Your Take on PhysX

[chizow]

Originally posted by: error8
But that's exactly it. It doesn't offers much, just like PhysX . Do you want me to link you to the jumping balls dx 10.1 demonstration movie ATI has, to show you the differences? You're right, PhysX has the upper hand on eye candy improvement, but dx 10.1 path is faster on cards and games that use it correctly.

Well that's certainly your opinion about physics, but to anyone who isn't blind or trolling that's clearly not the case in games that implement hardware accelerated physics or demos that enable physics features that clearly have not been done in real-time previously.

But I do agree about DX10.1, its so unremarkable its simply not worth mentioning.

The thing is, that both of them bring some improvements, here and there, that do not count on the overall card's value. For me both PhysX and dx 10.1 are worthless at this time. But it annoys me when you consider ATi cards are inferior just because they don't have the Nvidia's feature.

Who said I consider ATI cards inferior just because of this feature? There's about 8-9 other considerations that precede PhysX where Nvidia parts are superior, starting with performance. Not to mention I don't even consider an Nvidia feature anymore, seeing as hardware accelerated Havok was recently introduced and demonstrated compatibility with ATI as well as Nvidia parts.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
It's pretty clear that most ATI owners don't like PhysX and most NVIDIA owners do like it.

Go figure.

Maybe you should stick to speaking for yourself instead of trying to put words into other people's mouths.


Soulkeeper - XFX GTS 250 - "I could care less about PhysX"
munky - 8800GT - "I couldn't care much about PhysX support"
roid450 - EVGA gtx 260core 216 - "Physx is bull right now, unless u play Mirros Edge, GRAW2 with the Island level add on"
taltamir - eVGA 7900GS - "physics doesn't look right, its not realistic, the cloth for example: 1. looks like crud. 2. clips"
geokilla - BFG 9600GT OC - "However generally as you guys said, PhysX seems to be a bit overrated."
toyota - MSI GTX260 192SP - "for the record I think phsyx is a waste at the moment."
n7 - BFG GTX 280 OC - "I have zero interest in PhyX, & presently the same amount of interest in CUDA."
LOUISSSSS - BFG 8800GT - "physx is a piece of shit"


And that's just in this thread alone from those people with their hardware listed in their sigs.

Stop trying to turn every thread into a flamewar.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Creig


Stop trying to turn every thread into a flamewar.

I'm not. I also said "most" not all. I would also not consider many on your list to be NVIDIA fans. Although I'm typing this from an ATI laptop so I suppose that would make me an ATi fan and a supporter of PhysX.

 

[MegaWorks]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Creig


Stop trying to turn every thread into a flamewar.

I'm not. I also said "most" not all. I would also not consider many on your list to be NVIDIA fans. Although I'm typing this from an ATI laptop so I suppose that would make me an ATi fan and a supporter of PhysX.

Creig you can add me to your list. I have five nVidia card right now and I believe that PhysX is useless in today standard.

Now Wreckage how is that list "most" including myself? How do you know that they're not nVidia fans, and what exactly is an nVidia fan anyway?

 

[smackababy]

Originally posted by: MegaWorks

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Creig


Stop trying to turn every thread into a flamewar.

I'm not. I also said "most" not all. I would also not consider many on your list to be NVIDIA fans. Although I'm typing this from an ATI laptop so I suppose that would make me an ATi fan and a supporter of PhysX.

Creig you can add me to your list. I have five nVidia card right now and I believe that PhysX is useless in today standard.

Now Wreckage how is that list "most" including myself? How do you know that they're not nVidia fans, and what exactly is an nVidia fan anyway?

And nVidia fan is someone who is a fan of nVidia. Now, I purchased my card based on what I wanted to at the time. I think PhysX will, eventually if further developed, will be a great addition. As with Mirrors Edge, it adds an extra level of eye candy and nothing more. Kind of like high end video cards... As of now, I have the option of using PhysX in any game that supports it, and I'm happy with that.

 

[IanY]

I buy my cards for CUDA. I'm indifferent to Physx, but if it's there, then its an added bonus. However, I must say that the boost is quite noticeable if the application does support Physx, which is rare. I do play GRAW1 and GRAW2 and enjoy those games, but I don't care about Physx and the special Island level doesn't do much for me. Never tried Mirror's Edge before. My main machine uses four ___ cards because I'm a folder, so no flames, please.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Creig


Stop trying to turn every thread into a flamewar.

I'm not. I also said "most" not all. I would also not consider many on your list to be NVIDIA fans. Although I'm typing this from an ATI laptop so I suppose that would make me an ATi fan and a supporter of PhysX.

You're changing your tune. What you originally said was:

Originally posted by: Wreckage
It's pretty clear that most ATI owners don't like PhysX and most NVIDIA owners do like it.

Go figure.

Not "fans", but "owners". I pointed out a list of "owners" (+ MegaWorks) in this thread who really don't care about PhysX. Now, I'm pretty sure that Nvidia "fans" like it, but that's not what you originally stated, now is it?

If you go solely by the responses in this thread, it would seem that most Nvidia "owners" really don't care that much about PhysX.

 

[smackababy]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Creig


Stop trying to turn every thread into a flamewar.

I'm not. I also said "most" not all. I would also not consider many on your list to be NVIDIA fans. Although I'm typing this from an ATI laptop so I suppose that would make me an ATi fan and a supporter of PhysX.

You're changing your tune. What you originally said was:

Originally posted by: Wreckage
It's pretty clear that most ATI owners don't like PhysX and most NVIDIA owners do like it.

Go figure.

Not "fans", but "owners". I pointed out a list of "owners" (+ MegaWorks) in this thread who really don't care about PhysX. Now, I'm pretty sure that Nvidia "fans" like it, but that's not what you originally stated, now is it?

If you go solely by the responses in this thread, it would seem that most Nvidia "owners" really don't care that much about PhysX.

I can say I am an nVidia fan, and I don't really care about PhysX. It is nice, but as of right now, I couldn't care less about it. I don't even play any supported games.

 

[SSChevy2001]

@Creig

Add me to the list 8800GTS 512MB. I've used Mirrors Edge, UT3, Warmonger, and some demos. Currently there's nothing out that makes me want to use my 8800GTS as a PhysX card.

 

[MegaWorks]

Originally posted by: smackababy

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Creig


Stop trying to turn every thread into a flamewar.

I'm not. I also said "most" not all. I would also not consider many on your list to be NVIDIA fans. Although I'm typing this from an ATI laptop so I suppose that would make me an ATi fan and a supporter of PhysX.

You're changing your tune. What you originally said was:

Originally posted by: Wreckage
It's pretty clear that most ATI owners don't like PhysX and most NVIDIA owners do like it.

Go figure.

Not "fans", but "owners". I pointed out a list of "owners" (+ MegaWorks) in this thread who really don't care about PhysX. Now, I'm pretty sure that Nvidia "fans" like it, but that's not what you originally stated, now is it?

If you go solely by the responses in this thread, it would seem that most Nvidia "owners" really don't care that much about PhysX.

I can say I am an nVidia fan, and I don't really care about PhysX. It is nice, but as of right now, I couldn't care less about it. I don't even play any supported games.

I was confused between "fan" or "owner" but thanks to Creig for pointing this out.

 

[geokilla]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
It's pretty clear that most ATI owners don't like PhysX and most NVIDIA owners do like it.

Go figure.

At GDC they announced several more companies that will be incorporating PhysX into their game engines. In addition to the several announced prior to that. So for those of us who are into high end gaming it looks like a lot of good stuff is on the way.

Where'd you get this thought? I'm a NVDIA GPU owner and the only benefit I can see from owning a GeForce GPU is that I run F@H.

MODS! If this thread gets any worse, feel free to close it! I'm skipped the last page because it's mainly filled with arguements and minor flaming and stuff. Typical Video forum.

 

[AmberClad]

Originally posted by: geokilla
MODS! If this thread gets any worse, feel free to close it! I'm skipped the last page because it's mainly filled with arguements and minor flaming and stuff. Typical Video forum.

I'm keeping an eye on it and I'll lock it down per your request if it degenerates significantly. It's been pretty heated, but it hasn't gotten to the point of blatant flaming yet.

AmberClad
Video Moderator

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Wreckage
It's pretty clear that most ATI owners don't like PhysX and most NVIDIA owners do like it.

Go figure.

Maybe you should stick to speaking for yourself instead of trying to put words into other people's mouths.


Soulkeeper - XFX GTS 250 - "I could care less about PhysX"
munky - 8800GT - "I couldn't care much about PhysX support"
roid450 - EVGA gtx 260core 216 - "Physx is bull right now, unless u play Mirros Edge, GRAW2 with the Island level add on"
taltamir - eVGA 7900GS - "physics doesn't look right, its not realistic, the cloth for example: 1. looks like crud. 2. clips"
geokilla - BFG 9600GT OC - "However generally as you guys said, PhysX seems to be a bit overrated."
toyota - MSI GTX260 192SP - "for the record I think phsyx is a waste at the moment."
n7 - BFG GTX 280 OC - "I have zero interest in PhyX, & presently the same amount of interest in CUDA."
LOUISSSSS - BFG 8800GT - "physx is a piece of shit"


And that's just in this thread alone from those people with their hardware listed in their sigs.

Stop trying to turn every thread into a flamewar.

actually I got an eVGA GTX260 (regular amount of shaders) SC. I put in my spare 7900GS and was gonna sell my 260 (because I really don't play all that much anymore, what with starting serious premed) but it dropped in price so much that I really don't care to anymore... And I switched to rewarding myself with gaming time for doing well on tests (instead of eliminating gaming completely)

But back on subject, pretty much anyone here with an nvidia card is unimpressed by physX... on paper it sounds awesome, but in reality it doesn't deliver... windows shatter into 4 times as many pieces, but still don't do so realistically (i have shattered glass before), wood and plastic look completely wrong... liquids not only look wrong but all bahave EXACTLY THE SAME (oil and water and the like do NOT have the same consistency, density, and cohesion). Thin metal meshes behave like weird cloth and don't bend right. And actual clothe clips A LOT! it clips and clips and clips. I can't overstress that enough, it is much better to have a non physX cloth that moves based on prerended "wind" and ignores my bullets but doesn't clip (every other physics engine) instead of reacting to actual wind / players bullets but clipping over itself all the time. Oh, and it reacts to bullets WRONG.

PhysX tries too hard to be "fancy" and "noticeable" instead of trying to be REALISTIC. in a correct implementation you will not notice physX is there, you will only notice it ISN'T there. But in the physX implementation you simply notice that one "wrong" has been replaced with another "wrong".

 

[lavaheadache]

Originally posted by: MegaWorks

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Creig


Stop trying to turn every thread into a flamewar.

I'm not. I also said "most" not all. I would also not consider many on your list to be NVIDIA fans. Although I'm typing this from an ATI laptop so I suppose that would make me an ATi fan and a supporter of PhysX.

Creig you can add me to your list. I have five nVidia card right now and I believe that PhysX is useless in today standard.

Now Wreckage how is that list "most" including myself? How do you know that they're not nVidia fans, and what exactly is an nVidia fan anyway?

Add me to the list of people who think that Physx is mostly irrelevant and I even have a dedicated physx card.

 

[novasatori]

I like PhysX

Mirror's Edge with and without were night and day and Cryostasis was really cool, I look forward to more games with accelerated physics be it via PhysX or Havok.

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: novasatori
I like PhysX

Mirror's Edge with and without were night and day and Cryostasis was really cool, I look forward to more games with accelerated physics be it via PhysX or Havok.

night and day difference in Mirrors Edge? 2 or 3 pieces of cloth and better looking breaking glass placed in a game to show off an unneeded feature is night and day to you? also did you actually stop to check out the better looking breaking glass while getting chased and shot at? not to mention the crap was buggy for me and several others and forced me to uninstall and reinstall physx just to get it to work. it certainly wasnt worth the time or the small performance hit by using it either. its also laughable to think to those few little effects cant even be run on a cpu.

 

[Spike]

I have three nVidia cards (8800GTS 512, 9600 GSO, 8600 GTS) and one ATi card (4870 512) and physX means nothing to me currently. Yes, I really want to see physics in games and if ATi is really holding back development then shame on them. From what I can tell, and I'm just a random gamer, ATi's decision was more of a not supporting their rivals for what they felt was a closed "standard" as people like to say. With Havok, it seems like it is more "open" for all though again, I'm just a casual observer here and don't claim to understand the tech details.

I do have to disagree with Chizow on the nVidia benfits. Before XFX started making ATi cards most ATi vendors sucked and even now eVGA is better (all my current nVidia cards are eVGA) but XFX is close, especially with their warranty. nVidia still has more numerous good vendors but hopefully ATi gains a few more themselves, I really like the competition.

I also disagree with the claim that in the last three years nVidia's have been better. Yes, I do believe in general they claimed the top card (single GPU) spot but unfortunatly I can't afford the top end cards. I normally go after the mid - upper end cards (price bracket $200-300) and that has been very competitive. As Wreckage likes to point out his GTX 260 deal I paid $260 for my 4870 512, at the time the GTX 260 (old version) was $300, $280 AR was the lowest price I could find. Therefore to me the ATi was the better deal and so I jumped on it. At this point it seems like the better card in the mid to low upper end depends soley on who has the better rebate that week.

Anyway, I hope we see more games with hardware physics in them and I hope it runs on all hardware. At this point it looks like Havok is the only option there since PhysX is nVidia only. We can debate whether or not nVidia really offered it to ATi and whether ATi really held up physics development but at this point thats all in the past.

What we have is PhysX on one side, an nvidia only solution, or Havok on the other side, an open solution. In this economy of cutting back and getting the most for your dollar, who are the developers eventually going to support more?

 

[novasatori]

Originally posted by: toyota

Originally posted by: novasatori
I like PhysX

Mirror's Edge with and without were night and day and Cryostasis was really cool, I look forward to more games with accelerated physics be it via PhysX or Havok.

night and day difference in Mirrors Edge? 2 or 3 pieces of cloth and better looking breaking glass placed in a game to show off an unneeded feature is night and day to you? also did you actually stop to check out the better looking breaking glass while getting chased and shot at? not to mention the crap was buggy for me and several others and forced me to uninstall and reinstall physx just to get it to work. it certainly wasnt worth the time or the small performance hit by using it either. its also laughable to think to those few little effects cant even be run on a cpu.

yes it was imo

it raised the immersion more than just adding better graphics
for instance when you're sliding down the glass building and the heli gunners are shooting at you and you see the glass shards sliding down the building with you, and when you're running around on the roof tops and there are particles of roof material bouncing all around you when you're getting shot at

we'll have to agree to disagree, because even tho it is small additions in mirror's edge it was definitely night and day

 

[AmberClad]

I've opened a new thread and moved all of the recent discussion about the merits of ATI and Nvidia build quality and other general, non-PhysX exclusive topics to this thread

AmberClad
Video Moderator

 

[nemesismk2]

I find PhysX interesting but not sure how useful it really is yet.

 

[akugami]

Originally posted by: nemesismk2
I find PhysX interesting but not sure how useful it really is yet.

Your view is more common than you think. Many level headed owners of both ATI and nVidia cards find the prospect of physics acceleration interesting and can easily imagine some uses for it within games. Most would agree that as it currently stands, neither Havok nor PhysX is there yet.

The marketers/fanboys would have you believe that PhysX is the best thing since sliced bread and you should burn your ATI video cards and curse the day you ever even thought of buying an ATI card. Hell, you should probably shoot yourself in the head to punish your brain for even having that thought.

For those with common sense, physics acceleration as a whole is interesting. We definitely want to see where it leads. For business reasons, there is a very real prospect of PhysX failing. I'm not a programmer or software engineer so I'm not going to go into which is technically better down to the nth degree.

I'm just saying from my perspective as an enthusiast and a gamer as well as being a student of business that there is a real possibility of PhysX failing or at least becoming no more than a niche product. It is not always the product that is the best from a technological standpoint (see PS3, early MacOS vs Win 3.1) that wins the battle. There are other social and economical stimulus to consider when gauging the success or failure of a product.

If PhysX continues on its current path of requiring CUDA it'll have a slight edge in being early and more complete for developers but Havok will not be a weak contender. It'll have ATI and Intel in it's corner backing it. Furthermore, since it runs on OpenCL it'll run on pretty much any discrete graphics card and likely future integrated gpu's as well. PhysX...it'll run in a GPU accelerated state only on nVidia cards. If you're a developer looking to maximize your investments you obviously will look to broaden your user base and not limit your games to running at it's best only on half of the video cards out there.

If PhysX gets ported to OpenCL...it'll be just another physics acceleration standard. nVidia gets no cookies for having it and certainly no advantage. ATI would definitely support it at this point and then all hands are off as to whether Havok or PhysX wins.

At times the blind fanaticism and rabid attitude of nVidia fanboys remind me of Mac fanboys. This is coming from someone who used to own a Macintosh as well as owning iPods and have an iPhone. These are merely my opinions and are based upon business reasoning as I see them. I do not have any vested interest (and I don't really care) whether PhysX or Havok wins. Just give me good games. As for CUDA or STREAM processing, just give me some real tools and not the half-baked potential so I can work with my crappy home videos that no one wants to see.