Poll: What would the price of Physx card have to be

[fishbits]

to see thousands of particles flying around after an explosion?

If it were limited to that, I wouldn't buy one period. Fortunately they can do a lot more. I'd pay probably $225 tops, so picked <$300

I do not want this thing on a graphics card though. If they came out tomorrow, I don't want to have to lose the GPU I just purchased recently. If they come out down the road, don't want to put off a GPU purchase waiting for physics to be incorporated. Don't want it splitting GPU horsepower between pixels and physics. If it's just tacked on the graphics card, don't want to get rid of the physics unit just because its time to upgrade the GPU.

I'm looking at the first gen physics chips being supplied along the lines of the Sound Blaster 16. It'll have its own slot and quantifiable capabilities for developers to target. It should be have/don't have, not "well, this game does take advantage of physics processing, but with that particular physics card it'll still be lacking. You want to upgrade to the XPhysXtremeXX-X model." It'll last a good long while as a standard, and be moveable from your current rig to the next one. One base set of performance specs for everyone to adopt during this transatory period, then when the buyers are more savvy and take physics cards to be as standard for gaming as sound cards, can start exploring ways to upgrade.

 

[JAG87]

No more then 300 cdn when GOOD games that draw benefit actually come out. Definetely not touching one until UT 2007 comes out. I think that game will be the icebreaker for many, including me.

Until then I am fully supporting the nvidia/ati physics. If we can get physics accelleration from multi-GPU setups it would be far better. Many more people would go crossfire/SLI and actually have huge benefits. And dont start flaming at me saying that it is better to pay 200 for an ageia board then paying 500 dollars for a 2nd video card for physics. You know better then me that physics is not all it does, it provides overall a huge performance boost, the added physics accelleration in a crossfire/SLI setup would just be a bonus. And dont forget that a crossfire/SLI setup will always give you a performance boost for 500 dollars more, while an ageia board will give you a performance boost in maybe 10-20% of all games (most of which you probably dont even play) for 200 dollars. You do the math and see which solution will give you the most fun for your money.


btw when i refer to 500 dollars im assuming your getting 2 of the best cards. of course a 7900 GT for example is even cheaper, making the whole dual GPU scene even sweeter.

 

[Barkotron]

Originally posted by: JAG87
No more then 300 cdn when GOOD games that draw benefit actually come out. Definetely not touching one until UT 2007 comes out. I think that game will be the icebreaker for many, including me.

Until then I am fully supporting the nvidia/ati physics. If we can get physics accelleration from multi-GPU setups it would be far better. Many more people would go crossfire/SLI and actually have huge benefits. And dont start flaming at me saying that it is better to pay 200 for an ageia board then paying 500 dollars for a 2nd video card for physics. You know better then me that physics is not all it does, it provides overall a huge performance boost, the added physics accelleration in a crossfire/SLI setup would just be a bonus. And dont forget that a crossfire/SLI setup will always give you a performance boost for 500 dollars more, while an ageia board will give you a performance boost in maybe 10-20% of all games (most of which you probably dont even play) for 200 dollars. You do the math and see which solution will give you the most fun for your money.


btw when i refer to 500 dollars im assuming your getting 2 of the best cards. of course a 7900 GT for example is even cheaper, making the whole dual GPU scene even sweeter.

I like the idea of not having to use an SLI/Crossfire setup to use one card for graphics and the other for physics, as mentioned here: http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=226

"What is most impressive to me is that ATI has assured me that these two cards do not have to run in CrossFire mode, and thus they do not have to be the same GPU. If you have an X1900 XTX now, and in about eight months you buy a new ATI 2800 XTX, you can save your X1900 XTX for physics calculations. As of now, NVIDIA has said they do not support this feature but see the value in doing so. Hopefully that means the feature will be coming soon as the upgrade opportunities this offers readers are fantastic."

If both vendors enable this, which makes sense, it could be a great thing, and possibly kill the second-hand graphics card market stone dead .

 

[letdown427]

In UK, I'd say £100 max.

If Crysis REALLY, REALLY used it A LOT, I'd go up to about £200

For £100, that fan they put on it better be silent.

 

[Barkotron]

Originally posted by: letdown427
For £100, that fan they put on it better be silent.

This! This! Definitely has to be.

 

[coldpower27]

200 CAN probably and that is only after awhile when games start coming out for it that use it, I am not an early adopter.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Crashedout
It needs to be on the graphics card, in the GPU or on the MB before I would consider it. I don't think it needs to waste one of my slots and bus bandwidth. If it is priced like the sound chips I think they can create a market.

What do you use in your slots?
I havent used a PCI slot in years. The only card in my computer is my 6800GT.

I have 5 open PCI slots.

 

[SynthDude2001]

Originally posted by: Crusader
LOL look at all the people wanting one for <100.. everyone wants something for nothing.

I put <$200 (until it proves itself). But I think its worth $199 if it works at all as displayed in videos.

All I need is one killer app and I'd be dropping $200 for it.
Quake Wars with a fully destructible environment? Count me in.
Or FarCry 2? Count me in as well for this card @$200.

"Something for nothing"? I'm not demanding that AEGIA send me a free card, I (along with others) am simply stating a price I'm willing to pay. If they never drop the price that much (which as I already mentioned, I doubt they will), then I won't buy one unless I change my mind for some reason. Not really that hard, is it?

 

[Acanthus]

I would think that $100 would be perfectly reasonable after the initial launch. However, with the extremely complex memory controller and ultra high end memory on the card, you may be approaching cost at $100/card.

The PPU is not a small chip by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[KeithTalent]

I would pay up to $200 Cdn., contingent of course on some decent games making good use of it.

Are Crysis and UT2K7 the only announced games that are expected to be able to use it?

 

[Dethfrumbelo]

It all depends on how many years I could get out of it. I wouldn't want to have to upgrade a physics card ever year at $250 a pop. The resale value would probably be even worse than the video card. If it can last 2-3 years, $200 would be reasonable, assuming there were significant improvements in a good selection of games.

But indeed, since there aren't even any games out that support the tech at the moment, who would buy this card right now? Getting off the ground may prove impossible.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: KeithTalent
I would pay up to $200 Cdn., contingent of course on some decent games making good use of it.

Are Crysis and UT2K7 the only announced games that are expected to be able to use it?

http://physx.ageia.com/titles.html

 

[Corporate Thug]

$100 and i'll jump on it (assuming there was proper support)

 

[43st]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: KeithTalent
I would pay up to $200 Cdn., contingent of course on some decent games making good use of it.

Are Crysis and UT2K7 the only announced games that are expected to be able to use it?

http://physx.ageia.com/titles.html

Nothing much of note except the aging UT franchise. If it was GR under Red Storm then it would probably rock, under Ubisoft it's questionable.

Not to mention multiplayer issues. Will Ageia need to be a server side thing and how would that translate to the client? Is it eye candy only? I seem to remember reading that they wanted gameplay to hinge on whether you had a Ageia chip.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Thera

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: KeithTalent
I would pay up to $200 Cdn., contingent of course on some decent games making good use of it.

Are Crysis and UT2K7 the only announced games that are expected to be able to use it?

http://physx.ageia.com/titles.html

Nothing much of note except the aging UT franchise. If it was GR under Red Storm then it would probably rock, under Ubisoft it's questionable.

Not to mention multiplayer issues. Will Ageia need to be a server side thing and how would that translate to the client? Is it eye candy only? I seem to remember reading that they wanted gameplay to hinge on whether you had a Ageia chip.

Physics and interactive environments are desperately needed in the MMO genre.

As well as halfway intelligent AI, but thats wishful thinking.

Somehow people are entertained by 2 types of AI throughout the entire game. Caster/archer mob stays back and casts at you, fighter mob runs at you in a straight line and swings/spams abilities on a timer.

 

[dunno99]

I think the better question is: How many games you require for the PhysX to support before buying it?

But yeah, I still voted anyways.

 

[JBT]

I'm really suprised by some folks who consider themselves enthusiests. I for one love the idea. I'm sick of being able to shoot water melons and walk into buckets and being like wow it moved... I would really like to be able to interact with the environment.

I don't get how some of you spend $100 or more for a bit better audio but arn't willing to put any money into something that will completely change the capabilities of our games.

 

[Rhezuss]

PhysX cards? They're independent cards (like sound cards) that render more effects in apps and games?

If that's so, I want one.....but not over 150USD.

 

[JBT]

Originally posted by: Rhezuss
PhysX cards? They're independent cards (like sound cards) that render more effects in apps and games?

If that's so, I want one.....but not over 150USD.

more than just effects, They can actually change the environment.

 

[KeithTalent]

Originally posted by: JBT
I'm really suprised by some folks who consider themselves enthusiests. I for one love the idea. I'm sick of being able to shoot water melons and walk into buckets and being like wow it moved... I would really like to be able to interact with the environment.

I don't get how some of you spend $100 or more for a bit better audio but arn't willing to put any money into something that will completely change the capabilities of our games.

I don't think there is anything wrong with people adopting a 'wait and see' attitude here. People (including me) want some bang for their hard-earned bucks and I just do not see enough concrete information to warrant jumping blindly on the PhysX card bandwagon.

That said, I will definitely get one when I build my PC if there are decent games making proper use of the technology.

 

[Arkane13131]

100$ sounds reasonable. i mean why would it cost 300$ as thats the same price as a 3800+ x-2 dual core

 

[Acanthus]

For those of you that dont think it can radically change gaming, check out the cellfactor demo here

Edit: sorry those are screenshots, the high definition real time video can be found at http://www.cellfactorgame.com/

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Arkane13131
100$ sounds reasonable. i mean why would it cost 300$ as thats the same price as a 3800+ x-2 dual core

Because its memory subsystem has to be faster than a 7900GTX or X1900XT?

 

[Ika]

it really depends on how much support it will get, how much it affects performance, and how many PCI slots i can spare in my computer.

I would be willing to spend anywhere from $80-150 on one, though, if a killer game supported it.

 

[imported_JamesDax]

Originally posted by: JBT
I'm really suprised by some folks who consider themselves enthusiests. I for one love the idea. I'm sick of being able to shoot water melons and walk into buckets and being like wow it moved... I would really like to be able to interact with the environment.

I don't get how some of you spend $100 or more for a bit better audio but arn't willing to put any money into something that will completely change the capabilities of our games.

Yeah, I'm really surprised at all these so called enthusiests myself. Oh well, this time next year they will all have one.

btw, isn't this in the wrong forum??