Graphic Cards The PPU thread

KingKrool said:
Well AGEIA has one thing - an already accepted and existing Physics API, which has been license by Sony for PS3 too. So they can always structure their products to be the most compatible a la MS.

And in the case of on GPU physics, it is plausible enuf, but is ATI telling us that they have some extra silicon in there for it, or that they will use the existing silicon. The second solution is bad, Intel tried it with MMX and failed miserably.
Click to expand...

Yes though the API hasn't been finalised or accepted by all like directx i.e. vendor and third party independent. So we have that option open.

It's going to be just like the days when every gpu maker had their own proprietary API for e.g. 3dfx and glide :ohyeah:

As for the extra silicon yes there is quite a bit of unused silicon on the r520 though i don't remember the exact count. As a matter of ATi plans to use the GPU for general purpose computation. A lot of interesting stuff @ http://gpgpu.org/ If you like to delve into it.
 
Btw kk dug this up for you. This is the x1800xt simulating molecular dynamics using GROMACS.

20051006folding6rg.gif


The x1800xt is easily outperforming the cpus and the puny 7800gtx ;). Also MS might incorporate a physics API in the next version of directx. Once this happens then things will take off from there. This is what excites me :D. Accelerating physics, sound, computational tasks etc.
 
HMm Then the GPU will certainly be worth the extra price. But then again if it ATI implements this at the expense of its primary purpose, its a waste.
 
isnt gromacs one of the cores they use for folding@home? You can use a gpu to process it?
 
Grease Monk said:
isnt gromacs one of the cores they use for folding@home? You can use a gpu to process it?
Click to expand...

yup ... i was doin some folding lately

@blade .... hey dude can u give me the link ....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes Iknow abt general purpose computing on GPUs...

but this perforamnce of x1800 is not as much as the (claimed) performance of PhysX

Also, The precision might not be the same, GFX cards do not conform to the IEEE floating point standards (tho some may now, ask Chaos for more info)
 
All NV hardware since GF FX support IEEE fp32 standards. ATI X1800 hardware supports fp32 as well. R3XX/R4XX doesnt support fp32.
 
I don't see how physics will ever be more than a gimmick in games.
The current scenario showcases little more than a highly accurate collision detection system which needs some game elements to be built around them to be appreciated or even to be of any use.

The only place where real world physics could actually make a difference are sims; ie - if these ppu's actually intend to do anything more than collsion detection and ragdolls.

Ball and player physics in sports titles could also benefit, but these generally approach the real life sport from a completely different angle (it's virtually impossible to imitate real b-ball or football with a gamepad) and the only objective is to make a game that looks like football while playing like any other videogame.
 
saumilsingh said:
I don't see how physics will ever be more than a gimmick in games.
Click to expand...

I fully agree with Saumil here. The only benefit that I see of a discrete PPU (or even a GPU doing physics) is when things in the game obey the laws of physics more accurately. Say when you blow someone up, that poor dude will fall more accurately or disintegrate into several accurate pieces. When you shoot an arrow in a game, it will follow a parabolic arc more accurately and so on and so forth.

I dont see how it will make any difference to the gameplay itself, unless you are playing a driving or flying sim. Who really cares how accurately a body falls to the ground, when about 50 of them are trying to make *your* body fly more accurately through the air?

HL2's physics implementation as part of the gameplay (say where you have to place a few bricks on one end of the plank to make the other end rise up, so you can climb it and get out the window) is probably the limit of how it will affect gameplay.

Sims, of course, are a different issue and even here you dont want an accurate implementation, as you would probably never be able to play NFS UG at those insane speeds with the car fishtailing all over the place, courtesy of accurate physics.

Let's see how game developers react to the PPU concept. They are not exactly on fire at the moment, are they?
 
All the new Games now, are looking @ Real Life Physics.

Something just better, or the same as the Source engines Physics.

Right now, the most advanced Physics system is Source, even though, many people say it ruins the game, it doesnt. Physics are just standard in all games now. Even FEAR has it. I will be suprised to see an FPS game without Physics now.
 
I don't see how physics will ever be more than a gimmick in games
Click to expand...

Well thenthe same cud be said of gfx. Up to some extent they are necessary, but nowadays it is just a gimmick to distract from terrible gameplay a la d3.

But I think yu can get some really good gameplay with better physics. Imagine a shooter game in which richocheting bullets can cause kills.
 
But I think yu can get some really good gameplay with better physics. Imagine a shooter game in which richocheting bullets can cause kills.
Click to expand...

LOL they did since RTCW days, I always had a tough time killing those zombies with shields....

Yes but they arent that accurate, in any case doing the physics for richocheting bullet wont be so tough, its the non playable elements reacting to physics which will bring a CPU down to its knees.
 
I agree there a lot of games where shrapnel makes a difference, but as of now it is rather dumb. Realistic physics means that game devs will concentrate on providing a better experience there by making better engines. Might get something good about it. Ultimatley it might be possible (to a much greater extent than the havok engine) for game developers to make games using powerful builders, where they drag buildings on to the game scene, with the buildings being somewhat like an architects model, and having preconstructed rooms, with wooden doors and concrete walls, all of which behave differently. I mention these automated builder type tools, cos it will be just abt impossible otherwise to specify the weight, density, friction and granularity of each game element.
 
I can think of one good use for accurate physics in fps's though...

The ability to pickup and throw stuff as accurately as in real life using the proper hand movement each time.
The way hl2 did it felt so lame, even deus ex could do that.
 
Back
Top