1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Nvidia acquires Ageia

Discussion in 'Graphics Cards' started by EastCoasthandle, Feb 4, 2008.

  1. EastCoasthandle

    EastCoasthandle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,889 (2.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,505
    ccleorina says thanks.
  2. ccleorina

    ccleorina New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2007
    Messages:
    195 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10
    Location:
    Overclocking Hell
    Wow.....:eek: That nice to know...:rockout:
  3. panchoman

    panchoman Sold my stars!

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,595 (3.70/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,200
    not good for amd...
  4. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,668 (7.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,980
    Location:
    some AF base
    didnt ati already have phsyx anyway? there was that big thing about using an X1K card for phsyx and 2 others for xfire?
  5. Xazax

    Xazax

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,415 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    398
    Well damn i feel sorry for all those people who bought a PhysX card cuz now its dead lmao, maybe we now will start seeing GPUs and PPUs, much like a dual GPU board on one PCB much like the HD 3870x2?
  6. ccleorina

    ccleorina New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2007
    Messages:
    195 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10
    Location:
    Overclocking Hell
    You right man:rockout:
  7. panchoman

    panchoman Sold my stars!

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,595 (3.70/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,200
    agreed.


    ageia= physx cards for those that dont know..
  8. EastCoasthandle

    EastCoasthandle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,889 (2.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,505
    I really don't see the advantage of this. As we see the prospects of dual core GPU solutions in our near future this will become less of a problem. Also, another issue is having dev teams specifically code for specific physics. When we reach heights of Force Unleashed will we see how seamlessly this added benefit is.


    This games uses:
    Havok (underline physics system, moving several objects at one time)
    Euphoria (bio-mechanical AI, behavioral AI, AKA: storm troopers)
    DMM= Digital Molecular Matter (glass shatters, wood splinters, metal bends, etc)

    As you can see, it doesn't look like Ageia was used to create/develop this game. What's odd about this is it was created on the PC for console but I haven't come across what hardware was used as of yet. Nor is a PPU needed to play this game on the console (from what I know).
  9. Ripper3

    Ripper3 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    1,386 (0.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    117
    Location:
    London, England
    No, that was the other Physics engine, I believe it was Havoc? Unsure. That was bought out by Intel, and before that, they gave a lot of technical help to both Nvidia and ATi (they didn't make their own devices, but with graphics cards doing physics, why make their own expensive, and almost useless device, when they can simply offer greater compability with hardware from other manufacturers)
    This is really going to break AMD if physics in PCs finally takes off, and becoems more mainstream, to have a device in the PC to do physics calculations. Intel owns one, Nvidia owns the other. Both have different techniques and support, and both are against AMD in some way.
    Then again, it might be a case of early adoption of technology. Didn't graphics hardware evolve in this way, by companies making different APIs, and so on, but now we have OpenGL and DirectX, which are the most well known standards for graphics. This is probably what the Physics processing world needs. We'll eventually get there like this.
    In about ten years, Physics processing will likely be mainstream for gaming, and we'll have PPUs that abide by various different standards.
  10. bud951

    bud951 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Messages:
    218 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    I have one but stopped using it due to heat issues. I dont mind as long as we start to see video cards with the physics processor built on.
  11. EastCoasthandle

    EastCoasthandle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,889 (2.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,505
    :confused:
    I really don't understand this post. A dual core gpu is capable of what a PPU/GPU can offer. When you look at Force unleashed which Uses:
    Havoc (phyiscs for objects)
    Euphoria (AI behavior)
    DMM (destructions of objects)
    where is the PPU needed to do this?
  12. Ripper3

    Ripper3 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    1,386 (0.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    117
    Location:
    London, England
    Nvidia is going to try and bait AMD graphics card customers to Nvidia graphics, just for the PPU on-board, or integrated, or the exclusivity of using the Ageia software, which will likely now be tailored over time, to use Nvidia GPUs.
    Intel will bait AMD CPU customers to Intel CPUs for much the same reason, the fact that their Havok physics engine will be tailored more and more for Intel CPUs.
    Eventually, there will come a time when users will not budge, meaning that either Nvidia or Intel will need to budge, and start offering compatibility, otherwise AMD will need to offer their own-brand physics. At this point, the companies will likely start offering inter-compatibility, or better yet (to keep the profit margins up) their own seperate hardware.
    Therefore, PPUs will come back around, most likely.

    Offering PPUs, rather than offloading the work to other components already in use, means that those components won't be over-burdened by the work when it's extremely intensive. For example; imagine Half-Life 3 if you will. Imagine it has the latest physics engine, along with the latest graphics engine technologies, and is a very hard game to render, with a lot of work and strain for the CPU, GPU and PPU (if any).
    Even with these dual-core GPUs/multi-GPU setups, the GPUs could be over-loaded with work, specifically at higher resolutions, with higher settings. How would they be able to efficiently work out the Physics, and destruction of objects, while simultaneously being able to put all of that on-screen? I'd say it would still be a hard task.

    I still think, yes, GPU and PPU in one is a good idea, but frankly, I'd like a GPU that can handle the graphics, without being bogged down by working out all of the physics at the same time.


    Oh, and just to re-iterate the first point, either way, AMD would be screwed, unless the Havok and/or Ageia PhysX engines were opened up to it, and I must say, that would likely mean that seperate PPUs might end up being released anyhow, so that AMD users don't suffer, but the other two companies can still earn profits.
  13. calvary1980

    calvary1980 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Messages:
    1,801 (0.74/day)
    Thanks Received:
    310
    Location:
    Toronto, CA
  14. WarEagleAU

    WarEagleAU Bird of Prey

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    10,796 (3.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    545
    Location:
    Gurley, AL
    I had real high hopes for a physics accelerator. Unfortunately, it didnt catch on nearly enough. Whats interesting to note is, ATI and Nvidia both are in the process of making use of 3 cards, with 2 for video and one for physics processing. Pretty weird to be honest.

    Also, I was hoping Physics cards would use the PCI e 4x or 1x slots. Give them a use really without taking out a pci slot for sound or whatever.
  15. AddSub

    AddSub

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,001 (0.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    152
    They can keep it. I mean, I never saw a difference between Ageia cards and a pair of bright red neon lights for your case. They were always something of a flashy status item. 5-10 years from now a PPU might be a necessity, who knows. But right now, they are largely useless.
  16. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,668 (7.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,980
    Location:
    some AF base
    can i bring up the fact yet again that Ati has said that any X1k card can function as a ppu? why is this bad for Ati?
  17. Xazax

    Xazax

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,415 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    398
    Because they dont make the X1k card any more haha heck they are now @ 2 generations ahead....
  18. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,668 (7.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,980
    Location:
    some AF base
    well if it worked for the x1k cards why do you think you cant just get a 2400 adn throw it in as a ppu?
  19. Morgoth

    Morgoth

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2007
    Messages:
    3,795 (1.47/day)
    Thanks Received:
    250
    Location:
    Netherlands
    wont work since intel buyed havok ati droped the ppu idea
  20. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,367 (11.31/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,607
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    Bad for AMD. With Havoc working closely with Intel and NVidia acquiring Ageia. Now we could just see the incorporation of the API into NVidia's GPU based physics processing. The PhysX processor could be either burried or could see video cards with PhysX processor on the PCB??

    I almost cried when NVidia took over ULi. They were doing very good with the chipset and I thought here's a chipset that can bring NForce down (Back in the socket 939 days).:shadedshu
  21. Ripper3

    Ripper3 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    1,386 (0.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    117
    Location:
    London, England
    Yeh, that's why you might not have heard anything else about physics on GPU from ATi.
    CustomPC quoted a rep (can't remember if it's AMD or Nvidia) saying that pre-Intel, Havok was really helpful, and gave an awful lot of information, but now that Intel bought it, there's been no more coomunication between Havok and the graphics companies.
  22. EastCoasthandle

    EastCoasthandle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,889 (2.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,505
    Ok, I understand your POV now. I honestly don't think AMD is screwed by this because in order to prevent a CPU/GPU or dual GPU from doing what a PPU can do you would have to make the game only work with that hardware (as we see it now with games like GRAW/GRAW2). Doing this in the PC gaming market won't offer a lot of revenue for the devy team IMO. However, if you remember someone was able to enable most of the PPU features via CPU (if you had a CPU powerful enough to do it).

    I still believe it's inevitable that we will see dual GPU dies and with Intel's Nethalem at the horizon it going to be tough to market PPU video card that is better then average. In all likelihood it's going to be a tough sell by then. If it was available now it would be a different story. But I honestly don't see this happen before the release of the R700 and Nethalem CPUs. Also, I am seeing more and more games that are being optimized with Intel (do they have a website with a list of games yet). But time will tell.

    :)
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2008
  23. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,367 (11.31/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,607
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    Wait a minute. Havoc is neutral to CPU vendor. Of course they're working 'closely' with Intel but a Phenom will give a Havoc based game such as Alan Wake the same advantages of a dedicated core for physics processing as in an Intel quad.
  24. Ripper3

    Ripper3 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    1,386 (0.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    117
    Location:
    London, England
    Hmmm, then maybe Intel is just getting Havok to better advance its support for physics processing maybe?
    I dunno their real reasons, but frankly, thinking back on it, just by making it a closed platform would cut revenue by a huge amount. People would vote with their wallets. Really, what would be the point of closing physics anyhow? It's simple enough to program physics into a game yourself, as long as you have a good grasp of the concepts, and of programming.
    I think I was rushing into it, but really, you can still see how AMD could end up being seriously screwed by the two major physics companies in the industry being bought by its rivals.
    Plus, a transition to a market-place held by Nvidia and Intel would take years, so AMd would still be able to make something of it. Like I said above, programming physics probably doesn't take much.
  25. BullGod

    BullGod New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2007
    Messages:
    412 (0.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    31
    Location:
    Medias City
    I highly doubt that.

    Anyways this was bound to happen. Ageia were in it for the money and nothing else. Now they got what they wanted: milions of dollars. The question is: will Nvidia really use this thing or did they just eliminate some competition?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page