PDA

View Full Version : PhysX Chip AGEIA (PPU), GR3, anyone know anymore about this new technology?



ZA_Corax
05-25-2005, 12:55 PM
"Ghost Recon will be using AGEIA technology to increase the realism of its combat environments..." (http://www.ferrago.com/story/5774)

I've read this article about this new PhysX chip, anyone seen this on E&sup3 2005? I'm really curious about this new technology... and anyone know when it is slated for manufacturing I've read that ASUS has agreed to support it. I believe its gonna come in several flavors first PCI and eventually PCIe...

Anyone?

davidz021
05-25-2005, 02:20 PM
Originally posted by ZA_Corax:
I believe its gonna come in several flavors first PCI and eventually PCIe...


I'm sure you meant to say "first AGP and eventually PCI-Express"...

Alex_HS
05-25-2005, 02:55 PM
AGP? Where would he put his video card then lol http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.
All i know about this technology is that it brings revolutionary physics to games and that its supposed to cost 300 something, at release there wont be many games to put it to use and once it starts becoming standard they will problably come up with PPU2, our gaming PC's are about to get more expensive... how and nobody really knows how it will work in MP games, considering the large volume of data transfers originated by this it problably wont even work http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif.

WhiteKnight77
05-25-2005, 03:18 PM
From what I see, it is a PS3 technology and will not play into PC games much.

AlphaDelta219
05-25-2005, 03:31 PM
i remember seeing something about these chips being worthless in a PC.

davidz021
05-25-2005, 06:11 PM
Originally posted by Alex_HS:
AGP? Where would he put his video card then lol http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.


hmm...from my limited knowledge on this new PhysX technology, i always assumed that the PPU would be ON the video card, no? I have never thought that it would be in a seperate part of the PC, like on a PCI card like you are thinking.

But from reading Corax's link, this paragraph:


Along with the announcement of games that will use AGEIA's know-how there came word of the first board partner for their PhysX microchip. Mainboard monster ASUS have confirmed that the two companies are working on a slot in card that will carry the PhysX chip into he hearts of gaming machines. Products are expected to appear around the end of this year.

Seems to indicate that the PhysX component will be in a seperate card...

RWG.Jackal
05-25-2005, 06:17 PM
It goes in a PCI slot.

Alex_HS
05-26-2005, 03:21 AM
Originally posted by WhiteKnight77:
From what I see, it is a PS3 technology and will not play into PC games much.
Seems UE3 has already adopt it, plus if it cost 300 something i dont know how they will throw this into the next generation toys without making them alot more expensive, low price is one of the consoles main advantages.
I think this will allow for some really inovative stuff in the physics department but MP gaming wise i dont expect much out of it, if they wanna sell these they better drop the price significantly..

serbkillovic
05-26-2005, 10:24 AM
it's a seperate card for the PC.
$249 I think was what the guesstimated the price to be when it comes out to market Q4 2005.

They have pics of the card all over the net.

Ed_1
05-26-2005, 01:55 PM
PhysX is supposed to give us:

1000 times more objectives with physical properties. (HL have like 20 to 50 interactive (physics) object in sight (while playing) while with the physX you can have ut to 40000.. (or something) Liquids, tearing clothing (fabrics), rigid and soft body dynamics.. and the list is loooong.
In general: Think of Havok engine.. vs PhysX like Software 3D vs 2 GF 6800U in SLI and there you go..

weeman111111
05-31-2005, 01:31 PM
I thought that the physics in a game was calculated by the CPU while the the rest resolved by the GPU I maybe and quite possible be wrong but if this is the case isnt this likly to be a waste of time with double and triple core processors beginning to be released on the market?

EDIT: I kind of just answered my own question I guess its going to be the same sort of idea as what happened to the graphics card and that is most of the graphics used to be handled by the CPU then they invented the GPU and i guess this is a kind of similar revolution but with physics instead correct?

weeman111111
05-31-2005, 01:38 PM
For those of you that havent found the official site here ya go

http://www.ageia.com/technology.html

ZA_Corax
06-01-2005, 11:33 AM
I found a movie clip of an AEGIA demo on Gamespot...

Clicky Here - AGIEA Tech Demo (http://www.gamespot.com/features/6126660/p-8.html) <-- you can view the stream... really nice effects... something that Havok has been trying to simulate... worth the looksie...

http://img.gamespot.com/gamespot/images/shared/prod_images/8/5/17585_1.jpg

DayGlow
06-01-2005, 01:19 PM
the technology seems promising, but I wonder how long it will last? I'm thinking that once dual core CPUs become common the physics would have it's own thread and a second core would really speed it up. Or does this part make physics that a normal CPU couldn't model possible?

RWG.Jackal
06-01-2005, 02:54 PM
Originally posted by DayGlow:
the technology seems promising, but I wonder how long it will last? I'm thinking that once dual core CPUs become common the physics would have it's own thread and a second core would really speed it up. Or does this part make physics that a normal CPU couldn't model possible?

The problem with Computers rite now is that all componentsa are faster than the CPU.

IE. You Video Card spends alot of time Idle waiting for Instructions from your CPU. If you have a PCIe card and a CPU with a 2000Mghz Frontside bus here would be the problem.

You Video card can recieve instructions at a rate of 16 gigs a second, but you CPU can only send at 2 gigs a second.

The IDea behind this card is to take the "Physics" calculations away from the CPU and put them on a faster bus. This leaves the CPU to only process The transfer of the information.

By adding a good sound card to your system and NOT using onboard sound you will gain 10 to 30 Frames per second depending on your system. Not Using onboard LAN can give you 2 to 5 FPS. This happens because you are taking load of of the CPU.

This new card is working along the same line, take some of the strain of the CPU and you get improved performance.


These Cards are currently Unavailable, but will be out in October or so, They go in a PCI Slot, and soon will be available for PCI express. But since most people will want the PCI Epress slot for a Video Card the PCI cards will be the wy to go, unless they release them in PCIe 1x which would leave the PCIe 16x Slots for Video Cards.

The only real thing these cards will do is add more demention, Say its raining in the game, rather than jut see the rain fall, you would see it hit, and run down the object, you would see splashes on the ground, and puddles would form in low lying spaces. It would also control how objects move by wind, force, etc.

This would also make it possible to have accuracy effected by wind. and Have Bullet a fragmentation ricoche effects. Leave real time foot prints, and blood trails.

DayGlow
06-01-2005, 04:38 PM
I agree that it makes sense with a single thread program and a single CPU. My thoughts are along the lines as dual core CPUs become the norm, to take advantage of them programs will become more and more threaded. A second CPU to crunch physics calculations in a seperate thread may make this card uneccessary.

RWG.Jackal
06-01-2005, 05:22 PM
The AMD Dual core is now available and still only has a FSB of 2000. Only when Processor and bus are equla amounts would this become "Unnecassary" which I wouldnt call this card needed, just a performance enhancer, not a requirement.

DayGlow
06-01-2005, 05:30 PM
I'm not sure how the FSB is limiting physics computations. It would limit the speed to which the CPU will be able to communicate with the card.

The Intel dual cores only communicate through the FSB, but the AMD dual cores have a crossbar link so that the CPUs communicate directly across the die without using the FSB.

weeman111111
06-02-2005, 02:30 PM
would this chip be capable oif doing things outside of a gamin enviroment thught for example could it be used to boost your current CPU in CPU intesive application but outside of a game?

i just wondered because if it can i may consider purchasing one as soon as they come out becaise i was looking to buy one of the newer dual cores when they are realeased.

RWG.Jackal
06-02-2005, 06:27 PM
Toms Hardware has a review of the New AMDs, even though they do increase performance it still leaves the CPU as amajor bottle neck in a gaming enviroment.

The Idea behind the card is to take away physics calculations from the cpu and widiening the battleneck.

The Dual core chip,with a 64bit operating sytem and 64 bit game version, and one of these physics cards will take gaming graphics 4x higher than they are now.

Look at it this way, While running a game you have a GPU capable of recieving 20 pieces of info a cycle, but your currrent AMD cpu can only do 3 a cycle(only 2 on a Pentium 4 a cycle). You upgrade to the new dual core and now you get 7 calculations a cycle, you still have 13 getting dropped that your GPU could use.

Now you toss in the Physics card, it can now take (im just tossing a number out because I havent seen any posted yet) 10 of the calculations and send them to the GPU. Although 3 calculations still go unused, your GPU now gets 17 per cycle, allow you to use mmore of your GPUs potential.

They say we only use 10% of our brain, and if we could use 20% we would be able to do 1000% percent more, same adatage here. You are currently using about 12% of your GPUs potential, imagine if you could get it up to close to 90% usage.

bforte
07-02-2005, 10:49 AM
Graphics processors are designed just for graphics so thier architecture alone allows them to process graphics much faster than a deticated cpu could.

If they standardize a physics interface (directPhysics? OpenPL?) then they could streamline physics calculations in a similar way they do graphics now. So comparing a dedicated physics card to simply running another thread would be like comparing software rendering (on a dedicated thread) to a GPU.

Prozac360
07-02-2005, 10:54 PM
the pysiques looked good but i still noticed a major FPS hit on what ever hardware theyr using.

id say this hardware is cool but it wont be anything worth buying

DayGlow
07-03-2005, 05:52 PM
Originally posted by bforte:
Graphics processors are designed just for graphics so thier architecture alone allows them to process graphics much faster than a deticated cpu could.

If they standardize a physics interface (directPhysics? OpenPL?) then they could streamline physics calculations in a similar way they do graphics now. So comparing a dedicated physics card to simply running another thread would be like comparing software rendering (on a dedicated thread) to a GPU.

Only thing I think of is that the difference between a GPU and a PPU is that the CPU would send data to the GPU over the bus, and the GPU processes it and throws it on the display, my understanding is that it's pretty much one way.

A PPU would need data sent to it, then it would have to send data back along the bus to the CPU or GPU for futher processing. A dual processor setup with a dedicated physics thread would have a much faster interface to send and recieve data.

That's my only concern. I don't want to lay out $200-$300 for a PPU, only to have developers not to support it in the long run because the dual core cpus make it redundant.

Ed_1
07-04-2005, 11:36 AM
Originally posted by DayGlow:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bforte:
Graphics processors are designed just for graphics so thier architecture alone allows them to process graphics much faster than a deticated cpu could.

If they standardize a physics interface (directPhysics? OpenPL?) then they could streamline physics calculations in a similar way they do graphics now. So comparing a dedicated physics card to simply running another thread would be like comparing software rendering (on a dedicated thread) to a GPU.

Only thing I think of is that the difference between a GPU and a PPU is that the CPU would send data to the GPU over the bus, and the GPU processes it and throws it on the display, my understanding is that it's pretty much one way.

A PPU would need data sent to it, then it would have to send data back along the bus to the CPU or GPU for futher processing. A dual processor setup with a dedicated physics thread would have a much faster interface to send and recieve data.

That's my only concern. I don't want to lay out $200-$300 for a PPU, only to have developers not to support it in the long run because the dual core cpus make it redundant. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is like saying: Dualcore will make videocards redundant. PPU can calculate several thousand objects (colitions) pr secound. A cpu can handle 40 to 60 objects. So add one core and you get 80 to 120 objects. and if i remember correct.. PhysX can handle 40 000 objects..... like 333 times faster then a dual core CPU...

DayGlow
07-04-2005, 12:12 PM
but my worry is that the difference between a GPU and PPU are like I said before, the GPU is one way, CPU->GPU->output to screen.

The PPU has to work with the CPU so it could be bottlenecked by the PCI bus. CPU->PPU->CPU->GPU

Also current CPUs can only handle a small number of physics objects because only a single thread can be run at a time and everything has to be balanced.

That's why multi-cores have so much potential. A second core can dedicate itself to a single thread of a multi-threaded program. I'm pretty sure a re-written game engine with multiple threads would run way faster on a dual core cpu than a single core.

The problem today is that multithreaded programing doesn't exist for games yet. That's why the new processors aren't any faster than single core ones. It will change as they become common place.

That's my concern. The PPU will be great for a year or 2, but will it have longer term staying power as multi-core cpus become the norm and games are coded with multiple threads.

I wish someone with greater computer architetural knowladge could put this to rest for me. I hope the PPU works as advertised, I'm just not sold yet. I remember how the first 3d video cards were supposed to make upgrading computers a thing of the past. All you needed was a 486 and a 3d card and it would smoke through any game. Didn't happen.

Ed_1
07-04-2005, 02:37 PM
The PPU will have it's own memory 128 MB GDDR3 so .. PPU = move & interact GPU = draw & display CPU will control it all.. but since data is loaded into the PPU memory there will be no need for huge bandwith.. .. remember.. the CPU isn't capped by bandwith while calculating physics.. it's capped by calculatingpower.. the Rocked demo is like 40 MB's and of the models (1500 bricks) still choke an AMD 64 3000... (( HT at 840 MHz) 3.6 GB/s memory bandwith)

This is what gamedevelopers can do with the PhysX (i guess)

Frag grenades with independent fragments going differently each time. Guns that fire real (virtual) bullets with accurate ballistics and riccochets. So far grenades and bulleets have been just algorithms or scripts. AmericasArmy tried to implement physical bullets but tye had to give it up. We can have totally destructible eviroment. Cloths that ripps. Liquids that act like a liquid.. .. and so on.. The PhysX gives gamedev's almost unlimited physics before it hits the FPS. I just hope they grasp it.. and hopefully it will be standard.

Prozac360
07-04-2005, 05:04 PM
its a nice peice of hardware but i think dayglow is right.... why use the hardware when either way dual cpu with a dedicated thread will most likely peform the same way?

both types need software support dont they?

kainite
07-05-2005, 01:00 AM
I believe you're missing the point here guys. As I understand it the PPU has calculating power unmatched by a dual core system. We're talking about a processor specifically designed and dedicated to calculating physics.

Would even a triple core system make your video card redundant?

Prozac360
07-05-2005, 01:31 AM
Doesnt matter if no one supports it... and im sure nvidia or ati are thinking about pysiques too