AMD Announces Open Physics Initiative

[Sylvanas]

This is excellent, I hope the devs get on board this soon and that they are not slapped over the head by Nvidia in doing so. OpenCL + Direct compute are by far the best way to go when it comes to things like physics.

 

[IlllI]

didn't ati partner with havok? what happened with that?

 

[novasatori]

Originally posted by: GaiaHunter

Originally posted by: Red Storm
I still need to see actual game play changes due to physics before I get excited over it. Mirror's Edge and Batman: AA are all just visual features.

Probably you didn't see many improvements with physX because it is really a closed standard and no console uses it, if I'm not mistaken.

physx is available and used on every console

 

[Modular]

Very cool. I hope it takes off as they seem to want to work with other platforms and other companies to ensure that the industry benefits from the development of the coding.

 

[s44]

Originally posted by: dguy6789

Originally posted by: Shaq
Nvidia can still pay devs to put physx in and lock this out. I don't see it changing anything.

What will a developer be more likely to use, a physics API that works on Nvidia cards or a physics API that works on all video cards? PhysX has been going downhill for a while, and like all proprietary niche technologies like it(Glide, Truform, etc..) PhysX is going to be forgotten in history in time.

Wishful thinking.

The most likely outcome of this, if it gets any traction, is Nvidia opening PhysX as well. This is good.

 

[dev0lution]

Originally posted by: GaiaHunter

Originally posted by: Red Storm
I still need to see actual game play changes due to physics before I get excited over it. Mirror's Edge and Batman: AA are all just visual features.

Probably you didn't see many improvements with physX because it is really a closed standard and no console uses it, if I'm not mistaken.

You are mistaken. PS3, Wii and Xbox all can use PhysX libraries - just not GPU accelerated like on the PC.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: novasatori

Originally posted by: GaiaHunter

Originally posted by: Red Storm
I still need to see actual game play changes due to physics before I get excited over it. Mirror's Edge and Batman: AA are all just visual features.

Probably you didn't see many improvements with physX because it is really a closed standard and no console uses it, if I'm not mistaken.

physx is available and used on every console

But does the physx diver lock itself if detects a non-nvidia gpu? Or did Nvidia forget that the Xbox360 and the Wii use an Ati gpu?

 

[tommo123]

won't all this be decided by the next gen consoles? e.g if ATi hardware runs the next xbox like the current 360 and ATi pushes this open standard, then won't that become the standard used in PC games? assuming future games will be console ports again like the current status quo

whereas if Nvidia has the hardware in the next xbox, then ........

(assuming the xbox is 1st to market again)

 

[thilanliyan]

I don't think the Wii uses PhysX does it?

 

[mmnno]

How is this announcement any different than the one they made re: Havok right after nVidia bought Ageia? This is ATi announcing that they don't have a product for the second time.

 

[novasatori]

Originally posted by: thilanliyan
I don't think the Wii uses PhysX does it?

yes there are games on the wii that use physx and a physx SDK for wii

its available on all current generation consoles and the wii (since it doesn't count as current gen :laugh: )

 

[Sylvanas]

Originally posted by: thilanliyan
I don't think the Wii uses PhysX does it?

Some games use the PhysX libraries as nvidia allow devs to use the PhysX SDK for free, but it's not GPU accelerated like some games on the PC. So you won't be seeing special effects on consoles because of PhysX.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: sbuckler
http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15642/1/

http://www.hitechlegion.com/ou...gpu-and-open-cl-part-3

Reading the second link (hitechletion.com) I don't understand ATI's Dave Hoff's statement in reply to Erwin Coumans statements.

Erwin Coumans: "We develop on NVidia Geforce, but we also work and test OpenCL on AMD GPU and CPU and other hardware,
to make sure Bullet OpenCL version runs fine on all platforms."
and
"We develop on NVidia GPU, because our Macbook PRO is equipped with the 9400/9600M. Also the NVidia SDK example code has been very useful."

Dave Hoff's reply for these comments was "Erwin would not know because he is irrelevant and ATI has their own team from Bullet working with them."

Erwin Coumans is the creator/author of the bullet physics library. How is that irrelevant?

 

[Minas]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: sbuckler
http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15642/1/

http://www.hitechlegion.com/ou...gpu-and-open-cl-part-3

Reading the second link (hitechletion.com) I don't understand ATI's Dave Hoff's statement in reply to Erwin Coumans statements.

Erwin Coumans: "We develop on NVidia Geforce, but we also work and test OpenCL on AMD GPU and CPU and other hardware,
to make sure Bullet OpenCL version runs fine on all platforms."
and
"We develop on NVidia GPU, because our Macbook PRO is equipped with the 9400/9600M. Also the NVidia SDK example code has been very useful."

Dave Hoff's reply for these comments was "Erwin would not know because he is irrelevant and ATI has their own team from Bullet working with them."

Erwin Coumans is the creator/author of the bullet physics library. How is that irrelevant?

In my experience, marketing people are terrible at giving useful answers on technical topics. Clearly David Hoff is no better.

The whole article is a rambling mess of suppositions from non-information, though I think consumers should share his concern about the emergence of multiple sdks.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Minas

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: sbuckler
http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15642/1/

http://www.hitechlegion.com/ou...gpu-and-open-cl-part-3

Reading the second link (hitechletion.com) I don't understand ATI's Dave Hoff's statement in reply to Erwin Coumans statements.

Erwin Coumans: "We develop on NVidia Geforce, but we also work and test OpenCL on AMD GPU and CPU and other hardware,
to make sure Bullet OpenCL version runs fine on all platforms."
and
"We develop on NVidia GPU, because our Macbook PRO is equipped with the 9400/9600M. Also the NVidia SDK example code has been very useful."

Dave Hoff's reply for these comments was "Erwin would not know because he is irrelevant and ATI has their own team from Bullet working with them."

Erwin Coumans is the creator/author of the bullet physics library. How is that irrelevant?

In my experience, marketing people are terrible at giving useful answers on technical topics. Clearly David Hoff is no better.

The whole article is a rambling mess of suppositions from non-information, though I think consumers should share his concern about the emergence of multiple sdks.

Rambling mess of suppostions from non-information. Got it.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: IlllI
didn't ati partner with havok? what happened with that?

Exactly.

Until an actual game comes out with this.....it's just another paper launch.

 

[Minas]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: Minas

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: sbuckler
http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15642/1/

http://www.hitechlegion.com/ou...gpu-and-open-cl-part-3

Reading the second link (hitechletion.com) I don't understand ATI's Dave Hoff's statement in reply to Erwin Coumans statements.

Erwin Coumans: "We develop on NVidia Geforce, but we also work and test OpenCL on AMD GPU and CPU and other hardware,
to make sure Bullet OpenCL version runs fine on all platforms."
and
"We develop on NVidia GPU, because our Macbook PRO is equipped with the 9400/9600M. Also the NVidia SDK example code has been very useful."

Dave Hoff's reply for these comments was "Erwin would not know because he is irrelevant and ATI has their own team from Bullet working with them."

Erwin Coumans is the creator/author of the bullet physics library. How is that irrelevant?

In my experience, marketing people are terrible at giving useful answers on technical topics. Clearly David Hoff is no better.

The whole article is a rambling mess of suppositions from non-information, though I think consumers should share his concern about the emergence of multiple sdks.

Rambling mess of suppostions from non-information. Got it.

So you actually learned something from it? We already knew nvidia's was the only gpu sdk out there, we know a guy who's spent the last 10 years on physics engines is... working on physics engines, and we know a bunch of people won't tell us anything because they either have NDAs or are just being plain evasive.

 

[GaiaHunter]

Originally posted by: dev0lution

Originally posted by: GaiaHunter

Originally posted by: Red Storm
I still need to see actual game play changes due to physics before I get excited over it. Mirror's Edge and Batman: AA are all just visual features.

Probably you didn't see many improvements with physX because it is really a closed standard and no console uses it, if I'm not mistaken.

You are mistaken. PS3, Wii and Xbox all can use PhysX libraries - just not GPU accelerated like on the PC.

I meant GPU accelerated. Other games also use different physics effects that just aren't accelerated by the GPU.

Isn't the supposed advantage of physX to have those effects accelerated by the GPU so they could be more realistic/impressive?

Physics effects non-accelerated by GPU existed long before physX.

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: IlllI
didn't ati partner with havok? what happened with that?

Exactly.

Until an actual game comes out with this.....it's just another paper launch.

Havok is Intel...

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: GaiaHunter

Originally posted by: dev0lution

Originally posted by: GaiaHunter

Originally posted by: Red Storm
I still need to see actual game play changes due to physics before I get excited over it. Mirror's Edge and Batman: AA are all just visual features.

Probably you didn't see many improvements with physX because it is really a closed standard and no console uses it, if I'm not mistaken.

You are mistaken. PS3, Wii and Xbox all can use PhysX libraries - just not GPU accelerated like on the PC.

I meant GPU accelerated. Other games also use different physics effects that just aren't accelerated by the GPU.

Isn't the supposed advantage of physX to have those effects accelerated by the GPU so they could be more realistic/impressive?

Physics effects non-accelerated by GPU existed long before physX.

Lets see, xBox uses an ATI GPU, The Wii isnt even high def, and the PS3 uses a 7900 series GPU. I highly doubt any of those have the power or potential to run physX on a GPU. I do however expect the next generation to be able to.

 

[GaiaHunter]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: GaiaHunter

Originally posted by: dev0lution

Originally posted by: GaiaHunter

Originally posted by: Red Storm
I still need to see actual game play changes due to physics before I get excited over it. Mirror's Edge and Batman: AA are all just visual features.

Probably you didn't see many improvements with physX because it is really a closed standard and no console uses it, if I'm not mistaken.

You are mistaken. PS3, Wii and Xbox all can use PhysX libraries - just not GPU accelerated like on the PC.

I meant GPU accelerated. Other games also use different physics effects that just aren't accelerated by the GPU.

Isn't the supposed advantage of physX to have those effects accelerated by the GPU so they could be more realistic/impressive?

Physics effects non-accelerated by GPU existed long before physX.

Lets see, xBox uses an ATI GPU, The Wii isnt even high def, and the PS3 uses a 7900 series GPU. I highly doubt any of those have the power or potential to run physX on a GPU. I do however expect the next generation to be able to.

Yep, physX - or its GPU accelerated variant - is basically useless at this time. The library of effects can be useful for devs, but before it games already had physics effects.

I also expect the next generation of consoles to be able to take advantage of DX11 (or at least the xbox).

Considering the above and that the consensus (or at least so it seems when talking about DX11) of this forum is that if a feature isn't being utilized by the consoles now it is largely useless to the PC gaming industry since what moves the Gaming Industry is the consoles, I would say that stating that people can't really expect earth shattering effects due to physX at the present is a valid statement.

 

[IlllI]

Originally posted by: T2k
Havok is Intel...

yes. that does not take away from the fact that they still partnered with them.

but i seem to have found the answer maybe http://news.softpedia.com/news...celeration-89151.shtml

 

[T2k]

OT

Originally posted by: Genx87
"Capitalism is the unequal distribution of wealth. Socialism is the equal distribution of poverty"

Failure of Public Education

There's always a deeper meaning, often contrary to the original intent, isn't there?

Priceless, they are..