Skip to main content

AMD: Developers Use PhysX Only For The Cash

In a recent interview with THINQ, AMD’s senior manager of developer relations Richard Huddy slammed Nvidia and its PhysX technology, claiming that the rival company is forcefully shoving the technology down cash-strapped developer throats and paying them off at the same time. Huddy claims that Nvidia's marketing deal gives it the right to implement PhysX elements into a game whether the developer wants it or not.

According to the interview, Huddy spends a lot of time with developers and has concluded that most do not want Nvidia involved in game development. "The problem with [the marketing deal] is obviously that the game developer doesn’t actually want it," he said. "They’re not doing it because they want it; they’re doing it because they’re paid to do it. So we have a rather artificial situation at the moment where you see PhysX in games, but it isn’t because the game developer wants it in there."

Huddy goes on to claim that developers outside Epic Games don't want to implement GPU-accelerated PhysX into their games. "I’m not aware of any GPU-accelerated PhysX code which is there because the games developer wanted it with the exception of the Unreal stuff," he added. "I don’t know of any games company that’s actually said 'you know what, I really want GPU-accelerated PhysX, I’d like to tie myself to Nvidia and that sounds like a great plan.'"

Of course, Huddy also thinks that AMD's open approach to GPU-accelerated physics will eventually force Nvidia's proprietary PhysX into the virtual graveyard along with A3D and the infamous GLide API. "If you go back ten years or so to when GLide was there as a proprietary 3D graphics API, it could have coexisted, but instead of putting their effort into getting D3D to go well, 3dfx focused on GLide," he said. "As a result, they found themselves competing with a proprietary standard against an open standard, and they lost. It's the way it is with many of the standards we work with."

To read more, check out the interview here.

  • Hilarion
    Not surprising since Nvidia seems to be falling behind and grasping at straws to catch up...
    Reply
  • dman3k
    Wait... Didn't DirectX won over OpenGL???
    Reply
  • victomofreality
    Sounds like PR to me but it does have a valid point, why limit yourself more then you have to especially with the gpu manufacturer that is 6 months behind?
    Reply
  • Lutfij
    i agree , they have nothing better to do than come out with a renamed/revamped version of their older chips...shame...just a waste of resources!
    Reply
  • drfdisk
    When the 5870s came out I was more than happy to jump ship to ATI because of practices like this. At the very least they could allow an Nvidia card running PhysX to do so in the same system that has another brand card running graphics. They are doing nothing but hurting their customers and reputation. We all see how far they got with SLI only running on nforce boards.
    Reply
  • sliem
    Title is somewhat misleading.
    Reply
  • OvrClkr
    I dont think is relevant at all, its not like PhysX is actually going to boost sales. Price to performance is what matters not PhysX. NV is behind ATM, PhysX is not going to save the company, lower pricing and not screwing up is what they should be focusing on.



    Reply
  • ohim
    oh and waiting for fermi to go out so my next radeo 5xxx card can get cheaper.
    Reply
  • Nvidia just cant keep up with the rate at which ATI pumps out new cards. In order for Nvidia to keep its customer base from switching, its hamstringing ATI's cards by paying game developers to simply not fully support ati's hardware capabilities. The game utilizes the gpu hardware. If nvidia controls the game developer, they will never have to worry about ATI becoming "king of the hill" in the gpu world.
    Reply
  • Drag0nR1der
    umm, so? The developer gets some cash, and Nvidia users get some extra fizz and pop in their games.. sounds like win win to me.
    Reply