Gameguru Mania Updated:04:16 PM CEST Sep,22
66 lottery login

91 club

okwin

bdg game

55 club

Playbonus.ca
CONTACT
Please e-mail us if you have news.

(c) 1998-2025 Gameguru Mania
Privacy Policy statement
SEARCH:
 Gameguru Mania News - Jun,07 2006 -  
AGEIA Responds To ATI's Physics Hardware Solution - tech
(hx) 11:55 AM CEST - Jun,07 2006 - Post a comment / read (9)
After Ageia's PhysX chip and Nvidia's Havok FX support announcement, ATI now follows suit with its own proclamation of support for accelerated gaming physics. The chaps over at FiringSquad decided to contact AGEIA to get their side on things. Here is AGEIA's response via their vice president of marketing Michael Steele:
  • We're glad that they've validated physics as the next big thing in gaming
  • The performance claims appear to be based solely on gigaflops of the Radeon chips and an assumption of PhysX gigaflops, but that is not a meaningful way to measure physics performance. That's like suggesting that the more wheels I have on my car, the faster I will go. Physics requires much more than raw gigaflops.
  • Graphics processors are designed for graphics. Physics is an entirely different environment. Why would you sacrifice graphics performance for questionable physics? You'll be hard pressed to find game developers who don't want to use all the graphics power they can get, thus leaving very little for anything else in that chip.
  • "Boundless Gaming" is actually enabled by AGEIA's Gaming Power Triangle in which the PhysX processor adds true physics to the mix instead of leaving it to a repurposed graphics processor.
  • In the end, what matters is who develops software for the product. There are games shipping for PhysX today and more than 20 announced for 2006. In addition, over 65 developers of more than 100 games are deep in development for PhysX. No specific games are announced even in development mode for ATI.
  • PhysX is here now
    • In related news, AGEIA also sent over a link to a CNet News.com blog which is also critical of the ATI solution:
    - ATI's Radeon X1000-series 3D cards are DirectX 9 parts. By the time any games are out with Havok FX features, Windows Vista, and with it DirectX 10, will either have arrived or will be arriving imminently, rendering the current generation of Radeons obsolete. We're sure ATI will include Havok FX acceleration in its next-gen cards, but you'd be foolish to buy the Radeon X1900 XT card ATI is highlighting now in anticipation of future boosted game physics.

    - ATI's two-card physics acceleration presents the same problem as Nvidia's. By using a 3D card for physics acceleration, you sacrifice 3D performance for physics performance. Yes, there's lots of new technology on the horizon promising faster computing, but if you've played the Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, you know that it chokes even the most advanced current-gen hardware. Smooth frame rates are still more important than more flying bricks. As for the three-card option, ostensibly you can plug in an older Radeon alongside a two-card Radeon CrossFire setup to ramp up the physics, but we'll withhold judgment until we know more about pricing of the special three 3D slot motherboards.
    last 10 comments:
    monoxism(01:51 PM CEST - Jun,07 2006 )
    Is it just me, or does Ageia seem kinda desperate?

    xxxx(03:34 PM CEST - Jun,07 2006 )
    Pfff, I wouldn't touch ATI's card if you held a gun to my head. I wouldn't touch an AGEIA either... it's nVidia here ALL THE WAY BABY. The way it's meant to be played!

    El_Coyote(05:32 PM CEST - Jun,07 2006 )
    monoxism> Is it just me, or does Ageia seem kinda desperate?

    they're just whiners.. kinda like the xxxx fellow

    xxxx(06:18 PM CEST - Jun,07 2006 )
    Or big mouthes like Coyote who can't appreciate other peoples opinion and instead only have the intelligence to throw insults. Duh.

    Sabot(06:49 PM CEST - Jun,07 2006 )
    The main thing to ask yourself is, "how many of those 20+ titles are you buying?" That's what is important, not the fact that they have several devs churning out 20-100 games that you have absolutely NO interest in!

    Any dev will pump up figures to brag that their hardware is supported for the future -this of course looks good to the uninitiated (lots of ones and zeros must mean FULL support said johny) but it is realy wasted $$££100s on a pointless gimmick that doesn't fit your game style if you can only buy 4-5 games out that list...then of course you wait and wait (in hope) for some GOOD titles to come along, but as usual that never happens and the card get's binned!

    Bit like buying an XBox360 and finding out that all the GOOD titles, that you originaly bought it for, then got released BETTER on PC. Lesson learned? Nah you'll do it again; take the bait hook-line-and-sinker :lol:

    Nosferatu(06:31 AM CEST - Jun,08 2006 )
    Good point, Stumpus.
    I guess all this rush on the physics side will spawn a good solution in a year or two. By the time we'll see games taking advantage of it and there will be reason to buy it.
    The way I see it, the situation is similar to any cool feature introduced: think pixel and vertex shaders. When GeForce3 originally came out no games supported shader model at all, this was true for quite a long time. And only now we see very advanced effects that use shaders to its potential (still the sky's the limit).

    xxxx(03:41 PM CEST - Jun,08 2006 )
    There's a BIG difference betweeen the use of Pixel shaders and overabundant and not necessarily needed physics. And the support of Pixel shading taking a long time? BS. I also think you totally missed Stumpus points.

    Nosferatu(05:02 PM CEST - Jun,08 2006 )
    1. I only said I agreed with Stumpus, I wasn't connecting what I said with what he said.
    2. Probably the "long time" wasn't really so long, but it wasn't immediate, that's for sure. Consider, that GF2 GTS had the PS 1.0 support, that was even advertised a bit, but it just never got used (probably wasn't really usable at all).

    xxxx(07:41 PM CEST - Jun,08 2006 )
    bah, removed my post, its not what I wanted to say. I don't care to deliberate on this really because it's pretty dumb anyhow..

    AGEIA will 'need' fair support from ATI and nVidia to be successful. ATI and nVidia signed on with Havok. ATI and nVidia have been happy gouging us on video card prices for years. They don't want to disturb their yearly profits because someone is making money off physics acceleration. They throw in their monopolistic almost plan and partner with Havok. The 3 of them have been working together for years, do you really think AGEIA has a chance to begin with?

    But really, lets 'see' if ATI and nVidia provide open compatibility to the newcommer. Hahahhahahaha!

    Oh and if AGEIA is going to get into games they shouldn't be forcing senseless drivers on us when we don't even have their hardware. That doesn't help their position in my mind.

    All comments
     Add your comment (free registration required)


    Related news:
    TechNews - NVIDIA Purchased AGEIA - tech (Feb 05 2008)
    UT3 PhysX Mod - AGEIA's Savior? - tech (Nov 29 2007)
    AGEIA To Join Futuremark Benchmarking Program - briefly (Sep 28 2006)
    AGEIA Interview - tech (Jul 13 2006)
    Tech News RoundUp - Ageia PhysX & You - tech (May 08 2006)
    Saturday Reading - AGEIA PhysX benchmarked - briefly (May 06 2006)
    The AGEIA-Havok War..(cough.)..Debate! - tech (May 06 2006)
    Havok Sounds Off On Ghost Recon AGEIA Physics - tech (May 04 2006)
    Tuesday Reading - AGEIA PhysX impressions - briefly (Mar 28 2006)
    Games with AGEIA support - briefly (Mar 22 2006)
    City of Villains to support AGEIA PhysX - briefly (Mar 21 2006)
    AGEIA PhysX card demo pictured - tech (Jan 07 2006)
    Cyanide Studios to support AGEIA PhysX - briefly (Dec 20 2005)
    AGEIA Sets Pricing on PhysX Add-In Cards - tech (May 21 2005)
    Big Huge Games Supports AGEIA PhysX Chip - briefly (May 11 2005)
    AGEIA Physics Processing Unit Q&A - interview (Apr 14 2005)
    Epic Games' Tim Sweeney On Ageia PhysX - interview (Mar 09 2005)
    AGEIA PhysX Interview - interview (Mar 09 2005)

    related cheats/trainer:

    no results found


     External links