• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Tressfx: A new frontier of realism in pc gaming

Page 21 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Final8ty said:
The visual affects are there to see for everyone, i have run them on the CPU and they look just as pants as in the physx on off comparison trailers.

So don't try to pull it off as needing an NV to make them look better, its not about how a game handles which can not be visually conveyed, GPU physx has not been used for the feel since CellFactor and a level in UT3.

I have put up with your twisting enough for the moment.
Click to expand...

Are you talking "GPU-physX" or "CPU-PhysX"...because you seem to think there are 2 types of PhysX...and you ignore reality in the process on top of that...impressive. 😛

You might wanna go over the list of none-GPU accelerated games:
http://physxinfo.com/index.php?p=gam&f=cpu

They are all tier 1 phyics games...don't you get tried of using flawed/false arguments?
 
Last edited:
Lonbjerg said:
Are you talking "GPU-physX" or "CPU-PhysX"...because you seem to think there are 2 types of PhysX...and you ignore reality in the process on top of that...impressive. 😛

You might wanna go over the list of none-GPU accelerated games:
http://physxinfo.com/index.php?p=gam&f=cpu

They are all tier 1 phyics games...don't you get tried of using flawed/false arguments?
Click to expand...
http://physxinfo.com/wiki/Category:APEX
actually there are 5 (or 6 with the one with suspended development.) kinds of physX. Some must have a GPU to run, some don't

And please go play your physX games and be happy and leave this thread for those who has something new to bring along, this bickering is getting tiresome. And hopefully in 2 days we can observe how this new hair simulation works.
 
Lonbjerg said:
Are you talking "GPU-physX" or "CPU-PhysX"...because you seem to think there are 2 types of PhysX...and you ignore reality in the process on top of that...impressive. 😛

You might wanna go over the list of none-GPU accelerated games:
http://physxinfo.com/index.php?p=gam&f=cpu

They are all tier 1 phyics games...don't you get tried of using flawed/false arguments?
Click to expand...

How many types there are is totally irreverent all that matters is the results, so again your arguing nothing but semantics, i was just keeping things simple. No one cares how many types there, are they only care about the results in games.

You seem to be going off on a PhysX tangent.
I'm done with you.
 
Last edited:
Final8ty said:
How many types there are is totally irreverent all that matters is the results, so again your arguing nothing but semantics.
Click to expand...

So since AMD's GPU's have never been used for game physics...they are 100% irrelevant right?
Even this TressFX is not gameplay physics so it's irrelvant...right?

Or do I need too observe you change your "argument" once again, when reality hits?

I love that, when I predicted back in 2006) that NVIDA and ATi fans would rage against hardware physics...untill they got their own solution.
Well NVIDIA got AGEIA, Intel snatched Havok...AMD got left with no chair to sit on.

And what happend?
NVIDIA fans suddenly started liking hardware physics (in 2008), while AMD/Ati fans still had nothing positive to say.

Fast forward to 2013, and AMD demoes a hair-demo.

Post are made, even trying to suggest this is "A new frontier of realism in pc gaming", and suddenly hardware phsyics is the shizzle.

Welcome to the party...allthough you are 6-7 years late....but behaving like predicted...color me amused 😉
 
Last edited:
Lonbjerg said:
So since AMD's GPU's have never been used for game physics...they are 100% irrelevant right?
Even this TressFX is not gameplay physics so it's irrelanvt...right?

Or do I need too observe you change your "argument" once again, when reality hits?
Click to expand...

Sherlock continues to impress all who converse with him.
 
Lonbjerg said:
So since AMD's GPU's have never been used for game physics...they are 100% irrelevant right?
Even this TressFX is not gameplay physics so it's irrelanvt...right?

Or do I need too observe you change your "argument" once again, when reality hits?
Click to expand...

Where does it say in my comment anything to do with game play physics.

Originally Posted by Final8ty View Post
How many types there are is totally irreverent all that matters is the results, so again your arguing nothing but semantics.
Click to expand...


Final8ty said:
We have not seen it in action so judgement will have to wait, but i hope in future it expands from there for all.
Click to expand...
So i already covered your point earlier which means 2 things, first GPU physics for all, then it expands from there for all which means game play physics, of course they are going to start off on the candy first.

I never said only game play GPU physics matters, the point is that it should not only be used for candy, many people in this thread have made that abundantly clear and its all gone right over your head


You completely miss the points made and mixed up the context that they are made in, and when they are made.

I'm going off to watch SG1 😀
 
Last edited:
Final8ty said:
Where does it say in my comment anything to do with game play physics.
Click to expand...

Let me guess....you will keep moving the goalposts, untill they suit a pro-AMD stance?

I am glad after 6-7 of harping, you finally got a game that will have interactive hair...I am...just hope it will suit "your artistic style"....because realism isn't your gold.
I'm just not impressed...as it's a couple of years late better late (and almost naked) than never...right? ^^
 
Lonbjerg said:
Let me guess....you will keep moving the goalposts, untill they suit a pro-AMD stance?

I am glad after 6-7 of harping, you finally got a game that will have interactive hair...I am...just hope it will suit "your artistic style"....because realism isn't your gold.
I'm just not impressed...as it's a couple of years late better late (and almost naked) than never...right? ^^
Click to expand...

Yes wanting it for All DX11 GPUs regardless of brand is very pro-AMD stance... gotcha !

I can't watch your pain any longer.
 
Last edited:
Final8ty said:
Yes wanting it for All DX11 GPUs regardless of brand is very pro-AMD stance... gotcha !

I can't watch your pain any longer.
Click to expand...


All?
So this runs on HD 5450 just dandy?

Why is it that you insist on using false/flawed arguments?

When ALL...dosn't mean ALL...you cannot use the word: all.

So stop whining over some invented, made-up, fake feeling you think I have...and take a close look at your own "arguements"...defelction dosn't make flawed logic come true all of a sudden you know :whiste:

And what does "GPU" mean?

Just GPU?
APU's too?
Intel IGP's too?

I think you are in for a surprise when the first benches hits...
 
Lonbjerg said:
All?
So this runs on HD 5450 just dandy?

Why is it that you insist on using false/flawed arguments?

When ALL...dosn't mean ALL...you cannot use the word: all.

So stop whining over some invented, made-up, fake feeling you think I have...and take a close look at your own "arguements"...defelction dosn't make flawed logic come true all of a sudden you know :whiste:

And what does "GPU" mean?

Just GPU?
APU's too?
Intel IGP's too?

I think you are in for a surprise when the first benches hits...
Click to expand...
The irony. You should take your own advice.
 
MrK6 said:
The irony. You should take your own advice.
Click to expand...

Indeed he has just got way to silly now, i didn't say anything about performance for all DX11 GPUs no matter what level they are and i didn't even mention performance anyway, he really likes to make up things that were not said.
 
Last edited:
Lonbjerg, it has been said multiple times. PhysX is cool, it does everything that TressFX does and much more. That however, means very little when we take into consideration one or two games every year actually use it.

What TressFX does, that despite doing only hair makes it that much more exciting than PhysX, is run on every DX11 GPU. It will run in nearly every PC out there and I'd wager in PS4 and x720 too. That means TressFX has the potential of showing up in every single next-gen game. That's what makes it more exciting than PhysX for quite a lot of people around here, me included.
 
Last edited:
Lonbjerg said:
All?
So this runs on HD 5450 just dandy?
Click to expand...

Please... Just stop, youre embarassing yourself
Are you that eager to join the Rollo club?

There is nothing ground breaking about Tressfx and nobody is claiming that anyway, its the simple fact that it can be used on all BRANDS of GPU (so you dont make up another bullshit argument) that makes people excited

Something Nvidia could take a hint about
 
Dravonic said:
Lonbjerg, it has been said multiple times. PhysX is cool, it does everything that TressFX does and much more. That however, means very little when we take into consideration one or two games every year actually use it.

What TressFX does, that despite doing only hair makes it that much more exciting than PhysX, is run on every DX11 GPU. It will run in nearly every PC out there and I'd wager in PS4 and x720 too. That means TressFX has the potential of showing up in every single next-gen game. That's what makes it more exciting than PhysX for quite a lot of people around here, me included.
Click to expand...

The same thing were said about this in 2006:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLgb9AdnaBI
It's now 2013...and PhysX isn't dead, infact it's in better shape.

So sorry, your arguments dosn't carry anything, but a "what if..."

Because we all now how ATi's claimed panned out:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=63036&highlight=havokfx

NVIDIA has GPU's, CUDA and PhysX....they are in the game.
Intel has CPU's, X86 and Havok...they are in the game.

AMD has CPU/GPU, Directcompute/OpenCL...but no middleware...hence they are outside the game....just rying to latch on to the other players.

TL;DR
AMD makes hair in one game...AMD fans sees this as the end of PhysX....AMD fans need bigger/stronger glasses.

Neither OpenCL nor DirectCompute is a physics middleware...if AMD want to make more than a single effect in selected games...they need a middelware.

It's that simple.

But why let facts get in the way of supressed anger since 2006...aka jumping the gun...havn't stopped people trying to stop Progress before...why should it now?

Next argument:
TressFX cures cancer!!!!
PhysX causes cancer!!!
 
Lonbjerg said:
The same thing were said about this in 2006:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLgb9AdnaBI
It's now 2013...and PhysX isn't dead, infact it's in better shape.

So sorry, your arguments dosn't carry anything, but a "what if..."

Because we all now how ATi's claimed panned out:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=63036&highlight=havokfx

NVIDIA has GPU's, CUDA and PhysX....they are in the game.
Intel has CPU's, X86 and Havok...they are in the game.

AMD has CPU/GPU, Directcompute/OpenCL...but no middleware...hence they are outside the game....just rying to latch on to the other players.

TL;DR
AMD makes hair in one game...AMD fans sees this as the end of PhysX....AMD fans need bigger/stronger glasses.

Neither OpenCL nor DirectCompute is a physics middleware...if AMD want to make more than a single effect in selected games...they need a middelware.

It's that simple.

But why let facts get in the way of supressed anger since 2006...aka jumping the gun...havn't stopped people trying to stop Progress before...why should it now?

Next argument:
TressFX cures cancer!!!!
PhysX causes cancer!!!
Click to expand...

Hahah,that actually made me chuckle "TressFX cures cancer!!!!
PhysX causes cancer!!![
 
Lonbjerg said:
Next argument:
TressFX cures cancer!!!!
PhysX causes cancer!!!
Click to expand...

Lonbjerg kills braincells!!!!

Do you have any idea what Direct Compute and Open CL are? You're comparing them to PhysX and Havok even though they aren't even remotely comparable.

Direct Compute and OpenCL are tools that will allow developers to create their own effects that can leverage the power of GPU's to perform calculations. They are not even remotely comparable to Havok and PhysX.

The thing you are failing to grasp is that AMD's GCN is in both next generation consoles. If you can't grasp the gravity of what that means for PhysX's continued existence then I pity you. Yes PhysX did GPU based physics first, but what matters now is that no developer for upcoming titles has any reason to leverage PhysX in it's current form for their titles. It will wasted development time since it will not run on consoles which is where they make the majority of their money.

I will reiterate again that you are the only person who is claiming that anyone in this thread is stating that PhysX sucks because it belongs to Nvidia. PhysX sucks right now because it is hardly used, and when it is it's just for eye candy that has no effect on actual gameplay. It can't effect actual gameplay because of it's closed nature. Nvidia would garner a lot of goodwill if they stopped using CUDA to run PhysX and switched to Direct Compute or OpenCL.
 
Lonbjerg said:
*snip*
Click to expand...

Sure, we don't know if it's going anywhere. Hell, I don't even know if it's any good yet. But again, the reason it has me excited, and I think the same applies to many others around here, is it has the potential to go far, very far. Something PhysX doesn't, because nvidia is keeping it hostage.

Read again the thread title. What I interpret from it is "Hey guys, look! Another step in the right direction!". That's what it is, just another step. Now, because it's already been done with PhysX, you feel the need to tell us it's nothing new. I agree, to a certain extent. What's new here is the potential PhysX never had. The potential to be widely used.

Will it evolve to be an open, full blown physics engine to the point it will drive proprietary solutions like PhysX out of the market? Who knows. I can only dream. It is one of the first steps to make it happen, that's what makes it exciting. But if it actually will be, we can't know.
 
Lonbjerg said:
I bet there are more CUDA able GPU's out in the wil than DX11 GPU's...so a smaller markedet than for PhyX, is that was you say?
Click to expand...
According to the latest Steam survey:
47.97% are DX11 compliant (up 3% from last quarter, I think)

That's almost the majority already. :colbert:

There are some DX11-only games. Are there any hardware PhysX-only games that cannot be played on Radeons?
 
Last edited:
Lonbjerg said:
NVIDIA has GPU's, CUDA and PhysX....they are in the game.
Intel has CPU's, X86 and Havok...they are in the game.

AMD has CPU/GPU, Directcompute/OpenCL...but no middleware...hence they are outside the game....just rying to latch on to the other players.


Next argument:
TressFX cures cancer!!!!
PhysX causes cancer!!!
Click to expand...

Frack the middleware! Directcompute/OpenCL is exploding as you type these words! The beauty of it is no "middleware".. like you being the middleman that has to go! 😛 😎

PhsyX was the cancer preventing games from from having built-in physics gameplay based upon GPU-accelerated phsyics, because no developer was willing to make their game 100% UNPLAYABLE on Radeon cards.

The PC market isn't big enough for devs to make NV-exclusive games, like PS3-exclusives or Xbox-exclusives.

DC/OpenCL is the cure of cancer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
 
Last edited:
BoFox said:
Frack the middleware! Directcompute/OpenCL is exploding as you type these words! The beauty of it is no "middleware".. like you being the middleman that has to go! 😛 😎

PhsyX was the cancer preventing games from from having built-in physics gameplay based upon GPU-accelerated phsyics, because no developer was willing to make their game 100% UNPLAYABLE on Radeon cards.

The PC market isn't big enough for devs to make NV-exclusive games, like PS3-exclusives or Xbox-exclusives.

DC/OpenCL is the cure of cancer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
Click to expand...

Yeah right. Crysis 3 and Sleeping Dogs funny physics fail videos showed how awesome build-in physics engines are.

As for cancer, AMD fanboys really are stupid. D:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top