PhysX worthless with ATI?

[chizow]

Originally posted by: SSChevy2001
25 games before then end of the year is BS. List them like I did in the previous post. You can't cause there isn't 25 games than will use GPU Physx. Where talking games that are developed for GPU Physx in mind.

Where's your list? Of course I don't have a list of all 25 games as I'm only quoting the article, but I'll take the pic of Fud standing next to NV's VP of Content Relations at Nvision as more definitive proof than your claim of BS.....

I does matter if they don't add anything new, not even added FPS. How many FPS more do you get in a UT3 regular map, by using PhysX? Or Gears of War or Mass Effect or ...... Why list games for the hell of it, just because they had software PhysX and offer GPU acceleration that isn't needed?

When comparing CPU performance with hardware PhysX options enabled the difference in FPS is plainly obvious.....like 40 FPS compared to <10 was it? You're not going to see a gain in FPS when enabling hardware PhysX compared to no PhysX at all, but the point is you're getting more visuals and better physics in exchange for lower FPS. This isn't any different than accepting lower FPS by increasing detail or AA levels in-game.

To have to compared screenshot vs screenshot it's not that obvious, and doesn't warrant having 20% FPS drop. Also DX9 was faster in every other mode, while the workload should be the same.

Its actually very obvious, especially when you know what to look for and are actually looking at the game in full res and not a tiny SS. Crysis isn't a great representation because it looks great even at Medium settings so the differences with higher settings aren't as pronounced as other games. DX9 actually ran slower on my 8800GTX up until the 174-series, but even now I'm going to run DX10 over DX9 even with the slight drop in FPS. Also, the workload is not the same, its plainly obvious just by running the dev console as DX9 uses much more RAM than DX10, probably because it uses more static textures.

Personally I feel that Nvidia offering multi-gpu Physx on intel chipsets insulting, while it's great for SLI MB owners. Not that it matters cause right now a single GTX280 is most CPU limited with Physx.

Not sure why you'd feel insulted or why its better for SLI MB owners. Nvidia is adding functionality and value where there was none before.

The point is CUDA still does alot of work in the CPU. Currently Badaboom eats about 30% of my quad core on a encoding, which clearly shows CUDA still requires a good amount of CPU usage. PhysX will also eat more CPU usage because of CUDA, and it clearly shows ingame. It's the point that the PPU handle PhysX with less of a CPU hit.

Yes that's obvious the CPU is still going to be important, but here's what it comes down to:

1) You get more effects and visuals with hardware PhysX, even if it comes with a performance hit compared to no PhysX or software-only PhysX.
2) GPU-accelerated hardware PhysX performance absolutely destroys CPU-accelerated hardware PhysX. Simply put, a CPU is not adequate in accelerating hardware PhysX effects.

Using your Badaboom example, you'd be looking at 100% quad core usage and 10x longer encode times if you tried to do the same workload on the CPU only. And of course both of these will be slower than not doing any encoding at all......

I guess it's just the fact that the GPU being used for something more than games is more attractive right now vs some extra debris and smoke.

I'm guessing you haven't even bothered to load up any of the demos or don't own either of the two games that use hardware PhysX. Even that extra debris and smoke is more impressive and immersive than any recent developments in the GPU industry.

 

[SSChevy2001]

Originally posted by: chizow
Where's your list? Of course I don't have a list of all 25 games as I'm only quoting the article, but I'll take the pic of Fud standing next to NV's VP of Content Relations at Nvision as more definitive proof than your claim of BS.....

My list was on the last page. Since your to lazy to look to have checked the last page let me post it again.

Aliens: Colonial Marines - Q1 2009 360/PS3/PC
APB: TBA 2009 - 360/PS3/PC
Bionic Commando - TBA 2009 - 360/PS3/PC
Backbreaker - TBA 2009 - 360/PS3/PC
Borderlands - Q1 2009 - 360/PS3/PC
Cryostasis - TBA 2008 - PC
Divinity 2 - Ego Draconis - Q2 2009 360/PC
Empire: Total War - Q1 2009 - PC
Mirror?s Edge - November 11, 2008 - 360/PS3/PC
MKZ - Winter 2008 - PC
Nurien - TBD - PC

There you go maybe 3 new titles before then end other year. So again I ask for the 25 games?

When comparing CPU performance with hardware PhysX options enabled the difference in FPS is plainly obvious.....like 40 FPS compared to <10 was it? You're not going to see a gain in FPS when enabling hardware PhysX compared to no PhysX at all, but the point is you're getting more visuals and better physics in exchange for lower FPS. This isn't any different than accepting lower FPS by increasing detail or AA levels in-game.

Yes. The point is you can't count older software based PhysX titles as having an advantage to having a PhysX GPU, as there's no real benefit.

Its actually very obvious, especially when you know what to look for and are actually looking at the game in full res and not a tiny SS. Crysis isn't a great representation because it looks great even at Medium settings so the differences with higher settings aren't as pronounced as other games. DX9 actually ran slower on my 8800GTX up until the 174-series, but even now I'm going to run DX10 over DX9 even with the slight drop in FPS. Also, the workload is not the same, its plainly obvious just by running the dev console as DX9 uses much more RAM than DX10, probably because it uses more static textures.

Well I'm the opposite of you I rather not take even the slightest hit in FPS, as to me it's not that obvious. With my extra FPS I put towards raising draw distance and more vegetation, something more noticeable.

Not sure why you'd feel insulted or why its better for SLI MB owners. Nvidia is adding functionality and value where there was none before.

They give Intel MB owners multi-gpu PhysX causes their trying to build a install base for PhysX, while on the same token they're not going to give us SLI support. Guess you need to be happy with what you get, but still it would be a lot easier to build a install base if there was SLI support for intel chipsets.

Yes that's obvious the CPU is still going to be important, but here's what it comes down to:

1) You get more effects and visuals with hardware PhysX, even if it comes with a performance hit compared to no PhysX or software-only PhysX.
2) GPU-accelerated hardware PhysX performance absolutely destroys CPU-accelerated hardware PhysX. Simply put, a CPU is not adequate in accelerating hardware PhysX effects.

Using your Badaboom example, you'd be looking at 100% quad core usage and 10x longer encode times if you tried to do the same workload on the CPU only. And of course both of these will be slower than not doing any encoding at all......

Problem is will we need more powerful CPUs to see the real benefit of PhysX titles? The Firingsquad review clearly shows GPU PhysX titles are still CPU bound with a QX9770. How much CPU power will be needed for future titles?

I'm guessing you haven't even bothered to load up any of the demos or don't own either of the two games that use hardware PhysX. Even that extra debris and smoke is more impressive and immersive than any recent developments in the GPU industry.

I've tested all the demos and the UT3 maps. Warmong sucked, demo are just demos, UT3 Heatray physx was a fun map, but not super impressive. To me red faction's destructible environment was more impressive when it came out how many years ago.

 

[taltamir]

ok you ask me "why do you think this first order physics require physX" it does NOT (and hence, that is not what I think). physX is simply the only implementation that can run on a CPU + GPU concurrently.

What does this mean? it means that physX is 1 to 2 generations ahead in first order physics. Nothing more, nothing less.

First order physics is done by every game engine out there, physX allows you to leverege your GPU to get next gen first order physics on today's hardware.

Same goes for second order physics, but most of us here said we don't care about those...

And how it differs from crysis? Crysis physics are done entirely on the CPU, are thus limited to a smaller scope / lower FPS per amount of objects then running on CPU and GPU at the same time.
That crysis movie with 3000 barrels was rendered at 0.2 FPS... And was then assembled into a movie. Crytek designed their own first order physics engine with capabilities similar to PhysX... but because it runs only on the CPU, and not on CPU + GPU, the performance is atrocious in comparison. 0.2 FPS is not playable. 30+ FPS is playable.

The future of gaming is largly in adding more and more first order physics. Physics on GPU is just a major improvement in doing that, moreso then SLI / CF. But like SLI / CF it is a merely a way of getting a little more out of existing technology.

PhysX is merely the only API out there at the moment that supports physics on GPU.

 

[MarcVenice]

Hey now, Empire: Total War - Q1 2009 - PC is definately a triple a title !

I think we can all agree, to some extent, that physx might be nice, but it ain't here yet. Is nvidia on the right track, most definately yes, if only to get the competition to come out with something better, or to cooperate with nvidia, because nvidia has the 'best' physics API and the biggest user base, theoretically of course. Should we buy nvidia videocards and not ati videocards because of physx, well, I don't think so. And, imo, if you agree with the former, you'd have to think so as well. We could keep arguing how physx is here allready, I think if we were to empirically establish that, we'd find ourselfs with 1 game, warmonger, and 2 maps in UT3 and GRAW2, and 3 or so upcoming titles, of which we have no clue how physx will be used in the game itself.

BTW, I'm not saying you shouldn't buy nvidia videocards, if you get in on the right deal with a gtx260 it's a good buy, especially if you overclock it yourself. If you don't wanna deal with a HD4870X2 that doesn't always scale, I wouldn't say your stupid to buy a GTX280 instead, especially since it's cheaper. You just should not buy them if you think a ATI product is also good for you, purely because of the physx.

 

[taltamir]

i agree marc, there is definitely no room to say "I am not buying AMD video cards cause they don't have physX", that would be silly.

But it does add some value.

 

[Keysplayr]

Speaking of first order PhysX, in GRAW2, there are soldiers up in the wooden lookout towers trying to snipe. There are multiple ways of dealing with these guys.

1. Shoot him straight out.
2. Shoot out one of the wooden pillars supporting the roof of the tower above his head, then if it falls down the right way, crushes the soldier (sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't).
3. Launch a rocket at the tower and destroy it while the soldier falls to his demise (sometimes he croaks, sometimes he is just wounded).

Does this represent 1st order PhysX, or is that just shooting holes through cloth or more dust particles?
Opinions?

 

[MarcVenice]

First order physics Keys. Don't we have the same thing in Crysis though? The question isn't really about if physics are cool or not, plenty of games allready have them. It's about needing the GPU to accelerate it. Those 'new' games will have physx in them, I just doubt that you need a physx accelerator for it, because I think those things you described don't need a lot of horsepower. The only thing that does is if you have 100's of things flying around, or if you have 60k water particles flowing around. But to shoot a wooden pillar to pieces so the structure comes tumbling down, isn't something new, it's not something that requires the power of a videocard. And in those 3 games coming out, I very much doubt that there will be physx in it that warrant a nvidia videocard, those features won't be leftout for people who don't have an nvidia videocard. And that's the whole point.

I think Keys, that those games might actually use the videocard for physx, and perhaps the physx will be a 'little' more realistic, and better looking, then if you don't have the videocard accelerate the physx. But there won't be a huge difference between nvidia videocards and non nvidia videocards. Game devs just won't go for it, it will take FAR to much time to implement physics in the game, all throughout the game, if only half the players can use it. There will be physx, but they will also be able to run on the CPU just fine, and they will have exactly the same effect as with your nvidia videocard accelerating it. The wooden pillar gets shot away, tower tumbles down, soldier dies. With nvidia, you'll get a few more particles, woodsplinters and that's it.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
First order physics Keys. Don't we have the same thing in Crysis though? The question isn't really about if physics are cool or not, plenty of games allready have them. It's about needing the GPU to accelerate it. Those 'new' games will have physx in them, I just doubt that you need a physx accelerator for it, because I think those things you described don't need a lot of horsepower. The only thing that does is if you have 100's of things flying around, or if you have 60k water particles flowing around. But to shoot a wooden pillar to pieces so the structure comes tumbling down, isn't something new, it's not something that requires the power of a videocard. And in those 3 games coming out, I very much doubt that there will be physx in it that warrant a nvidia videocard, those features won't be leftout for people who don't have an nvidia videocard. And that's the whole point.

I think Keys, that those games might actually use the videocard for physx, and perhaps the physx will be a 'little' more realistic, and better looking, then if you don't have the videocard accelerate the physx. But there won't be a huge difference between nvidia videocards and non nvidia videocards. Game devs just won't go for it, it will take FAR to much time to implement physics in the game, all throughout the game, if only half the players can use it. There will be physx, but they will also be able to run on the CPU just fine, and they will have exactly the same effect as with your nvidia videocard accelerating it. The wooden pillar gets shot away, tower tumbles down, soldier dies. With nvidia, you'll get a few more particles, woodsplinters and that's it.

Marc, not every post I make is about ATI vs. Nvidia. I simply asked if what I posted would be considered 1st order PhysX. So please put the ATI vs. Nvidia non-PhysX/PhysX thing aside for a moment and lets just talk about the feature. Just for a minute or two.
We've already established that some think that PhysX is worthless, and some do not.
Each side has given reasons for thinking the way they do. So, now that it has been beaten to death and we know where everyone stands and why, maybe now we can talk tech.

 

[taltamir]

it is first order physics. especially beacause he is not gaurenteed to be crushed, there is actual calculations being made about how it is gonna fall based on what type of damage you did. Extremely simplistic first order physics will have him automatically killed if you hit a designated spot.
First order physics = any physics calculation, even the most simplistic, that affects actual gameplay.
Second order physics = any physics calculation that provides eye candy but is barred from affecting gameplay.

For example, if you shoot the tower, and the tower gets realistic bullet holes, or parts of it realistically break off, but the person inside is not affected (harmed, OR moved OR loose cover) then it is second order physics.
If you shoot the tower and it collapses, it is first order physics, if it can actually kill a person inside it is better first order physics, if it collapses realistically, instead of a prerendered method, then it is an even better first order physics.

PhysX does NOT introduce first order physics, that was always there. PhysX allows more realistics first order and second order physics.

Classic second order physics are FIRE and SHARPNEL that can NOT under any circumstances harm a person. (you have all seen those, an explosion / fire occurs and you walk right through it without taking any damage)

If fire and sharpnel harm a person based on distance from explosion (rather then examining if a fragment actually hit him) then it is simplistic first order physics (what we have today in UE, your distance from the epicenter determines your damage), if fire and sharpnel harm a person based on weather or not he was actually hit by a fragment, then it is more advanced first order physics.
If the amount of damage is done by calculating the path the sharpnel bores through the person's body, taking into account the composition of his armor, and the location of his internal organs, then it is even more advanced first order physics.



Another thing. Marc for god's sake read the posts in this forum.

Yes, crysis has a first order physics engine capable of all things physX is capable of. But because it is CPU only, it gives crap performance... look at that crysis demo movie, 3000 barells... at 0.2 FPS, that is 1/150th what is considered playable.
If crysis engine was capable of doing its first order physics on GPU then it would be a competitor for physX, as it is, it isn't.

You want a non real time physics engine? look at the CGI engines hollywood uses, they annihilate physX in terms of appearnace, amount of objects, and object interaction.
But the average home user doesn't have 128GB of ram, and wants to INTERACT with the game, not take 150 seconds of rendering to create 1 second of movie.

 

[Creig]

I'm not a programmer, so what I envision physics to be may not even be possible. But my hopes are that eventually any object in a scene that can be altered will be assigned real world properties (density, thickness, length, compression load, tension load, etc). Let's say something simple like the wooden lookout tower your described, keys. Everything could be made out of wood, but each piece will react differently since they will be of different lengths, thickness, etc. As it stands right now, even those games that have destructible items in it will accumulate damage, but then all fail in the exact same way at the exact same point. You shoot at the top of a board and it breaks/explodes in the middle and the roof of the tower comes down. To me, in a true physics situation, you could shoot at the top of a board holding up the roof and break off 2' of it and the roof will sag by 2', but not drop and crush the soldiers underneath because the rest of the board you shot at is still holding up the roof. This way you could have an infinite number of ways to defeat the soldiers. Shoot the roof supports, shoot some middle supports, shoot the legs of the tower, etc. Sometimes the tower will fall one direction, sometime another. You might even have to take wind direction into account if you want the tower to fall in a specific location.

To me, THAT'S in-game physics. Everything behaves in a manner it would in real life.

I doubt we're going to see that level of realism anytime soon, but I don't see why it wouldn't be eventually possible. Every object in the scene will have to have a material value added to it that will determine its physical properties so other objects with physical properties can react properly with it.

 

[taltamir]

craig, that is the holy grail of first order game physics, it will be like that in the future. But it isn't gonna occur in one big step, but in multiple small steps. AFAIK several engines are already theoretically capable of doing it, just not in real time. CPU+GPU accelerated physics (which is only PhysX at the moment) can do it a lot better then CPU only.

AFAIK in GRAW, without GPU acceleration you shoot a fence, and when it takes X damage the entire fence collapses in a prerended method. If the GPU accelerated demo it seemed that when a plank was shot, it usually just "fell" off by itself (more realistic, but not truelly realistic yet). But at one of the shots (the last one) it broke at the point of impact, which is exactly what you described. More advanced physics will realistically calculate the effect of a bullet going through wood based on the exact shape and properties of both items.

The shot where the plank broke at the point of impact makes me wonder how close GPUs are to be able to give that kind of performance you describe.

 

[uribag]

HD3850 + GeForce 9600GT (for PhysX):

http://www.chw.net/foro/radeon...mezcla-3d-t178422.html

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: evolucion8
The fact that the GTX280 has the same old features as the almost 2 years old 8800GTX proves that nVidia only loves money and doesn't love innovation.

You mean like PhysX? There are far more games using that and with obvious game play benefits as opposed to 10.1 :laugh:

I know you are just trolling, but come on your statements are just ridiculous.

Pff wow, the same features which are enabled on the GeForce 8 like PhysX, DX10.1 is simply more inmersive in terms of graphics effects, I wonder how a GTX 280 will perform when doing real time globall ilumination, and I meant the real one, not some fake using fake cubemaps, and please, trolling? I'm not the one who sold his soul to nVidia to get free stuff and uses some smokescreen to hide the truth.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: evolucion8

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: evolucion8
The fact that the GTX280 has the same old features as the almost 2 years old 8800GTX proves that nVidia only loves money and doesn't love innovation.

You mean like PhysX? There are far more games using that and with obvious game play benefits as opposed to 10.1 :laugh:

I know you are just trolling, but come on your statements are just ridiculous.

Pff wow, the same features which are enabled on the GeForce 8 like PhysX, DX10.1 is simply more inmersive in terms of graphics effects, I wonder how a GTX 280 will perform when doing real time globall ilumination, and I meant the real one, not some fake using fake cubemaps, and please, trolling? I'm not the one who sold his soul to nVidia to get free stuff and uses some smokescreen to hide the truth.

You don't see anything wrong with your posts, do you. You "wonder" how a GTX280 will perform global illumination ( <--- spelled correctly)? Are we still "wondering" how an ATI DX10.1 card will perform global illumination? You don't think your trolling? And personally attacking people? What is your deal? I don't care what you say when talking tech, but you need to stop your BS with these personal attacks fairly quickly.

If you simply can't just discuss the topic, don't post. Do you get this?

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: evolucion8

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: evolucion8
The fact that the GTX280 has the same old features as the almost 2 years old 8800GTX proves that nVidia only loves money and doesn't love innovation.

You mean like PhysX? There are far more games using that and with obvious game play benefits as opposed to 10.1 :laugh:

I know you are just trolling, but come on your statements are just ridiculous.

Pff wow, the same features which are enabled on the GeForce 8 like PhysX, DX10.1 is simply more inmersive in terms of graphics effects, I wonder how a GTX 280 will perform when doing real time globall ilumination, and I meant the real one, not some fake using fake cubemaps, and please, trolling? I'm not the one who sold his soul to nVidia to get free stuff and uses some smokescreen to hide the truth.

You don't see anything wrong with your posts, do you. You "wonder" how a GTX280 will perform global illumination ( <--- spelled correctly)? Are we still "wondering" how an ATI DX10.1 card will perform global illumination? You don't think your trolling? And personally attacking people? What is your deal? I don't care what you say when talking tech, but you need to stop your BS with these personal attacks fairly quickly.

If you simply can't just discuss the topic, don't post. Do you get this?

Heck, now we have a spelling teacher, at least I can speak two languages. Global Ilumination? ATi already did that with it's Ping Pong demo with it's HD 3800 series of card which is 2 times slower than their current line up. Calling me troll simply crossed the line of the personal attacks, so I'm simply at the defensive mode, I will stop, but will you?. If you just simply can't discuss the topic with the real truth and not some nVidia's Focus Group Cheap Marketing, then don't post, I got it, but will you?

 

[taltamir]

you think speaking two languages makes you special? I speak five, 2 of them with a mastery well beyond that of an average native.

Almost EVERY relatively young person speaks two languages, because english is taught and required in schools all over the world, and in the USA you have to learn a second language to graduate highschool nowadays.

I don't see how "prooving" you are such a super genious with your "know two languages" argument make you incapable of performing personal attacks.

As for "how nvidia will perform global lightening"... the exact same AMD does, because if you recall, there is not a single game out there with DX10.1
That means every game performs global lightening just fine now with "fake" cube maps as you call them, on DX10, on AMD and nVidia hardware.

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: taltamir
you think speaking two languages makes you special? I speak five, 2 of them with a mastery well beyond that of an average native.

Almost EVERY relatively young person speaks two languages, because english is taught and required in schools all over the world, and in the USA you have to learn a second language to graduate highschool nowadays.

I don't see how "prooving" you are such a super genious with your "know two languages" argument make you incapable of performing personal attacks.

As for "how nvidia will perform global lightening"... the exact same AMD does, because if you recall, there is not a single game out there with DX10.1
That means every game performs global lightening just fine now with "fake" cube maps as you call them, on DX10, on AMD and nVidia hardware.

Oh my God, more nVninjas at attack, I don't know why are you meddling, first I don't live in U.S, 2nd, if you dominate with mastery those two languages even better than their native speakers you should go back to your planet then, 3rd I do not care if you speak 10 languages or if everybody in the world speaks two of them, ask that to the chinese people, 4th, keys made fun of my mispelling, I was just defending myself, so if you don't know what's happening then don't talk, your juvenile attitude doesn't work here. I'm talking about Real Global Illumination, not Fake Global Illumination, the first one cannot be done in real time unless it's done on Dx10.1. So since you like fake stuff and is fine with you, then go back to DX7 and enjoy your fake reflections and fake lights, etc.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: evolucion8

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: evolucion8

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: evolucion8
The fact that the GTX280 has the same old features as the almost 2 years old 8800GTX proves that nVidia only loves money and doesn't love innovation.

You mean like PhysX? There are far more games using that and with obvious game play benefits as opposed to 10.1 :laugh:

I know you are just trolling, but come on your statements are just ridiculous.

Pff wow, the same features which are enabled on the GeForce 8 like PhysX, DX10.1 is simply more inmersive in terms of graphics effects, I wonder how a GTX 280 will perform when doing real time globall ilumination, and I meant the real one, not some fake using fake cubemaps, and please, trolling? I'm not the one who sold his soul to nVidia to get free stuff and uses some smokescreen to hide the truth.

You don't see anything wrong with your posts, do you. You "wonder" how a GTX280 will perform global illumination ( <--- spelled correctly)? Are we still "wondering" how an ATI DX10.1 card will perform global illumination? You don't think your trolling? And personally attacking people? What is your deal? I don't care what you say when talking tech, but you need to stop your BS with these personal attacks fairly quickly.

If you simply can't just discuss the topic, don't post. Do you get this?

Heck, now we have a spelling teacher, at least I can speak two languages. Global Ilumination? ATi already did that with it's Ping Pong demo with it's HD 3800 series of card which is 2 times slower than their current line up. Calling me troll simply crossed the line of the personal attacks, so I'm simply at the defensive mode, I will stop, but will you?. If you just simply can't discuss the topic with the real truth and not some nVidia's Focus Group Cheap Marketing, then don't post, I got it, but will you?

Ok, Mr. "real truth". Let's hear it. The "real truth". And I dare you to point out where I have lied. But first, the "real truth" if you please. And I won't even respond. I'll leave it to other non-focus members to rip your comments a new one. Because I know exactly the diatribe you will spew forth.

Have at it.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: evolucion8

Originally posted by: taltamir
you think speaking two languages makes you special? I speak five, 2 of them with a mastery well beyond that of an average native.

Almost EVERY relatively young person speaks two languages, because english is taught and required in schools all over the world, and in the USA you have to learn a second language to graduate highschool nowadays.

I don't see how "prooving" you are such a super genious with your "know two languages" argument make you incapable of performing personal attacks.

As for "how nvidia will perform global lightening"... the exact same AMD does, because if you recall, there is not a single game out there with DX10.1
That means every game performs global lightening just fine now with "fake" cube maps as you call them, on DX10, on AMD and nVidia hardware.

Oh my God, more nVninjas at attack, I don't know why are you meddling. I'm talking about Real Global Illumination, not Fake Global Illumination, the first one cannot be done in real time unless it's done on Dx10.1. So since you like fake stuff and is fine with you, then go back to DX7 and enjoy your fake reflections and fake lights, etc.

Meddling? He is part of this forum just as much as anyone.

In bold ^ : Exactly right. Now show us a title that demonstrates this if you please.

And watch out, if it's not a Triple A title, you'll hear from a few members here.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: evolucion8

Originally posted by: taltamir
you think speaking two languages makes you special? I speak five, 2 of them with a mastery well beyond that of an average native.

Almost EVERY relatively young person speaks two languages, because english is taught and required in schools all over the world, and in the USA you have to learn a second language to graduate highschool nowadays.

I don't see how "prooving" you are such a super genious with your "know two languages" argument make you incapable of performing personal attacks.

As for "how nvidia will perform global lightening"... the exact same AMD does, because if you recall, there is not a single game out there with DX10.1
That means every game performs global lightening just fine now with "fake" cube maps as you call them, on DX10, on AMD and nVidia hardware.

Oh my God, more nVninjas at attack, I don't know why are you meddling. I'm talking about Real Global Illumination, not Fake Global Illumination, the first one cannot be done in real time unless it's done on Dx10.1. So since you like fake stuff and is fine with you, then go back to DX7 and enjoy your fake reflections and fake lights, etc.

I assure you, I am not affiliated with nvidia. And in my PCs I currently have a 3450, a 4850, and a GTX260. Thats 2:1 AMD:nVidia cards. So I am no "nvninja".

As for why I am "meddling"... its because you are personally attacking people. Like just now.

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: evolucion8

Originally posted by: taltamir
you think speaking two languages makes you special? I speak five, 2 of them with a mastery well beyond that of an average native.

Almost EVERY relatively young person speaks two languages, because english is taught and required in schools all over the world, and in the USA you have to learn a second language to graduate highschool nowadays.

I don't see how "prooving" you are such a super genious with your "know two languages" argument make you incapable of performing personal attacks.

As for "how nvidia will perform global lightening"... the exact same AMD does, because if you recall, there is not a single game out there with DX10.1
That means every game performs global lightening just fine now with "fake" cube maps as you call them, on DX10, on AMD and nVidia hardware.

Oh my God, more nVninjas at attack, I don't know why are you meddling. I'm talking about Real Global Illumination, not Fake Global Illumination, the first one cannot be done in real time unless it's done on Dx10.1. So since you like fake stuff and is fine with you, then go back to DX7 and enjoy your fake reflections and fake lights, etc.

Meddling? He is part of this forum just as much as anyone.

In bold ^ : Exactly right. Now show us a title that demonstrates this if you please.

And watch out, if it's not a Triple A title, you'll hear from a few members here.

DX10.1
Titles: 0
Demos: 1

GPU accelerated PhysX
Titles: 0
Demos:1

Now show me the 25 GPU accelerated AAA (None) games that are coming!!

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: evolucion8

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: evolucion8

Originally posted by: taltamir
you think speaking two languages makes you special? I speak five, 2 of them with a mastery well beyond that of an average native.

Almost EVERY relatively young person speaks two languages, because english is taught and required in schools all over the world, and in the USA you have to learn a second language to graduate highschool nowadays.

I don't see how "prooving" you are such a super genious with your "know two languages" argument make you incapable of performing personal attacks.

As for "how nvidia will perform global lightening"... the exact same AMD does, because if you recall, there is not a single game out there with DX10.1
That means every game performs global lightening just fine now with "fake" cube maps as you call them, on DX10, on AMD and nVidia hardware.

Oh my God, more nVninjas at attack, I don't know why are you meddling. I'm talking about Real Global Illumination, not Fake Global Illumination, the first one cannot be done in real time unless it's done on Dx10.1. So since you like fake stuff and is fine with you, then go back to DX7 and enjoy your fake reflections and fake lights, etc.

Meddling? He is part of this forum just as much as anyone.

In bold ^ : Exactly right. Now show us a title that demonstrates this if you please.

And watch out, if it's not a Triple A title, you'll hear from a few members here.

DX10.1
Titles: 0
Demos: 1

GPU accelerated PhysX
Titles: 0
Demos:1

Now show me the 25 GPU accelerated AAA (None) games that are coming!!

Why include PhysX? Did you think we were talking about PhysX or global illumination?
I'm sorry if you were confused, but to take it upon yourself to directly compare DX10.1 feature with PhysX was purely your own choice. Care to comment on why you did that?

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: evolucion8

Originally posted by: taltamir
you think speaking two languages makes you special? I speak five, 2 of them with a mastery well beyond that of an average native.

Almost EVERY relatively young person speaks two languages, because english is taught and required in schools all over the world, and in the USA you have to learn a second language to graduate highschool nowadays.

I don't see how "prooving" you are such a super genious with your "know two languages" argument make you incapable of performing personal attacks.

As for "how nvidia will perform global lightening"... the exact same AMD does, because if you recall, there is not a single game out there with DX10.1
That means every game performs global lightening just fine now with "fake" cube maps as you call them, on DX10, on AMD and nVidia hardware.

Oh my God, more nVninjas at attack, I don't know why are you meddling. I'm talking about Real Global Illumination, not Fake Global Illumination, the first one cannot be done in real time unless it's done on Dx10.1. So since you like fake stuff and is fine with you, then go back to DX7 and enjoy your fake reflections and fake lights, etc.

I assure you, I am not affiliated with nvidia. And in my PCs I currently have a 3450, a 4850, and a GTX260. Thats 2:1 AMD:nVidia cards. So I am no "nvninja".

As for why I am "meddling"... its because you are personally attacking people. Like just now.

I wasn't attacking people, I was only defending myself of Keys and only him and his marketing lies, and you just backed him up stating a false claim that I'm attacking personally everybody, I said that I will stop, and so he's, and then you just showed up and threw some logs to the fire, I was just defending myself of you and now I'm a forum member with rabies which blindly is attacking everybody, nice!

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: evolucion8

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: evolucion8

Originally posted by: taltamir
you think speaking two languages makes you special? I speak five, 2 of them with a mastery well beyond that of an average native.

Almost EVERY relatively young person speaks two languages, because english is taught and required in schools all over the world, and in the USA you have to learn a second language to graduate highschool nowadays.

I don't see how "prooving" you are such a super genious with your "know two languages" argument make you incapable of performing personal attacks.

As for "how nvidia will perform global lightening"... the exact same AMD does, because if you recall, there is not a single game out there with DX10.1
That means every game performs global lightening just fine now with "fake" cube maps as you call them, on DX10, on AMD and nVidia hardware.

Oh my God, more nVninjas at attack, I don't know why are you meddling. I'm talking about Real Global Illumination, not Fake Global Illumination, the first one cannot be done in real time unless it's done on Dx10.1. So since you like fake stuff and is fine with you, then go back to DX7 and enjoy your fake reflections and fake lights, etc.

Meddling? He is part of this forum just as much as anyone.

In bold ^ : Exactly right. Now show us a title that demonstrates this if you please.

And watch out, if it's not a Triple A title, you'll hear from a few members here.

DX10.1
Titles: 0
Demos: 1

GPU accelerated PhysX
Titles: 0
Demos:1

Now show me the 25 GPU accelerated AAA (None) games that are coming!!

Why include PhysX? Did you think we were talking about PhysX or global illumination?
I'm sorry if you were confused, but to take it upon yourself to directly compare DX10.1 feature with PhysX was purely your own choice. Care to comment on why you did that?

Because both are pretty much in the same situation, in adoption mode, none of them is a real reason to buy a card and both vendors are using them as a selling point, but for me, DX10.1 is a better selling point. There are no DX10.1 games (Except the Unpatched AC), only one mini game which shows how global illumination works, the ping pong demo. PhysX games are plenty, but GPU accelerated PhysX? None.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: SSChevy2001
My list was on the last page. Since your to lazy to look to have checked the last page let me post it again.

Aliens: Colonial Marines - Q1 2009 360/PS3/PC
APB: TBA 2009 - 360/PS3/PC
Bionic Commando - TBA 2009 - 360/PS3/PC
Backbreaker - TBA 2009 - 360/PS3/PC
Borderlands - Q1 2009 - 360/PS3/PC
Cryostasis - TBA 2008 - PC
Divinity 2 - Ego Draconis - Q2 2009 360/PC
Empire: Total War - Q1 2009 - PC
Mirror?s Edge - November 11, 2008 - 360/PS3/PC
MKZ - Winter 2008 - PC
Nurien - TBD - PC

There you go maybe 3 new titles before then end other year. So again I ask for the 25 games?

Kotaku's Blurb
Upcoming PC titles that incorporate PhysX technology include Cryostasis, Backbreaker, Aliens: Colonial Marines, with close to 20 more PC titles expected before the year-end holiday seasons.

Like I said, I don't have a list and I sure as hell am not going to cross-reference and compile one. There's 2 reliable sources who have echoed 20-25 titles before X-mas. I'm sure not all will be GPU-accelerated but its certainly a good indication PhysX is gaining traction.

Yes. The point is you can't count older software based PhysX titles as having an advantage to having a PhysX GPU, as there's no real benefit.

If they enabled GPU PhysX and show additional physics effects where there were none before, there certainly is a benefit.

Well I'm the opposite of you I rather not take even the slightest hit in FPS, as to me it's not that obvious. With my extra FPS I put towards raising draw distance and more vegetation, something more noticeable.

And that's certainly your prerogative but to say the differences aren't obvious is clearly untrue.

They give Intel MB owners multi-gpu PhysX causes their trying to build a install base for PhysX, while on the same token they're not going to give us SLI support. Guess you need to be happy with what you get, but still it would be a lot easier to build a install base if there was SLI support for intel chipsets.

But they are still adding value and functionality where there was none before. Heck, if they fix the WDDM driver issue, you could even have a 4870X2 + NV PhysX card or even ATI CF with a PhysX card in your 3rd x16/x4 electrical PCIE slot. What's not to like about that?

Problem is will we need more powerful CPUs to see the real benefit of PhysX titles? The Firingsquad review clearly shows GPU PhysX titles are still CPU bound with a QX9770. How much CPU power will be needed for future titles?

We need faster CPUs for current GPUs anyways, but that doesn't matter since GPU PhysX allow effects that are not possible otherwise. Sure it has a hit on overall performance, but its still playable and runs circles around CPU-only performance. Again, this is no different than cranking up options or AA in any game you have today.

I've tested all the demos and the UT3 maps. Warmong sucked, demo are just demos, UT3 Heatray physx was a fun map, but not super impressive. To me red faction's destructible environment was more impressive when it came out how many years ago.

Well its obvious you're not going to be impressed, but as I said before, what we've seen so far is still better than anything we've seen recently in the GPU industry and more is yet to come.