why the hell did you even play it if it sucks? Why complain about not getting physx if it sucks?

On the whole, it'd be best if nvidia didn't disable it. Don't do any QA, don't provide support, but releasing it with "use at your own risk" would be an overall better solution. If this were the case, there would be half as many ATI owners saying "sucks and is worthless and adds nothing."

 

[scooterlibby]

It's too bad. As an owner of both, I'd love to at least see how Metro 2033 looks with Phsyx by having my GTX260 run along side my 5970. Not willing to use old drivers for that, though.

 

[tviceman]

And people wonder why Nvidia gets so much bad rap... seems like they bring it on themselves. As funny as this is, it really highlights Nvidia's anti-competitive side.

I think this situation shows two sides. This side of nvidia, without a doubt, has strong merit. I think that keeping it a closed tech hurts them more in the long run. But hardware accelerated physx in itself also shows Nvidia is trying to do more things/different stuff to push PC gaming and add value to their hardware than ATI has in the past or present.

For six months, ATI had a stronger lineup of graphics cards in every way possible. Better price and better performance top to bottom. And going back further, it can be argued ATI were in a much better competitive situation with the 4x00 series than Nvidia was with the 2xx series. Yet ATI has not introduced and done anything new with their GPU's along side developers that add instant value besdies eyefinity. And yes, seeing videos of eyefinity in action is cool - but I can't instantly put an ATI card in my computer and take advantage of eyefinity. I have to go out and buy new monitors now. And there are obvious drawbacks to eyefinity besides spending $150+ on a new monitor - it doesn't work right in every game and bezels detract from experience.

Physx and 3Dvision might not be wide spread, but they are instant technologies that can be used the moment you put a Geforce card in your computer. No extra hardware required. If it's not something you care about, then it won't factor into your purchase decision. But right now with most PC games being console ports, at least nvidia is working with developers to add a little something to the PC versions. If ATI started doing the same thing and on the same level as Nvidia, they might come up with a very compelling alternative or new feature that could be a potentially great selling point. But until then, I'd rather see a company trying and pushing new things that add stuff to games I play rather than just go by the current directx status quo.

 

[Creig]

If ATI started doing the same thing and on the same level as Nvidia, they might come up with a very compelling alternative or new feature that could be a potentially great selling point. But until then, I'd rather see a company trying and pushing new things that add stuff to games I play rather than just go by the current directx status quo.

Don't you think that a good portion of the credit for seeing tessellation included in DX11 should go to ATi? They've included hardware tessellation support in their GPUs since the 2900XT and have obviously been working closely with Microsoft to have it included in DX11. I would have to call tessellation a "new feature that could be a potentially great selling point". The only difference is that ATi isn't trying to block Nvidia users out from the DX11 game content that they're assisting developers with.

 

[Madcatatlas]

You have to go out and buy new monitors... lol thats just a killer reason for not trying new stuff.
I didnt know 3d glasses came with all nVidia cards and that everyone had a 120mhz monitor, is this the case?

see.., your onesided friend. You should start being more objective and youll convince yourself that open standards are the way to go, no matter what.

The bolded part of your post is applicable more to eyefinity than ANYTHING nVidia has on its feature list.
This basicly says alot about how we perceive or value different features, and it can be argued, i dont like to make too bold statements.

 

[dust]

I think this situation shows two sides. This side of nvidia, without a doubt, has strong merit. I think that keeping it a closed tech hurts them more in the long run. But hardware accelerated physx in itself also shows Nvidia is trying to do more things/different stuff to push PC gaming and add value to their hardware than ATI has in the past or present.

For six months, ATI had a stronger lineup of graphics cards in every way possible. Better price and better performance top to bottom. And going back further, it can be argued ATI were in a much better competitive situation with the 4x00 series than Nvidia was with the 2xx series. Yet ATI has not introduced and done anything new with their GPU's along side developers that add instant value besdies eyefinity. And yes, seeing videos of eyefinity in action is cool - but I can't instantly put an ATI card in my computer and take advantage of eyefinity. I have to go out and buy new monitors now. And there are obvious drawbacks to eyefinity besides spending $150+ on a new monitor - it doesn't work right in every game and bezels detract from experience.

Physx and 3Dvision might not be wide spread, but they are instant technologies that can be used the moment you put a Geforce card in your computer. No extra hardware required. If it's not something you care about, then it won't factor into your purchase decision. But right now with most PC games being console ports, at least nvidia is working with developers to add a little something to the PC versions. If ATI started doing the same thing and on the same level as Nvidia, they might come up with a very compelling alternative or new feature that could be a potentially great selling point. But until then, I'd rather see a company trying and pushing new things that add stuff to games I play rather than just go by the current directx status quo.

I think you're missing the point here. If I want to run physx I have to get a nvidia card anyway, nobody here claims otherwise. So I'm running to the store and check this and that and I go for the nvidia card as it offers a shitload of features compared to ati. The features come to mind only when I pay the price premium since the rendering is more or less equal for them and so are the frames.

The issue comes when the feature is no longer available as soon as an ati card is detected, as this shouldn't be of any concern for nvidia( I paid for their card already and I expect it to live up to the task with ALL the features listed at the time of the purchase as available). So the price premium I paid is no longer justified.Would you buy a tv with added features inside vs the current competitors, just to be able to run one station only?

All things considered, you are right about the complain part, physx is not that appealing right now to be even considered a problem when not available. If however, I had an older nvidia card and I migrated to ati rendering I might consider keeping the older card for this, but it'll hardly prove worthwhile probably.

 

[Voo]

Physx and 3Dvision might not be wide spread, but they are instant technologies that can be used the moment you put a Geforce card in your computer.

Wow, so I really can use 3D Vision without buying new monitors or glasses? That's great.. if it were true which sadly it isn't.

But that completely misses the point, if I had to decide between one or two features more or a open PC platform I'd always take the latter. I don't want games that will only run with Nvidia GPUs and Intel CPUs, in the long run this seperation not only harms Nvidia and the consumers but also the platform at a whole.

Also I'm rather sure that the EU won't like stuff like that.. and what's their whole reason for it? How many people will buy Nvidia GPUs just because of Physix? I'd wager not that many.. the pr damage and fines would surely be higher. Also they would sell quite a few cards if it'd work, probably not high end cards, but one sold card vs. none doesn't sound too bad..

 

[NoQuarter]

This exactly. Most ATI fans/ card owners say it sucks and is worthless and adds nothing but when they can't use it they complain. It has me scratching my head the same way when I read pirates saying they didn't buy the game they just played through because it sucks. Well why the hell did you even play it if it sucks? Why complain about not getting physx if it sucks?

I'm not saying PhysX sucks I'm saying it isn't good. It's a superfluous addition that is neat but doesn't factor in to my purchases, but I wouldn't turn it down if I could set it up using an 8800GTS I have lying around.

When I buy new video cards I don't want my main video card wasting rendering power on physics processing, I would only do it with a dedicated card, so PhysX would only even become a useable feature to me after I replace my GPU in 2-3 years and it can become a dedicated PPU. Not worth the premium for a 3 year wait especially if nVidia can sabotage the drivers anytime they feel like.


I think a less brand-devout hypothetical is if Logitech G15's LCD display disabled itself if it detected a Razer mouse instead of a Logitech one. The LCD display is neat but not worth having my consumer choice taken away from me, and so it becomes a liability in cost.

 

[soccerballtux]

I was thinking the same thing. We have all seen class action suit's for some pretty dumb reasons. This might actually be a legitimate one.

Hmm....Where is the EU when you need them. I'm sure if anything is there they will be the first to initiate something

I was thinking about getting a nvidia card for physX just for the hell of it....But decided against it just for this reason alone! Hell if the bastards weren't so gready they would have most likely got about $125 or so revenue from me!

the EU is busy denying that Greece's problems will grow to the more countries in Europe (PIIGS).

 

[Voo]

the EU is busy denying that Greece's problems will grow to the more countries in Europe (PIIGS).

So while the president of the united states is busy the high court gets a vacation? Interesting idea, but I fear it works a little bit different.. and "the EU" is not "the EU", it's a "bit" more complex than that.

 

[soccerballtux]

the EU is busy denying that Greece's problems will grow to the more countries in Europe (PIIGS).

So while the president of the united states is busy the high court gets a vacation? Interesting idea, but I fear it works a little bit different.. and "the EU" is not "the EU", it's a "bit" more complex than that.

I was just taking a side-swipe at them, didn't mean to start anything.
But they _are_ denying that other countries won't have the same problem

 

[Martimus]

Physx and 3Dvision might not be wide spread, but they are instant technologies that can be used the moment you put a Geforce card in your computer. No extra hardware required. If it's not something you care about, then it won't factor into your purchase decision. But right now with most PC games being console ports, at least nvidia is working with developers to add a little something to the PC versions. If ATI started doing the same thing and on the same level as Nvidia, they might come up with a very compelling alternative or new feature that could be a potentially great selling point. But until then, I'd rather see a company trying and pushing new things that add stuff to games I play rather than just go by the current directx status quo.

Rollo, this is a bunch of bull. Both companies have tried to push new technologies recently, and I wouldn't say that the 3D Vision and PhysX is anymore pushing new technology than ATI with Eyfinity, Teselation, or inlcuding Hardware sound support and passthrough for HDMI in all models since the 3000 series (along with all the hardware video acceleration included on those models). Both have been forward looking, just they are looking at different things.

ATI seems to have learned from their failures in the past of trying to do too much (2900XT), and seem to have cut back to just getting out a product that works at the specs they wanted. nVidia did that to get into DX10 (8800 GTX), and seemed to get away from that in there recent offering (480) with similar results to what happened with ATI with the 2900. Seeing how well the 480 scales with clockspeed tells me that this will be a good architecture in the future as it is further refined, just as the 2900 was a good architecture as it was refined.

 

[VirtualLarry]

If ATI started doing the same thing and on the same level as Nvidia, they might come up with a very compelling alternative or new feature that could be a potentially great selling point. But until then, I'd rather see a company trying and pushing new things that add stuff to games I play rather than just go by the current directx status quo.

But the problem is, these "value-add technologies" from Nvidia are all proprietary.

Would you like it, and think it innovative, if AMD chipsets came out with their own version of USB, that was twice as fast as normal USB, but the downside was that you had to purchase special "AMD USB" devices to work with it? Or would you poo-poo it as proprietary and therefore worthless?

Edit: or even worse, they throttled down to standard USB speeds, if any of your USB devices wasn't an "AMD USB" device?

 

[Voo]

I was just taking a side-swipe at them, didn't mean to start anything.
But they _are_ denying that other countries won't have the same problem

Well I'd say that's more about not unsettle the markets even more. If they just said "yeah we know that Ireland, Italy,.. also are almost bankrupt" that really wouldn't help those countries. But I'd say it's undeniable that they know the reality better than most people, at least I really hope they aren't that crazy - but you never know. And like it's always the case there you always have the problem that foreign and domestic policies are orthogonal.. as a EU citizien you get used to it *sigh*

But just because of that I really wouldn't put an investigation against Nvidia out of reach even if they're rather busy, since those are different institutions.

 

[zerocool84]

If ATI started doing the same thing and on the same level as Nvidia, they might come up with a very compelling alternative or new feature that could be a potentially great selling point. But until then, I'd rather see a company trying and pushing new things that add stuff to games I play rather than just go by the current directx status quo.

Tessellation ring a bell??? ATI had tessellation forever but Nvidia made sure it didn't get put into DX10 cus they didn't have it. So much for your trying to add stuff to new games. Oh and ATI wasn't trying to block Nvidia from using tessellation at all. sorry but Physx sucks. You can try to tout it all you want but it has not changed the way we play games like they said it was going to. Hell most of the effects can and have been done on the cpu. I would love to use my 9800GTX+ as a Physx card to go with my 5870 but it's sad that people like you support them in what they're doing.

 

[killster1]

so what game is that with the girl and the anti gravity =P looks like boring game but i want to test it out hah

 

[blanketyblank]

so what game is that with the girl and the anti gravity =P looks like boring game but i want to test it out hah

thas not really a game. It's a runway tech demo type thing. I remember trying it out when I had an 8800 GTS 512 and it ran horribly slow. I only had one card then, but I wasn't about to buy a second card just to run tech demos.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Tessellation ring a bell??? ATI had tessellation forever but Nvidia made sure it didn't get put into DX10 cus they didn't have it.

Maybe because ATi failed to captialise on their tessellation capabilities due to the lack of dev relationship? or the fact that they didnt have enough resources/money to spend to push this? They've had it since R600 but nothing was done til now (it was their own proprietary tech).

And the part about nVIDIA making sure it didnt end up as a DX10 standard.. I dont know where this is from but Microsoft decides what in and whats out. Im really starting to believe that some people think nVIDIA is some evil corporate company while ATi is a company that stands for justice and morals. You would have to be very naive if you think this. Its amusing to see how much people get emotionally upset about this too.

Hell most of the effects can and have been done on the cpu.

Id like to know if this is true. Then why bother with GPU accelerated physics in the first place?

 

[zerocool84]

Maybe because ATi failed to captialise on their tessellation capabilities due to the lack of dev relationship? or the fact that they didnt have enough resources/money to spend to push this? They've had it since R600 but nothing was done til now (it was their own proprietary tech).

And the part about nVIDIA making sure it didnt end up as a DX10 standard.. I dont know where this is from but Microsoft decides what in and whats out. Im really starting to believe that some people think nVIDIA is some evil corporate company while ATi is a company that stands for justice and morals. You would have to be very naive if you think this. Its amusing to see how much people get emotionally upset about this too.


Id like to know if this is true. Then why bother with GPU accelerated physics in the first place?

Nvidia has more marketshare and has more push and more money to throw around. It's common knowledge that Nvidia is the reason tessellation wasn't out earlier. Also in Batman AA the fog and cloth flapping and other effects have been done in other games without Physx and totally taking them out without an Nvidia card is retarded. Physx is supposed to be about much more than some stupid fog effects. Nvidia said it'd change the way we play games. We are all still waiting on that. There are other games that have had better physics that actually do something and enhance gameplay that don't require anyone to own certain gpu. I'm all for GPU physics for what it theoretically CAN do but everyone knows it's never going to take off until they allow it on ATI.

 

[MagickMan]

I just know that NV won't let me use my 8800GT, that I paid good money for, as a PhysX card. So, screw those bastards.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Nvidia has more marketshare and has more push and more money to throw around. It's common knowledge that Nvidia is the reason tessellation wasn't out earlier.

What? tessellation was out 3 years ago by ATi. No one, not even nVIDIA stopped them from pushing this feature. It would have been interesting had they actually done something with tessellation or atleast support the devs to use such feature. It was pretty much a waste of transistors for a tick on the feature set box.

Also in Batman AA the fog and cloth flapping and other effects have been done in other games without Physx and totally taking them out without an Nvidia card is retarded.

What games are these? You keep saying that its already been done, but what I am asking is, why are they pushing for GPU-accelerated physics if those same effects can be done on a CPU.

Physx is supposed to be about much more than some stupid fog effects. Nvidia said it'd change the way we play games. We are all still waiting on that. There are other games that have had better physics that actually do something and enhance gameplay that don't require anyone to own certain gpu. I'm all for GPU physics for what it theoretically CAN do but everyone knows it's never going to take off until they allow it on ATI.

With all the emotional hate aside, its up to the devs to take advantage of PhysX, not nVIDIA. nVIDIA supplies the technology and hardware or in other words tools. The devs are the ones responisble for creating the games and incoporating these features. Obviously adding the full PhysX experience requires even more so resources for these companies to implement. Its there decision to do this, and as we all know the state of PC gaming isnt quite good compared to past years.

 

[NoQuarter]

What? tessellation was out 3 years ago by ATi. No one, not even nVIDIA stopped them from pushing this feature. It would have been interesting had they actually done something with tessellation or atleast support the devs to use such feature. It was pretty much a waste of transistors for a tick on the feature set box.

Tessellation was supposed to be added in DX10. A lot of the features that were suppose to be in DX10 got pushed out to DX10.1 and DX11 because nVidia wanted to extend the life of their G92 GPU's as much as they could and didn't want a new feature set they couldn't support without having to make a new design. So DX10 turned out sort of lackluster, had all the difficulties such as new memory management without the features that required the changes to begin with.

What games are these? You keep saying that its already been done, but what I am asking is, why are they pushing for GPU-accelerated physics if those same effects can be done on a CPU.

What he's saying is flag-flapping and fog exist in other games even if they aren't calculated to real world perfection, and making it either overcalculated PhysX fog or no fog at all is stupid. I'm not saying we shouldn't have GPU accelerated fog.. just saying spending 750 million transistors on it is wayy overcalculating a single effect. That much horsepower should calculate everything in the scene.