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

NVIDIA Provides Physics Technology for PLAYSTATION 3

DarkMatter

New Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2007
Messages
1,714 (0.28/day)
Processor Intel C2Q Q6600 @ Stock (for now)
Motherboard Asus P5Q-E
Cooling Proc: Scythe Mine, Graphics: Zalman VF900 Cu
Memory 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR2 Corsair Dominator 1066Mhz 5-5-5-15
Video Card(s) GigaByte 8800GT Stock Clocks: 700Mhz Core, 1700 Shader, 1940 Memory
Storage 74 GB WD Raptor 10000rpm, 2x250 GB Seagate Raid 0
Display(s) HP p1130, 21" Trinitron
Case Antec p180
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi PLatinum
Power Supply 700W FSP Group 85% Efficiency
Software Windows XP
COLLADA is not a physics engine, PhysX is. Even OpenGL or DX11 don't make PhysX obsolete. That's a common missconception. A physics engine is no different than a game/graphics engine. You have D3D, but you still need to make an engine and not everybody knows, wants or can afford to make their own. Also making an engine is relatively easy compared to making a good/efficient engine. Most developers just license it from other companies or more recently some publishers (and not developers as in the past) create their own unique engine to use in all their games. When it comes to physics, almost invariably they license either Havok or PhysX.
 
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
2,859 (0.50/day)
Location
Northants. UK
System Name Bad Moon Ryzen
Processor Ryzen 5 5600X
Motherboard Asrock B450M Pro4-F
Cooling Vetroo V5
Memory Crucial Ballistix 32Gb (8gb x 4) 3200 MHz DDR 4
Video Card(s) 6700 XT
Storage Samsung 860 Evo 1Tb, Samsung 860 Evo 500Gb,WD Black 8Tb, WD Blue 2Tb
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG270bmiix & 4K Samsung TV
Case Fractal Design Meshify 2 Compact w/Dark Tempered Glass
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply MSI MPG A850GF (850w)
VR HMD Rift S
yay, more stuttering framerates for the ps3. Lucky people.
 

Wile E

Power User
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
24,318 (3.81/day)
System Name The ClusterF**k
Processor 980X @ 4Ghz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 BIOS F12
Cooling MCR-320, DDC-1 pump w/Bitspower res top (1/2" fittings), Koolance CPU-360
Memory 3x2GB Mushkin Redlines 1600Mhz 6-8-6-24 1T
Video Card(s) Evga GTX 580
Storage Corsair Neutron GTX 240GB, 2xSeagate 320GB RAID0; 2xSeagate 3TB; 2xSamsung 2TB; Samsung 1.5TB
Display(s) HP LP2475w 24" 1920x1200 IPS
Case Technofront Bench Station
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Fi Forte into Onkyo SR606 and Polk TSi200's + RM6750
Power Supply ENERMAX Galaxy EVO EGX1250EWT 1250W
Software Win7 Ultimate N x64, OSX 10.8.4
yay, more stuttering framerates for the ps3. Lucky people.
Most games don't stutter. Those are only games that are poorly coded, due to lazy developers. Not the fault of the hardware in use.
 
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
2,859 (0.50/day)
Location
Northants. UK
System Name Bad Moon Ryzen
Processor Ryzen 5 5600X
Motherboard Asrock B450M Pro4-F
Cooling Vetroo V5
Memory Crucial Ballistix 32Gb (8gb x 4) 3200 MHz DDR 4
Video Card(s) 6700 XT
Storage Samsung 860 Evo 1Tb, Samsung 860 Evo 500Gb,WD Black 8Tb, WD Blue 2Tb
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG270bmiix & 4K Samsung TV
Case Fractal Design Meshify 2 Compact w/Dark Tempered Glass
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply MSI MPG A850GF (850w)
VR HMD Rift S
So its not true that alot of people have problems coding on the machine? Hence bad performance.
 

Wile E

Power User
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
24,318 (3.81/day)
System Name The ClusterF**k
Processor 980X @ 4Ghz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 BIOS F12
Cooling MCR-320, DDC-1 pump w/Bitspower res top (1/2" fittings), Koolance CPU-360
Memory 3x2GB Mushkin Redlines 1600Mhz 6-8-6-24 1T
Video Card(s) Evga GTX 580
Storage Corsair Neutron GTX 240GB, 2xSeagate 320GB RAID0; 2xSeagate 3TB; 2xSamsung 2TB; Samsung 1.5TB
Display(s) HP LP2475w 24" 1920x1200 IPS
Case Technofront Bench Station
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Fi Forte into Onkyo SR606 and Polk TSi200's + RM6750
Power Supply ENERMAX Galaxy EVO EGX1250EWT 1250W
Software Win7 Ultimate N x64, OSX 10.8.4
So its not true that alot of people have problems coding on the machine? Hence bad performance.

Not really anymore. It was true when it first launched, but even then there were games that ran perfectly. The only ones that run poorly now are the ones from crappy developers.
 
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
2,859 (0.50/day)
Location
Northants. UK
System Name Bad Moon Ryzen
Processor Ryzen 5 5600X
Motherboard Asrock B450M Pro4-F
Cooling Vetroo V5
Memory Crucial Ballistix 32Gb (8gb x 4) 3200 MHz DDR 4
Video Card(s) 6700 XT
Storage Samsung 860 Evo 1Tb, Samsung 860 Evo 500Gb,WD Black 8Tb, WD Blue 2Tb
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG270bmiix & 4K Samsung TV
Case Fractal Design Meshify 2 Compact w/Dark Tempered Glass
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply MSI MPG A850GF (850w)
VR HMD Rift S
Thats good then, lets hope the physx is implemented correctly. I have played some games on Playstation 3. I remember I loved Motorstorm.
 

leonard_222003

New Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2006
Messages
241 (0.04/day)
System Name Home
Processor Q6600 @ 3300
Motherboard Gigabyte p31 ds3l
Cooling TRUE Intel Edition
Memory 4 gb x 800 mhz
Video Card(s) Asus GTX 560
Storage WD 1x250 gb Seagate 2x 1tb
Display(s) samsung T220
Case no name
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply chieftec 550w
Software Windows 7 64
Yes much much better than in a Quad. Remember the GFlops I gave? Well those are not the advertised ones. AFAIK IBM/Sony advertised it as being 256 GFlops. 150 is the maximum sustained Flops found in the chip, I think and 100 was the median low (when SPEs are used). It is commonly accepted that a Core2 has 8-10 Gflops per core depending on the clocks, more when overclocked. We could say that a heavily overclocked Quad has like 50 GFlops, versus the 150 Gflops on the Cell processor. The difference is that Cell's power can only be used in heavily parallel number crunching tasks (such as physics) while Core2 can run everything. Think of it as having 7 workers and an engineer, versus 4 engineers. 4 engineers are much slower doing the hard work, but all of them know what needs to be done at any given time. The 7 workers completely depend on their engineer's instructions.

I can't say you are wrong in what you say but i'm unsure about what IBM says about their CPU , it's an old arhitecture from the days of pentium4 and athlonx2 if i'm not wrong and i know there is theoretical flops number and the one tested in reality and there is a hugeee difference bettwen them.
I was looking trough some forums and i found this
http://img116.imageshack.us/img116/8032/flops1ue4.jpg
a quad QX9770 has 35 real Gflops and a cell processor i have to believe it has 150 gflops ?, i know it's specialized for games and can't do anything but it can do a game menu and AI and has some operating system to run so a game puts that CPU trough a lot of different things to do.
It's just hard to believe that the cell CPU is that good , if it was that good it could've beaten all the CPU's from that time and rule the microprocessor bussines , that stated computing power is pure bullshit for gullible people to believe , Intel and AMD can't exagerate because the next day a happy man makes a software and tests the cpu and shows it can do shit or it shows all that power is not present in some thing he does , IBM had the nerve to state such big numbers because they can't be checked that easily.
People still say even today that PS3 is such a powerfull hardware and can do so much more but no one acces the "power" like it should , or some other excuse , well years have passed and PS3 didn't impressed anyone with great graphics or compiling/encoding/physics :) or whatever , programers had enough time to learn the "power" of the PS3 and didn't find anything extraordinary in it , even worse for the PS3 the xbox360 wich has worse computing power has better game graphics and the same physics , so where is all that power no one could find IN YEARS ? i think it's in marketing bullshit.
 

h3llb3nd4

New Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
3,323 (0.60/day)
Location
Durban, South Africa
System Name My mobo is Laughing at me
Processor E7400
Motherboard P5KPL-E Bios flashed to 0601 (Piece of poo!!)
Cooling Thermalright Ultra 120a
Memory GENERIC 2 GB DDR2 800
Video Card(s) NONE!! Beat that!!
Storage 500GB SAMSUNG SATAII, 250GB SAMSUNG SATAII and o'l crappy 4gb maxtor
Display(s) ACER X223W Q
Case AEROCOOL ZERODEGREE (planning to mod)
Audio Device(s) REALTEK ONBOARD
Power Supply GIGABYTE 460W
Software Win 7 x86 build 7022
Benchmark Scores Super Pi 1m 17.000 :(
nVidia+PS3=$$$$+more$$$$
$$$$+more$$$$=no money
no money=no more nice i7 :(
 

Wile E

Power User
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
24,318 (3.81/day)
System Name The ClusterF**k
Processor 980X @ 4Ghz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 BIOS F12
Cooling MCR-320, DDC-1 pump w/Bitspower res top (1/2" fittings), Koolance CPU-360
Memory 3x2GB Mushkin Redlines 1600Mhz 6-8-6-24 1T
Video Card(s) Evga GTX 580
Storage Corsair Neutron GTX 240GB, 2xSeagate 320GB RAID0; 2xSeagate 3TB; 2xSamsung 2TB; Samsung 1.5TB
Display(s) HP LP2475w 24" 1920x1200 IPS
Case Technofront Bench Station
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Fi Forte into Onkyo SR606 and Polk TSi200's + RM6750
Power Supply ENERMAX Galaxy EVO EGX1250EWT 1250W
Software Win7 Ultimate N x64, OSX 10.8.4
I can't say you are wrong in what you say but i'm unsure about what IBM says about their CPU , it's an old arhitecture from the days of pentium4 and athlonx2 if i'm not wrong and i know there is theoretical flops number and the one tested in reality and there is a hugeee difference bettwen them.
I was looking trough some forums and i found this
http://img116.imageshack.us/img116/8032/flops1ue4.jpg
a quad QX9770 has 35 real Gflops and a cell processor i have to believe it has 150 gflops ?, i know it's specialized for games and can't do anything but it can do a game menu and AI and has some operating system to run so a game puts that CPU trough a lot of different things to do.
It's just hard to believe that the cell CPU is that good , if it was that good it could've beaten all the CPU's from that time and rule the microprocessor bussines , that stated computing power is pure bullshit for gullible people to believe , Intel and AMD can't exagerate because the next day a happy man makes a software and tests the cpu and shows it can do shit or it shows all that power is not present in some thing he does , IBM had the nerve to state such big numbers because they can't be checked that easily.
People still say even today that PS3 is such a powerfull hardware and can do so much more but no one acces the "power" like it should , or some other excuse , well years have passed and PS3 didn't impressed anyone with great graphics or compiling/encoding/physics :) or whatever , programers had enough time to learn the "power" of the PS3 and didn't find anything extraordinary in it , even worse for the PS3 the xbox360 wich has worse computing power has better game graphics and the same physics , so where is all that power no one could find IN YEARS ? i think it's in marketing bullshit.
He wasn't giving you stated performance numbers. He was giving you real-world tested numbers. You can install Linux on the PS3. It's very easy to get a real-world measurement of the Cell's processing power.

And the Cell cpu can't take over the cpu market because Windows doesn't work on it's architecture.

And the PS3 has impressed many with it's computational power, just not the gamer crowd. It's actually used by quite a few in computing farms to get super-computer performance with a fraction of the cost.

Cell has proven itself to be capable of crunching numbers far better than ANY x86 based cpu. The only reason it is not more popular is because A.) It doesn't run Windows, and B.) It's strength lies in Floating point calculations, and not so much on Integer calculations, which is what most programs are written for.
 

alexp999

Staff
Joined
Jul 28, 2007
Messages
8,012 (1.32/day)
Location
Dorset, UK
System Name Gaming Rig | Uni Laptop
Processor Intel Q6600 G0 (2007) @ 3.6Ghz @ 1.45625v (LLC) / 4 GHz Bench @ 1.63v | AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-62 2 GHz
Motherboard ASUS P5Q Deluxe (Intel P45) | HP 6715b
Cooling Xigmatek Dark Knight w/AC MX2 ~ Case Fans: 2 x 180mm + 1 x 120mm Silverstone Fans
Memory 4GB OCZ Platinum PC2-8000 @ 1000Mhz 5-5-5-15 2.1v | 2 x 1GB DDR2 667 MHz
Video Card(s) XFX GTX 285 1GB, Modded FTW BIOS @ 725/1512/1350 w/Accelero Xtreme GTX 280 + Scythe sinks| ATI X1250
Storage 2x WD6400AAKS 1 TB Raid 0, 140GB Raid 1 & 80GB Maxtor Basics External HDD (storage) | 160GB 2.5"
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster SM2433BW @ 1920 x 1200 via DVI-D | 15.4" WSXGA+ (1680 x 1050 resolution)
Case Silverstone Fortress FT01B-W ~ Logitech G15 R1 / Microsoft Laser Mouse 6000
Audio Device(s) Soundmax AD2000BX Onboard Sound, via Logitech X-230 2.1 | ADI SoundMAX HD Audio
Power Supply Corsair TX650W | HP 90W
Software Windows 7 Ultimate Build 7100 x64 | Windows 7 Ultimate Build 7100 x64
Benchmark Scores 3DM06: 19519, Vantage: P16170 ~ Win7: -CPU 7.5 -MEM 7.5 -AERO 7.9 -GFX 6.0 -HDD 6.0
nVidia+PS3=$$$$+more$$$$
$$$$+more$$$$=no money
no money=no more nice i7 :(

I read today, that game developers are demanding Sony to drop their PS3 prices $50-$100 as they are far too expensive against the Wii and 360. They threatened they would discontinue development for the PS3 if Sony didn't because it was becoming unprofitable with the number of PS3 games sold.
 

h3llb3nd4

New Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
3,323 (0.60/day)
Location
Durban, South Africa
System Name My mobo is Laughing at me
Processor E7400
Motherboard P5KPL-E Bios flashed to 0601 (Piece of poo!!)
Cooling Thermalright Ultra 120a
Memory GENERIC 2 GB DDR2 800
Video Card(s) NONE!! Beat that!!
Storage 500GB SAMSUNG SATAII, 250GB SAMSUNG SATAII and o'l crappy 4gb maxtor
Display(s) ACER X223W Q
Case AEROCOOL ZERODEGREE (planning to mod)
Audio Device(s) REALTEK ONBOARD
Power Supply GIGABYTE 460W
Software Win 7 x86 build 7022
Benchmark Scores Super Pi 1m 17.000 :(
LOL,:laugh:.Sony got pwned! but thats kinda sucks!
 

DarkMatter

New Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2007
Messages
1,714 (0.28/day)
Processor Intel C2Q Q6600 @ Stock (for now)
Motherboard Asus P5Q-E
Cooling Proc: Scythe Mine, Graphics: Zalman VF900 Cu
Memory 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR2 Corsair Dominator 1066Mhz 5-5-5-15
Video Card(s) GigaByte 8800GT Stock Clocks: 700Mhz Core, 1700 Shader, 1940 Memory
Storage 74 GB WD Raptor 10000rpm, 2x250 GB Seagate Raid 0
Display(s) HP p1130, 21" Trinitron
Case Antec p180
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi PLatinum
Power Supply 700W FSP Group 85% Efficiency
Software Windows XP
I can't say you are wrong in what you say but i'm unsure about what IBM says about their CPU , it's an old arhitecture from the days of pentium4 and athlonx2 if i'm not wrong and i know there is theoretical flops number and the one tested in reality and there is a hugeee difference bettwen them.
I was looking trough some forums and i found this
http://img116.imageshack.us/img116/8032/flops1ue4.jpg
a quad QX9770 has 35 real Gflops and a cell processor i have to believe it has 150 gflops ?, i know it's specialized for games and can't do anything but it can do a game menu and AI and has some operating system to run so a game puts that CPU trough a lot of different things to do.
It's just hard to believe that the cell CPU is that good , if it was that good it could've beaten all the CPU's from that time and rule the microprocessor bussines , that stated computing power is pure bullshit for gullible people to believe , Intel and AMD can't exagerate because the next day a happy man makes a software and tests the cpu and shows it can do shit or it shows all that power is not present in some thing he does , IBM had the nerve to state such big numbers because they can't be checked that easily.
People still say even today that PS3 is such a powerfull hardware and can do so much more but no one acces the "power" like it should , or some other excuse , well years have passed and PS3 didn't impressed anyone with great graphics or compiling/encoding/physics :) or whatever , programers had enough time to learn the "power" of the PS3 and didn't find anything extraordinary in it , even worse for the PS3 the xbox360 wich has worse computing power has better game graphics and the same physics , so where is all that power no one could find IN YEARS ? i think it's in marketing bullshit.

In general tasks (even the main thread of a game falls here) a Quad has 4 times the hypothetical power of Cell, if all for cores were actually used, which doesn't happen. Kinda , I don't actually know. It's just a bold guesstimate based on the fact that Cell has only 1 general purpose PPC core, while Quads have 4 (x86). But when it comes to number crunching the Cell is a 8 core (1 PPE + 7 SPEs, SPE = ~dumb processor, Rainman Processor) CPU, with almost twice the output per core compared to Core2, so you can see it as a 16 core CPU in those situations.

About programs using the full potential, you have F@H where the Cell is much faster than any conventional CPU, by almost an order of magnitude I think.

In games you won't see them using the full potential, because in games number crunching is not required, unless you run heavy physics or more complex than adecuate AI algorithms. PhysX can change that.
 
Last edited:

leonard_222003

New Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2006
Messages
241 (0.04/day)
System Name Home
Processor Q6600 @ 3300
Motherboard Gigabyte p31 ds3l
Cooling TRUE Intel Edition
Memory 4 gb x 800 mhz
Video Card(s) Asus GTX 560
Storage WD 1x250 gb Seagate 2x 1tb
Display(s) samsung T220
Case no name
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply chieftec 550w
Software Windows 7 64
Ok , so we established the cell can do physics faster than any CPU , now let's see what it brings to the table , i guess it has to be better effects in games and physics of course , let's see if they can deliver something better than what we seen until now.
 

ShadowFold

New Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
16,918 (2.85/day)
Location
Omaha, NE
System Name The ShadowFold Draconis (Ordering soon)
Processor AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 2.8ghz
Motherboard ASUS M4A87TD EVO AM3 AMD 870
Cooling Stock
Memory Kingston ValueRAM 4GB DDR3-1333
Video Card(s) XFX ATi Radeon HD 5850 1gb
Storage Western Digital 640gb
Display(s) Acer 21.5" 5ms Full HD 1920x1080P
Case Antec Nine-Hundred
Audio Device(s) Onboard + Creative "Fatal1ty" Headset
Power Supply Antec Earthwatts 650w
Software Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit
Benchmark Scores -❶-❸-❸-❼-
I read today, that game developers are demanding Sony to drop their PS3 prices $50-$100 as they are far too expensive against the Wii and 360. They threatened they would discontinue development for the PS3 if Sony didn't because it was becoming unprofitable with the number of PS3 games sold.

Good. My PS3 is a POS. Almost no good games at all. We pretty much never use it anymore..
 

DarkMatter

New Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2007
Messages
1,714 (0.28/day)
Processor Intel C2Q Q6600 @ Stock (for now)
Motherboard Asus P5Q-E
Cooling Proc: Scythe Mine, Graphics: Zalman VF900 Cu
Memory 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR2 Corsair Dominator 1066Mhz 5-5-5-15
Video Card(s) GigaByte 8800GT Stock Clocks: 700Mhz Core, 1700 Shader, 1940 Memory
Storage 74 GB WD Raptor 10000rpm, 2x250 GB Seagate Raid 0
Display(s) HP p1130, 21" Trinitron
Case Antec p180
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi PLatinum
Power Supply 700W FSP Group 85% Efficiency
Software Windows XP
Ok , so we established the cell can do physics faster than any CPU , now let's see what it brings to the table , i guess it has to be better effects in games and physics of course , let's see if they can deliver something better than what we seen until now.

If by that you mean released games, then yes they can do it a lot better. Maybe with the PS3 and the multiplatform they can find an excuse to deliver true physics to games, even when AMD and Intel won't aprove. Only reason they are not including amazing ohysics already is because Ati users wouldn't be able to enjoy them thanks to AMD prefering to be Intel's friend than Nvidia's on this.

With Nvidia + PS3 installed base they don't have an excuse to not implement them IMO.
 

leonard_222003

New Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2006
Messages
241 (0.04/day)
System Name Home
Processor Q6600 @ 3300
Motherboard Gigabyte p31 ds3l
Cooling TRUE Intel Edition
Memory 4 gb x 800 mhz
Video Card(s) Asus GTX 560
Storage WD 1x250 gb Seagate 2x 1tb
Display(s) samsung T220
Case no name
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply chieftec 550w
Software Windows 7 64
Only reason they are not including amazing ohysics already is because Ati users wouldn't be able to enjoy them thanks to AMD prefering to be Intel's friend than Nvidia's on this.
It's understandable for them ( not us ) , Nvidia didn't adopt dx10.1 or tesselation or any technology at which Ati excelled and of course AMD/Ati will never adopt any technology at which Nvidia can excel or charge money for it , not fair for us from neighter Nvidia who halted the evolution of graphics in games at some point but neighter from AMD/Ati who refuses to adopt technology that could make games better.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
26,259 (4.65/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2021
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (65w eco profile)
Motherboard MSI B550 Gaming Plus
Cooling Scythe Mugen (rev 5)
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-3200 32 GiB
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT
Storage Samsung 980 Pro, Seagate Exos X20 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Nixeus NX-EDG274K (3840x2160@144 DP) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW (1440x900@60 HDMI-DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay + USB 3.2 (A+C) 3.5" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse Nixeus REVEL-X
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Home 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
Take Mirror's Edge, for example. the game developers have designed around Physx for the PC, so it requires no extra work to enable it on PS3.

Same goes for future games, if they are working on games that will be Physx enabled on PC, they can now enable Physx on PS3 without paying for coding another physics engine.
They have to work from the ground up to recode everything else as well. Converting physics code isn't that much of a hurdle compared to the rest (liking making use of the CELL engine). Valve learned the hard way on that one when trying to port Half-Life 2 to the PS3.

Simply put, there is little to no value of NVIDIA Physx on PS3 unless it shows significant performance gains over COLLADA. Programmers will stick to what they know and very few PS3 programmers know NVIDIA Physx.


COLLADA is not a physics engine...
Bullet is the physics engine on PlayStation 3, Wii, and Xbox 360.
 
Last edited:

DarkMatter

New Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2007
Messages
1,714 (0.28/day)
Processor Intel C2Q Q6600 @ Stock (for now)
Motherboard Asus P5Q-E
Cooling Proc: Scythe Mine, Graphics: Zalman VF900 Cu
Memory 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR2 Corsair Dominator 1066Mhz 5-5-5-15
Video Card(s) GigaByte 8800GT Stock Clocks: 700Mhz Core, 1700 Shader, 1940 Memory
Storage 74 GB WD Raptor 10000rpm, 2x250 GB Seagate Raid 0
Display(s) HP p1130, 21" Trinitron
Case Antec p180
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi PLatinum
Power Supply 700W FSP Group 85% Efficiency
Software Windows XP
They have to work from the ground up to recode everything else as well. Converting physics code isn't that much of a hurdle compared to the rest (liking making use of the CELL engine). Valve learned the hard way on that one when trying to port Half-Life 2 to the PS3.

Simply put, there is little to no value of NVIDIA Physx on PS3 unless it shows significant performance gains over COLLADA. Programmers will stick to what they know and very few PS3 programmers know NVIDIA Physx.



It runs on a PAL. What PAL Sony has in the PS3 is, as far as I know, unknown. It is most likely Bullet.

Developers don't have to program anything different, PhysX is a two layer API, one is developer/user level, and is exactly the same no matter where you are going to run it. The second layer, kind of kernel or compilator (I don't know exactly what it is) mode is platform specific and is Ageia themselves who make the different compilators. Think of it just as if it was Java, is completely platform independient.

It's been long since PhysX can run on Cell, so it's not a problem anyway. And if you read your link it seems that PhysX can indeed run through COLLADA as well as through PAL anyway. As I stated before one thing is the physics support and another one is the engine.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
26,259 (4.65/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2021
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (65w eco profile)
Motherboard MSI B550 Gaming Plus
Cooling Scythe Mugen (rev 5)
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-3200 32 GiB
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT
Storage Samsung 980 Pro, Seagate Exos X20 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Nixeus NX-EDG274K (3840x2160@144 DP) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW (1440x900@60 HDMI-DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay + USB 3.2 (A+C) 3.5" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse Nixeus REVEL-X
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Home 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
Regardless, it is basically another option to use instead of COLLADA/Bullet. It may or may not get used. Because there is no indication PhysX would execute on the GPU, there is likely to be virtually no difference between them for the users.
 

DarkMatter

New Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2007
Messages
1,714 (0.28/day)
Processor Intel C2Q Q6600 @ Stock (for now)
Motherboard Asus P5Q-E
Cooling Proc: Scythe Mine, Graphics: Zalman VF900 Cu
Memory 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR2 Corsair Dominator 1066Mhz 5-5-5-15
Video Card(s) GigaByte 8800GT Stock Clocks: 700Mhz Core, 1700 Shader, 1940 Memory
Storage 74 GB WD Raptor 10000rpm, 2x250 GB Seagate Raid 0
Display(s) HP p1130, 21" Trinitron
Case Antec p180
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi PLatinum
Power Supply 700W FSP Group 85% Efficiency
Software Windows XP
Regardless, it is basically another option to use instead of COLLADA/Bullet. It may or may not get used. Because there is no indication PhysX would execute on the GPU, there is likely to be virtually no difference between them for the users.

It's a better and more complete solution. As I understand it, COLLADA physics is not an engine, it's a bundle of simple routines. PhysX offers everything you need for a lifelike physics reproduction, providing you have the hardware to handle them (it also easily scales to a level a common CPU can handle). There are a lot of benefits to 3rd party solutions versus in-house solutions. They can spend more time and money into making the engine, because they are going to sell it to many people and also is cheaper for the developer using it because they are not the only to pay for the solution. If a complete and efficient engine needs $20 millions to be made, and they sell the thing to 20 developers for $2 each they have enough money to make another better engine and everything evolves. And from the developer point of view they have an efficient solution worth $20, for only $2 million. There's also the fact that a programer group completely dedicated to physics will know how to better make them than other programmers.
 
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
633 (0.11/day)
Location
Australia
System Name _Speedforce_ (Successor to Strike-X, 4LI3NBR33D-H, Core-iH7 & Nemesis-H)
Processor Intel Core i9 7980XE (Lapped) @ 5.2Ghz With XSPC Raystorm (Lapped)
Motherboard Asus Rampage VI Extreme (XSPC Watercooled) - Custom Heatsinks (Lapped)
Cooling XSPC Custom Water Cooling + Custom Air Cooling (From Delta 220's TFB1212GHE to Spal 30101504&5)
Memory 8x 8Gb G.Skill Trident Z RGB 4266MHz @ 4667Mhz (2x F4-4266C17Q-32GTZR)
Video Card(s) 3x Asus GTX1080 Ti (Lapped) With Customised EK Waterblock (Lapped) + Custom heatsinks (Lapped)
Storage 1x Samsung 970 EVO 2TB - 2280 (Hyper M.2 x16 Card), 7x Samsung 860 Pro 4Tb
Display(s) 6x Asus ROG Swift PG348Q
Case Aerocool Strike X (Modified)
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound BlasterX AE-5 & Aurvana XFi Headphones
Power Supply 2x Corsair AX1500i With Custom Sheilding, Custom Switching Unit. Braided Cables.
Mouse Razer Copperhead + R.A.T 9
Keyboard Ideazon Zboard + Optimus Maximus. Logitech G13.
Software w10 Pro x64.
Benchmark Scores pppft, gotta see it to believe it. . .
Dont you miss the R.I.S.K days ?
 
Top