Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD and Intel unite against NVIDIA PhysX

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a b U Graphics card
March 23, 2009 1:10:40 AM

Trust me, the game which will determine the fate of PhysX will be Backbreaker (which I'm assuiming we'll be getting news on later this month...)

http://xbox360.ign.com/dor/objects/958004/backbreaker/v...

^^ The Tackle Alley vid; this was from a build PRIOR to PhysX being implemented. Havok simply can't do what PhysX can.

Hovok is good at rudimentary physics, but simply isn't powerful enough to handle full real-time effects with more than a few objects at any one time. PhysX is a full API, and I feel it will do the same thing a unified GFX API (Glide, D3D, and later OGL) did for graphics.
March 23, 2009 1:21:42 AM

...."Against NVIDIA PhysX is currently the competition is not yet grown herb."

LOL

I read about Nvidia's agreement with Nintendo the other day. The funniest part about that is the Wii uses an ATI GPU.
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
March 23, 2009 11:42:58 AM

Again, theres nothing stopping the API from being used on ATI cards, except that NVIDA owns it, and ATI doesn't want to pay to use it.
March 23, 2009 4:48:55 PM

gamerk316 said:
Again, theres nothing stopping the API from being used on ATI cards, except that NVIDA owns it, and ATI doesn't want to pay to use it.

wrong
AMD/ATI not support PhysX because it owned to nVIDIA
and AMD Know if they Accept nVIDIA offer to make PhysX work in there GPU's
That's Makes nVIDIA PhysX The Must ruling Physics Engine..
this Gift AMD will not give to nVIDIA ..
AMD had always saying we will support Havok Physic Engine all time's and that's what happened ..





a c 130 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
March 23, 2009 4:55:24 PM

PhysX feels like a fad to me, its implementation is less than perfect which goes for havock as well.
Im thinking its going to take a differant aproach from either company before its a real issue that card buyers need to consider.

Mactronix
March 23, 2009 5:05:42 PM

I for 1 am very happy with Havok, and don;'t need 100% realism, I mean it still is a video game:D 
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
March 23, 2009 6:55:44 PM

yes i get your point, of the two i favour Havok, Physx seems like its trying too hard sometimes, extra bits flying around for the sake of it type thing.

Mactronix
March 23, 2009 7:04:48 PM

yup, think of this 2, what sells more exclusives or crossplatoforms?:D 

PhysX doesn't revolutionize anything, I mean if it didn't decrease frames at all then I might be favour it:) 

But even then its exclusivity kills the possible chances of it hitting the market as a big success.

IMO that is:p 
a b U Graphics card
March 23, 2009 7:05:22 PM

Regardless of physx being offered to ATI or not, its always going to be optimized for nVidia anyways, so why take second best?
I agree, we need something that makes all gpus have to be compliant, with no regards to current arch
March 23, 2009 8:51:51 PM

The GPU in the Wii uses customized shaders, it can use anything and everything by anything and everything. The GPU isnt even actually developed by ATI, it was developed by a company that ATI bought and they just slapped the ATI logo on it for marketing.

Havok vs PhysX has nothing to do with it. Supporting one or the other isnt even a problem. I just think its ironic that a system with a GPU tagged as "ATI" has opened its arms to an Nvidia owned API.
March 23, 2009 10:07:06 PM

.....I couldnt even understand the translation........
March 23, 2009 10:59:00 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Regardless of physx being offered to ATI or not, its always going to be optimized for nVidia anyways, so why take second best?

taht's what i'm trying to say ..ATI won't to have PhysX that work on nVIDIA GPU better.
same thing with Havok FX if Larrabee come out ..could that happen with Intel ..except if there is previous Agreement between Intel and AMD about it :whistle:  .
boudy said:
.....I couldnt even understand the translation........
this could be better http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2009/03/20/amd-to...
a b U Graphics card
March 24, 2009 11:23:09 AM

Didn't Havok FX get canceled?

And yes, PhysX implementations have been bad thus far, but thats been because nothing has been created using PhysX first, just as an add-on layer. Backbreaker will be the first game truly designed with PhysX as part of its base engine, and will show exactly what PhysX can do.

We are fast hitting a limit on what graphical effects we can add without killing the GPU in the process. Its time to move beyond graphics, and start to implement fully interactive physics.
!