new physics card should speed up PCs all around

[morbidangel]

check this site out
includes demos
www.ageia.com

 

[morbidangel]

only thing is no pictures of the actual hardware. ;(
I am thinking about investing in this company, but they will probably be bought out by nvidia or creative.

 

[Action_Man]

No.

Some people are like slinkies....
Not really good for anything but you cant help smile when you see one tumble down the stairs.

 

[dinoshan]

Wouldn't they pay good when a buyout occurs? So why not buy then?

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Welcome to 6 months ago. Repost of a repost of a repost.

</font color=white><b><font color=red>■ ■ <font color=blue>■ ■ <font color=orange>■ ■ <font color=green>■ ■ </font color=green>■ ■ </font color=orange>■ ■ </font color=blue>■ ■</font color=red></b>

 

[mofofosho]

think asus touting one this upcoming winter solstice (yay!)...wait and see to take stock though...i hear nvidia too vieing for a "sudden" possibility in incorporating "similar" technologies...a hybrid mayhaps?

 

[mpasternak]

I'm actually going to make an argument against a "pysicks" chip.

whats the purpose of one? to parellel some of the processing needed to computate a lot of the newer pysichs in games.

wouldnt a dual core processor be sufficient if a game was coded for it properly?

send all pysichs related stuff to CPU 1 and everything else to CPU 2... same idea isnt it?

 

[Animefreak]

no that woun't work you would require a dedicated processor to do most of the work and cpu don't make up near enough processing power to get the job done from my understanding the cpu job is to load the game and take care of information sorting gpu is the graphics and the phyics chip will take care of the phyics.

The cpu could do it but why have it do it when you have a dedicated physic chip to do it plus not much burden on the cpu

 

[knownalien]

I think by the time these physics chips or cards make it to the table, the stuff they were competing with (graphics cards technology and even CPUs) will work very effectively without such a need for a seperate card, but if they want to make one to occupy a friggin PCI-e X1 slot then by all means do it!

K8T NeoFIS2R
Athlon 64bit 3400
2X1024 OCZ DDR400
Maxtor 40, 120
Western Digital Raptor 74 Gig
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro
NEC LCD Monitor 1760NX
Antec Tru Power 550
Windows XP

 

[Gamer_369]

I think it's very interesting to see this technology surface as it proves we're moving ahead indeed with game graphics and the realism they can come to. But I don't know if we'll start to see a clear blow of performance and graphics with games releasing later this year that use a PPU, like Aegia is claiming. I believe some game titles may show a nice boost in realism, but I think if anything, it will take a while for game developers to catch on with the whole PPU idea. In other words, I'd wait probably until next year before the core element of a PPU is shown in game titles.

A CPU only does general processing, while a PPU is specificly designed for processing physics, and so in that aspect is much more efficient than a single core cpu would be.

<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21648" target="_new">http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21648</A>

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Gamer_369 on 09/30/05 07:43 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[Gamer_369]

Graphics cards do not process hardware-accelerated physics , and I don't forsee the jump in doing so anytime soon, or even at all to the degree the PPU can do such.

And perhaps a multi-core cpu could dismiss the need for any PPU, but we've yet to see this test, and it might be a while as we're only making our way to dual-core at the moment.