It is currently Mon Aug 20, 2018 10:03 am


Post a new topicPost a reply Page 1 of 1   [ 6 posts ]
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 3:53 am 
TCT Member

Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 3:42 am
Posts: 1
Jnathus and Anthony,

Here's an idea for a future podcast or shortwave. Users on other forums have asked about PhysX and if they'll need to purchase Ageia's PPU. Perhaps you can talk about Ageia, PhysX the software and the need for or advantages of installing their PPU.

As a mostly MacOS user I know you don't need the card to run games that use PhysX, but I don't know what I may be missing by not being able to purchase Ageia's PPU. Do developers have to build different capabilities into Mac OS and Windows versions of games, for example? If there's any way to present the information in the context of Uru that would be most helpful, but perhaps not possible at this time.

Lial


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:16 am 
User avatar
Site Admin

Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 12:36 pm
Posts: 854
Location: Warren, MI
Uru Live KI: 171075
Title: 2011 Camaro 2LT - 312 horsepower - enough to pull YOUR wagon!
That's not a bad idea at all Lial. I've followed the PhysX PPU, the engine it employs, and quite a few reviews on how effective it is.

The only problem is that we have the next 2 TCT Tech segments mapped out, possibly 3, so we may not get to it until September or later.

It's definitely a good idea.

J'nathus


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 5:17 am 
TCT Member

Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2005 12:46 pm
Posts: 224
Location: Plymouth, UK
I'm still waiting for them to just mount this PPU on the motherboard

_________________
<a href="http://www.TheCavernToday.org" target="_blank">Image</a>


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:23 pm 
TCT Member

Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 11:17 am
Posts: 55
Location: Wherever I am, there I am.
I doubt that will happen... not everyone wants it, and from what I've read it's not very effective. There's also argument over how to do it--separate physics card or processed through the graphics chips--and also some deeper arguments about the pysics itself. It'll be a while before this settles down, I think.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 2:48 pm 
User avatar
Site Admin

Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 12:36 pm
Posts: 854
Location: Warren, MI
Uru Live KI: 171075
Title: 2011 Camaro 2LT - 312 horsepower - enough to pull YOUR wagon!
We have dual-core processors, and before long we'll have quad-core processors. It'll reach a point where it simply isn't necessary to have dedicated audio or physics cards because those tasks can be delegated to one or more of the other CPU cores.

However, I think it's a subject that's worth looking into, and Anthony and I are planning to do some research there. I know that the difference hasn't been marked, but many people don't see a marked difference with Antialiasing on or off, but there indeed is one.

J'nathus


Last edited by Jnathus on Mon Aug 07, 2006 3:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:37 pm 
User avatar
Site Admin

Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 12:36 pm
Posts: 854
Location: Warren, MI
Uru Live KI: 171075
Title: 2011 Camaro 2LT - 312 horsepower - enough to pull YOUR wagon!
<! :orange--> "color:orange"><!--/ >Almost completely in line with what I was thinking, see this article from <a href="http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34859" target="_blank">Theinquirer.net</a>:

<!--colorc--> <!--/colorc--><! :red--> "color:red"><!--/ >INTEL showed a rather interesting game simulation demo at the show that brings the Core 2 Quad to its knees. The CPU utilisation goes to 90 per cent on all four cores but can perform 200 frames per second (FPS). A single thread takes some 50 FPS under the same game.

The demo is a castle make of bricks and big blocks and you can destroy it with cannon. The castle has 5,000 blocks and each one can interact with each other. This is very expensive as it takes a lot of calculations. Intel doesn’t use Ageia - it uses some other proprietary physics engine. The more objects you have on the scene, the less performance you have from the real physical objects. If you use 10,000 blocks the performance becomes tragic.

All of the next gen consoles and computer are multi core, so you have to think multi threading. More and more games will have to start using multi threaded code. Soon after dual core, we are in the dawn of quad core and we will get even more cores down the road. But it is not easy to do multitasking and Intel proved that ages ago with hyperthreading.<!--colorc--> <!--/colorc--><! :orange--> "color:orange"><!--/ >

I'm not Intel's biggest fan, especially after the Pentium 4 that they foisted on us . . . but Intel DOES have the speed crown right now, and if their move to Quad-core allows physics to be left to the CPU (where it's always been), I'm all for it. Assuming ALL games were to use PhysX in the near future (unlikely though it is), I still doubt the probability of a $250.00 'gotta have it' PhysX card.

J'nathus
<!--colorc--> <!--/colorc-->


Last edited by Jnathus on Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post a new topicPost a reply Page 1 of 1   [ 6 posts ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons By-NC-ND 3.0 License. Powered by phpBB