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

NVIDIA Announces PhysX and APEX Support for Sony PlayStation 4

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Mar 7, 2013.

  1. tokyoduong

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Messages:
    478 (0.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    119
    PhysX is such a waste of time. I really liked the idea of a cheap PPU. I wished Aegia didn't sell its soul. I was really thinking of buying one until NVIDIA picked it up. Why don't they just make a small chip that can be integrated into any graphics card and just charge a small royalty fee. I just can't see how NVIDIA can win with their current policy.
    With all these new open standards, the BS propriety stuff can only be forced with lots of money. Something that NVIDIA doesn't have a lot of.
  2. okidna

    okidna

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2012
    Messages:
    469 (0.51/day)
    Thanks Received:
    341
    Location:
    Indonesia
    Yes, and probably the latest/newest game (2010) in that list.
  3. TheMailMan78

    TheMailMan78 Big Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    20,855 (8.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,413
    I like PhysX. Adds a lot to games when its hardware accelerated.
  4. TheLaughingMan

    TheLaughingMan

    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    5,067 (2.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,292
    Location:
    Marietta, GA USA
    PhysX actually isn't your post proved that with a total of what, 11 games that use it.
  5. Mindweaver

    Mindweaver Moderato®™ Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    5,139 (2.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,646
    Location:
    Statesville, NC
    I have to agree. I like PhysX and is the main reason I just bought a GTX680. :toast:

    EDIT: Did I tell you I just bought a MSI GTX680 PE? It's out for Delivery. :toast:
    Crunching for Team TPU
  6. HumanSmoke

    HumanSmoke

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,191 (1.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    360
    Can't say the press release was anything other than 1. expected, and 2. standard boilerplate.

    The Unreal engine features prominently in PS4 PR...and Unreal features what physics engine ?...and Nvidia have been listed as a PS4 partner for some time- if they aren't providing hardware for the system, what else would their partnership be offering ?
    Well considering the topic at hand is PS4, then you'd probably need to include console games as well- and since Unreal has PhysX integrated, maybe those eleven titles (????????) need augmenting
    Fluffmeister says thanks.
  7. tokyoduong

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Messages:
    478 (0.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    119
    Yes it does. I don't doubt that. I've seen it in Batman and Mirror's Edge as best use of PhysX. It's a big difference but not exactly a make or break deal in almost all titles. And the problem is that those titles where it worked great was single player mainly. Why don't make physX an open standard but spend some money optimizing it for their CUDA cores. Yes, it will run on all GPUs but it will be best on NVIDIA cards. That way, I can get a decent taste of physX with whatever GPU i have and decide for myself whether i should plunge for NVIDIA or not on my next card purchase.

    The fact that PhysX is not a deciding factor for gamers buying a new card means their strategy is not working. The fact that physX is not that important for gamers means that developers will not go heavy on implementing PhysX unless they have an incentive payment from TWIMTBP.
  8. TheMailMan78

    TheMailMan78 Big Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    20,855 (8.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,413
    AMD drivers are an incentive to go NVIDIA. PhysX is just gravy.
  9. tokyoduong

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Messages:
    478 (0.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    119
    you have to bring another flame bait into this topic. I'm out.
    NeoXF says thanks.
  10. TheMailMan78

    TheMailMan78 Big Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    20,855 (8.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,413
    Just going by my own experience.
  11. Fluffmeister

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2011
    Messages:
    598 (0.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    165
    [​IMG]
  12. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    13,746 (4.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,782
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    It's not flamebait. It's documented issues with Photoshop(OpenGL), which made him change.


    I have issues myself, and am considering changing as well. It's not flamebait at all, it's just a users experience, and sentiment.

    I haven't run Nv cards for any real length of time since the 7800GTX 256MB. I've had Nvidia cards since then, but have always preffered AMD cards. I am loath to switch, and just end up with other issues, but I am definitely not happy with the dual 7950's and dual 7970's that I run now, to the point that of those 4 VGAs, only one is getting used. I'd sell the others, but have some review work to finish with them, and then I'm changing as well. AMD's drivers suck in my config. You're more than welcome to come to my house and check it out, find out what I'm doing wrong, but I doubt you'll find much.

    So you can add THAT to my "ANTI-NV" opinions posted earlier.

    Remember, he plays games near daily with the rest of the TS users, and uses an Nvidia card. To him, that is his perspective as an NVidia user. You may not like it, but that doesn't make it invalid. Whenever he sees something in-game that is cool, and thinks might be pHys-X, he's quick to ask me if I see similar(we paly together often). 8/10 times, I do. So Phys-X adds little to his experience so far.


    If PHys-X is used behind the scenes, nobody cares. But the fact of the matter is that while it is used fairly often now, it doesn't really add much that a user can identify with, as that's 1000% due to it being CPU-based. When it doesn't add much to the user experience, of course it's usefulness will be questioned.
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2013
  13. tokyoduong

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Messages:
    478 (0.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    119
    But we're talking about PhysX and not photoshop. I agree with you that NVIDIA cards works better with photoshop anyways. The gap is not as wide now as it used to be.

    As far as gaming and physX goes(since they are closely/directly related), NVIDIA has made inconsistency and dirty tactics in the industry. I think it's great that they help devs optimize games to work with their hardware but they also do dirty tricks to make AMD look bad for no reason. If I am owning AMD hardware and the game runs like crap simply because of a bad business practice rather than hardware limitation then I would less likely buy into their products.

    Just open up PhysX and put NVIDIA logo in it so it's pretty much repetitive marketing burned into everyone's brain whenever they start a game. Let it run on all hardware. Spend money to optimize on their CUDA cores. Devs will spend more time and resources coding for physX into their game. Watch people enjoy PhysX so much that they would rather buy NVIDIA cards instead of AMD because it just works better. That would make more sense as a long term strategy.
  14. Fluffmeister

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2011
    Messages:
    598 (0.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    165
    You're right, I can't help it if people are going to be ignorant.
  15. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    13,746 (4.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,782
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Actually, I'd call your own attitude a bit ignorant as well. Like, no offense intended, but really that's how you come off, especially with this post as a perfect example. Ignorance is bliss, so they say. Why try to ruin someone's bliss?


    Do keep in mind, that the local BoyScout troop is run out of my house, and as such, those BoyScout ideals are a big part of my character that has me feel this way. I dealt with Mailman and his driver issues, on many occasions, and he really is justified in making that change, and stating it as such.

    Well, I mean, Mailman posted AMD had driver issues, which was scoffed at. For him, there were issues, and he uses his PC both for gaming, and for Photoshop. He wasn't referring to issues with games. you called it flamebait, but that was really what made him change...driver issues.
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2013
  16. TheHunter

    TheHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    Messages:
    861 (1.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    315
    Location:
    Europa
    HW physx can be good, but its optimization sucks.

    HW Physx3 has improved a little, but nothing major compared to physx2, it still crawls gpu with useless cycles (drawback calls) and lowers gpu usage instead of speeding it up..


    I know i played a lot HW physx games and the more i played them the more i hatted this physics engine. Again optimization is bad.


    Sw physx is ok, its just another physics engine, nothing special.
  17. Fluffmeister

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2011
    Messages:
    598 (0.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    165
    I really can't help it if people get offended, this forum and many others like it are full of people getting butthurt everyday over things that basically mean very little in the grand scheme of things.

    The fact is I simply stated it's no real surprise PhysX has been licensed again for the new consoles, which in turn resulted in all this fuss is suitable proof of that. ;)
  18. tokyoduong

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Messages:
    478 (0.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    119
    I never scoffed at him about PhysX. I even said I PhysX works great but photoshop is off topic and a subjective comment about drivers is unnecessary. But I see his point, however, it is still off topic.

    My point being they have this technology that should be mainstream and they spent lots of time and resources to push and make it mainstream. Then they spent lots of time and resources restricting people from experiencing it. It's like an identity crisis.

    Now if they allow physx to run on the PS4 GPU then they're hypocritical. If they force it to run on the CPU then it's like what you mentioned above. The difference in gaming experience will not be that noticeable if it's even noticed. The cost will get passed to the consumer one way or another with a half assed implementation of something that could/should work great on every title. AMD users will be pissed and NVIDIA users doesn't get to fully utilize PhysX iin all its glory because devs doesn't want to heavily code something that NVIDIA shut out half their potential customers.

    But you posted this after you read the news. Had you predicted this before the news came out then you would've had a great career as a prophet :)
    NeoXF, Widjaja and cadaveca say thanks.
  19. TheMailMan78

    TheMailMan78 Big Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    20,855 (8.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,413
    I was giving you a reason IMO that is valid to switch even without PhysX which was based off of this comment.

    Also NVIDIA bought PhysX as a fluff for developers to use their tech and license. They spent good money on it just so they could win a profit. Now you want them to make it "open source". Great idea there Buffet.
  20. Fluffmeister

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2011
    Messages:
    598 (0.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    165
    I said people were reading too much into it too, but you're right, I should have predicted the impending tears. :)
  21. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,493 (13.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,908
    You can stop now. No need to continue down this road. You've said what you need to say, no point in continuing. Let others partake in the discussion.
    Fluffmeister says thanks.
  22. buildzoid

    buildzoid

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2012
    Messages:
    1,084 (1.74/day)
    Thanks Received:
    291
    Location:
    CZ
    Nvidia would never let AMD run Physx without some sort of forced slow down because AMD cards have a lot more compute power than Nvidia cards so they would run PhysX better.
    GTX 680 ~ 3TFLOPS
    HD 7970 Ghz ~ 4TFLOPS
    GTX Titan ~ 4.5TFLOPS
    So if PhysX was equally well optimized for both AMD and Nvidia GPUs then the AMD ones would run it better. The only nvidia card that has more compute power than the 7970 Ghz is the GTX Titan which is to expensive to compete in this.
  23. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,660 (6.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,834
    The tiny amount of compute power PhysX needs to run would make the difference between the GPUs moot. I mean, we're talking about a technology that can be maxed out on a GTX250 with is only capable of ~450GFLOPS. The PhysX calculations are relatively easy for a GPU to compute, it is all the extra graphical crap that has to be rendered on the screen that it generates that really cause the performance issues.
    Roph says thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU
  24. buildzoid

    buildzoid

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2012
    Messages:
    1,084 (1.74/day)
    Thanks Received:
    291
    Location:
    CZ
    Yeah because so far it's implementations are limited to aesthetics if it was use for highly detailed environment destruction (Redfaction style but much bigger something like leveling a skyscraper/s) or something similar then the requirements would start stacking up.
  25. theoneandonlymrk

    theoneandonlymrk

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,333 (2.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    546
    Location:
    Manchester uk
    Bring exactly that.... someone please xD

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

Share This Page