AMD to Demonstrate GPU Havok Physics Acceleration at GDC

[DarkMatter]

I hope the video explodes our minds!

Oh, that's for sure. Ati is much better at that. Ati always has some good looking demos, while Nvidia always shows minimalist tech demos where you can only see the tech they want to show. Like with the ray-tracing demos some time ago: who cares if the ugly and minimalist "veyron demo" from Nvidia was showing a superior technology, if you could see Ruby scaping from the mech, while avoiding the cars all in full and fancy colors??

 

[TheMailMan78]

Oh, that's for sure. Ati is much better at that. Ati always has some good looking demos, while Nvidia always shows minimalist tech demos where you can only see the tech they want to show. Like with the ray-tracing demos some time ago: who cares if the ugly and minimalist "veyron demo" from Nvidia was showing a superior technology, if you could see Ruby scaping from the mech, while avoiding the cars all in full and fancy colors??

Stop H8tin son!

 

[ShadowFold]

but seriously, I don't really care for tech demos. But when it involves physics, I certainly want to see what's up. I love the idea of realistically rendered mass physics with small performance hits!

Also, it irks me that they spelled it haterade, it's AIDE....

 

[DarkMatter]

Stop H8tin son!

That is true to a point, but it does enervate me that they released a demo about ray-tracing where you couldn't actually see ray-tracing, even if it was there. But hey it looked good.
Then we also have the froblin demo... Actually most of their demos are pure marketing, but hey you like them, and they serve their purpose, so I guess I should accept that. I know you don't like to hear this, but Ati is all about marketing lately and most of you buy everything it comes from them. I used to love them in the past, when Ati was about the products and the tech and Nvidia was marketing (FX line, even GF 6 series), but lately...

 

[TheMailMan78]

That is true to a point, but it does enervate me that they released a demo about ray-tracing where you couldn't actually see ray-tracing, even if it was there. But hey it looked good.
Then we also have the froblin demo... Actually most of their demos are pure marketing, but hey you like them, and they serve their purpose, so I guess I should accept that. I know you don't like to hear this, but Ati is all about marketing lately and most of you buy everything it comes from them. I used to love them in the past, when Ati was about the products and the tech and Nvidia was marketing (FX line, even GF 6 series), but lately...

Good marketing = money. Money for ATI = money for me. Anyway ATIs products havent been this strong in years. This time the marketing is truthful. I mean even Wizz has been rating them high for the price/performance and right now people are "cost effective" minded.

 

[ShadowFold]

Think about it this way. It's Intel, when have they failed in recent years?(Just forget Pentium 4 ever happened lol) They've always had the best performing CPU's on the market and have had almost no competition in the high end range until the Phenom II's came out. I think with AMD AND Intel collaborating on this, they can't fail. Now I don't think this will become like a standard since like you said, a lot of people have nvidia cards. They wouldn't leave them behind, they will most likely get it to work on CUDA as well.

 

[DarkMatter]

Good marketing = money. Money for ATI = money for me. Anyway ATIs products havent been this strong in years. This time the marketing is truthful. I mean even Wizz has been rating them high for the price/performance and right now people are "cost effective" minded.

I understand what marketing is, and I understand why they have to do it, but that doesn't change the fact that we don't have to acept it as dogma. Marketing is never truthful, and of course they have good products, but in no way they are better in every aspect as Ati and fans want to make the world believe. I can understand they have to do something because of their actual position, but I will never accept false claims in order to help selling the underdog. This is capitalism and they are where they are for a reason, maybe they should have dissapeared in the last couple of years, and let another one enter the game, who knows (I don't want that as you can see in previous posts).

And now this thread, even before we've seen anything, GPU Havok is so much better than PhysX, that suddenly is crap and flawed, and has a much better future. Every Ati fan said how wonderful was Ati because they said they wouldn't support a propietary physics SDK and bashed Nvidia for using one and trying to bring it to games. Now Ati supports a propietary physics API and everyting is so bright and wonderful...

I am really the only one who sees how they try to play with us?? First they say that a propietary API will never catch on and that it will die, then they make everything in their hands to bash that API and finally one year later they make their own one. If 2008 was a bad year to adopt a propietary engine because DX11 was coming out a year later, what happens in the same year of release of that said DX11? Some moths before actually?

 

[DarkMatter]

Think about it this way. It's Intel, when have they failed in recent years?(Just forget Pentium 4 ever happened lol) They've always had the best performing CPU's on the market and have had almost no competition in the high end range until the Phenom II's came out. I think with AMD AND Intel collaborating on this, they can't fail. Now I don't think this will become like a standard since like you said, a lot of people have nvidia cards. They wouldn't leave them behind, they will most likely get it to work on CUDA as well.

That's indeed part of the problem I see. IMO Intel is playing with AMD. Havok will run much better on Larrabee than on anything else, Intel will ensure that, and with the huge architecture differences (SPs versus, x86 cores) they have the perfect excuse. Even if AMD released something like Larrabee they know they are much faster with x86, it's graphic what they lack.

In the near future only PhysX running in GPUs could (IMO it will) be faster, so they want to rule it out, just as they did with Ageia in the past. Intel wants to be the bigger high-end GPU provider too and knows he can't compete with Nvidia and Ati in graphics so they are trying to do something. That something was ray-tracing first, but both Nvidia and Ati demostrated they could do that just as well or better, and developers aren't really interested yet, so they have to find something. IMO that's physics but to an extent, controlling. Accelerated physics is going to be the next revolution in games, so pretty soon physics will affect performance as much as graphics and Intel wants to control that part. He wants to play in their field, because PhysX is much better than anything they can do ATM and IMO it will always be. NOT because of the API, which is similar, but because of where it runs, because of the ever evolving GPUs. It's like a racer with the slower car but the better acceleration, his only chance is to overtake the other before the other takes traction. The bad part for us is that the slow car will always slow down the fast one thereafter.

 

[Steevo]

X1K Toy Shop demo. First use of current production game coding and engines. highly optomized, why can't games run like this now? Water droplet physics, much else.

 

[TheMailMan78]

I understand what marketing is, and I understand why they have to do it, but that doesn't change the fact that we don't have to acept it as dogma. Marketing is never truthful, and of course they have good products, but in no way they are better in every aspect as Ati and fans want to make the world believe. I can understand they have to do something because of their actual position, but I will never accept false claims in order to help selling the underdog. This is capitalism and they are where they are for a reason, maybe they should have dissapeared in the last couple of years, and let another one enter the game, who knows (I don't want that as you can see in previous posts).

And now this thread, even before we've seen anything, GPU Havok is so much better than PhysX, that suddenly is crap and flawed, and has a much better future. Every Ati fan said how wonderful was Ati because they said they wouldn't support a propietary physics SDK and bashed Nvidia for using one and trying to bring it to games. Now Ati supports a propietary physics API and everyting is so bright and wonderful...

I am really the only one who sees how they try to play with us?? First they say that a propietary API will never catch on and that it will die, then they make everything in their hands to bash that API and finally one year later they make their own one. If 2008 was a bad year to adopt a propietary engine because DX11 was coming out a year later, what happens in the same year of release of that said DX11? Some moths before actually?

People are happy because Havok is more widly used in "A list" games. They also use it in movies. I'm sorry but Havok isnt going anywhere. Heres a list of Havok games. Say how much better this is than that but you have to admit if you had a choice it would have been Havok over PhysX for Nvidia.

24: The Game
PlayStation2

After Burner: Black Falcon
PSP

Alone in the Dark
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, Wii, PlayStation2, PC

America's Army: True Soldiers
Xbox 360

Ant Bully
PlayStation2, Wii, GameCube, PC

Assassin's Creed
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, PC

Astro Boy
PlayStation2

Auto Assault
PC

Battlefield: Bad Company
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3

BioShock
Xbox 360, PC

Blacksite : Area 51
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, PC

Boom Blox
Wii

Bottle Buster
PC

Carnival Games
Wii

Cars
PSP

Company of Heroes
PC

Company of Heros: Opposing Fronts
PC

Conan
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3

Condemned 2: Bloodshot
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3

Crackdown
Xbox 360

Dark Messiah of Might and Magic: Elements
Xbox 360, PC

Dawn of Mana
Playstation 2

de Blob
Wii

Dead Rising
Xbox 360

Def Jam: Icon
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3

Desperados 2: Cooper's Revenge
PC

Destroy All Humans! 2
PlayStation2, Xbox, PC

Destroy All Humans: Big Willie Unleashed
Wii

Dungeons & Dragons Online: Stormreach
PC

F.E.A.R. Files
Xbox360, PLAYSTATION3, PC

Fable 2
Xbox 360

Fallout3
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, PC

Folklore
PLAYSTATION3

Full Spectrum Warrior
PlayStation2, Xbox, PC

Full Spectrum Warrior: Ten Hammers
PC

George of the Jungle: Search for the Secret
Wii, PlayStation2

Go! Sports Ski
PLAYSTATION3

Guitar Hero III
X360, PLAYSTATION3, PC

Half-Life 2: The Orange Box
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, PC

Halo 2
Xbox, PC

Halo 3
Xbox 360

Happy Feet
PlayStation2, Wii, GameCube, PC

Harry Potter and the Order of The Phoenix
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, PC, Wii

Heavenly Sword
PLAYSTATION3

Hellgate: London
PC

IHRA Drag Racing: Sportsman Edition
PlayStation2, Xbox, PC

Iron Man
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, Playstation2, Wii, PC

Just Cause
PlayStation2, Xbox 360, Xbox, PC

Kane & Lynch: Dead Men
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, PC

Killzone: Liberation
PSP

Looney Tunes: Acme Arsenal
Xbox 360

Lost Planet: Extreme Condition
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, PC

LOTR Online: Shadows of Angmar
PC

Medal of Honor Heroes
PSP

Medal Of Honor: Heroes 2
PSP, Wii

Mercenaries 2
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION 3, PS2, PC

Micro Machines V4
PlayStation2, PSP, PC

Monster House
PlayStation2, GameCube

MotorStorm
PLAYSTATION3

MotorStorm: Pacific Rift
PlayStation 3

My Sims
Wii

Neopets Petpet Adventure:The Wand of Wishing
PSP

Novastrike
PLAYSTATION3

Over the Hedge
PlayStation2, Xbox, GameCube, PC

PAIN
PlayStation Network

Painkiller
PC

Painkiller: Overdose
PC

Playground
Wii

Requiem: Bloodymare
PC

Saints Row
Xbox 360

Saints Row 2
Xbox 360

Scene It? Lights, Camera, Action
Xbox 360

Shadowrun
Xbox 360, PC

Shrek SuperSlam
PlayStation2, Xbox, GameCube, PC

Shrek the Third
Xbox 360, Playstation2, PSP, Wii

Soldier of Fortune: Payback
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, PC

Sonic Riders 2: Zero Gravity
PlayStation2

Sonic the Hedgehog
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3

Soulcalibur IV
PlayStation 3, Xbox 360

Spiderman: Friend or Foe
PSP

Spore
PC

Star Wars: The Force Unleased
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3

Stranglehold
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, PC

Stuntman: Ignition
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, PlayStation 2

Super Smash Bros.Brawl
Wii

Superman Returns: The Videogame
PlayStation2, Xbox 360, PC

Syphon Filter: Logan's Shadow
PSP

Teen Titans
PlayStation2, Xbox, GameCube

Test Drive Unlimited
Xbox 360

The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, PC

The Godfather
Xbox 360, PlayStation2, Xbox, PC

The Godfather: Blackhand Edition
Wii

The Golden Compass
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, Wii, PlayStation2, PC

The Incredible Hulk
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, PlayStation2, PC, Wii

The Outfit
Xbox 360

The Simpsons
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, Wii, PlayStation2, PSP

Time Crisis 4
PLAYSTATION3

Timeshift
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3, PC

TNA iMPACT!
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3

Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2
Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION3

Alan Wake

Diablo III

Fracture

Halo Wars

Indiana Jones

Ride to Hell

Saboteur

Splatterhouse

Starcraft II

This is Vegas

Wheelman

Movies:
Troy
Kingdom of Heaven
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
X-Men: The Last Stand
Poseidon
Harry Potter and the Order Of The Phoenix
10,000 BC
The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian

 

[Wile E]

I'd choose Physx, only because it runs on the much more capable gpu, as opposed to a cpu. Havok physics, while good, is still limited by cpu power at this point. And when it does go GPGPU, the old titles won't magically get GPU computing support. They would have to be recoded. Meaning that Havok will be starting from square one anyway, giving Physx the advantage in the market due to being more mature.

I look forward to Havok on a gpu as well. But this anti-Physx sentiment needs to stop.

 

[TheMailMan78]

I'd choose Physx, only because it runs on the much more capable gpu, as opposed to a cpu. Havok physics, while good, is still limited by cpu power at this point. And when it does go GPGPU, the old titles won't magically get GPU computing support. They would have to be recoded. Meaning that Havok will be starting from square one anyway, giving Physx the advantage in the market due to being more mature.

I look forward to Havok on a gpu as well. But this anti-Physx sentiment needs to stop.

I was never against Physx. I was jealous Nvidia had it to be honest. I just think AMD adopting Havok is great news and shouldn't be played down.

 

[CDdude55]

I doubt we will see any big differences between Havok for ATI and PhyX for Nvidia, This should help games that really utilize physics processing(which isn't many), whether you go with ATI or Nvidia, shouldn't really be a big pick in terms of wanting a Physics processor.

 

[DarkMatter]

I was never against Physx. I was jealous Nvidia had it to be honest. I just think AMD adopting Havok is great news and shouldn't be played down.

I'm in no way downplaying Havok, no one has, re-read this thread because the only API that has been downplayed here is PhysX, while I've been claiming equality.

But AMD adopting Havok is indeed a bad move by them, IMO. Not only it will be at Intel's mercy, but it starts later and in no way it has assured a better adoption from developers. As Wile said it's the CPU Havok that has been in use, not the GPU one. So actually the score is 7-0 at the moment, that I can remember right now: UT3, Mirror's Edge, Warmonger, Cryostasis, Crazi Machines, Metal Knight Zero and Nurien. And if you take Ageia PPU games into account, that's a 10-0, by adding Cellfactor, and GRAW 1 and 2.

Also the CPU Havok lacks a lot of features that PhysX has (like advanced cloth and fluids in real time*) and although I suppose that the GPU Havok has those, they are new to developers. And no matter how you look at it, the API will be very different from the one in the CPU. So the already known factor won't have a big role here.

Considering what AMD said about PhysX and it's short lifespan, GPU Havok has a much shorter life even in AMDs mind so it's a dead end even before it has been demostrated. Nvidia at least believes in PhysX, but I highly doubt AMD sees this as much more than a short stop gap and a marketing tool to divert attention from PhysX and hey congrats AMD because it served it's purpose.

* There is an off-line or production Havok that is very different from the one in games, and that is the one used in Movies. If those movies would serve as any proof of Havoks superiority, I might as well say Nvidia has a much much better image quality, because MentalRay, it's production renderer and ray-tracer has been used in almost all mayor titles to some extent, or a good number of them. i.e Matrix trilogy. I say this just as an example that one good product doesn¡t automatically make all the similar ones from that company a better product. I'm just presenting a parallel example.

 

[Steevo]

Everyone keeps forgetting that most of this gaming goes on inthe Windoze relm, where a magical elf name Bill makes a "DX" and everyone makes games for this. Also the 360 is made by bill, so the new DX if implementing Physics as a standard API will probably be used for both, developers are the key to this, do you code for two of the largest customers?

 

[DarkMatter]

Everyone keeps forgetting that most of this gaming goes on inthe Windoze relm, where a magical elf name Bill makes a "DX" and everyone makes games for this. Also the 360 is made by bill, so the new DX if implementing Physics as a standard API will probably be used for both, developers are the key to this, do you code for two of the largest customers?

Electronic Arts is indeed distributing PhysX as their physics engine to their developers. And although I would agree to any critic to the quality of their games, there's no one bigger than them.

And 2k games. I forgot about 2k games.

 

[ShRoOmAlIsTiC]

think of it as crossfire and sli. they both will work and we will be able to benefit from them no matter what setup we have.

 

[DarkMatter]

think of it as crossfire and sli. they both will work and we will be able to benefit from them no matter what setup we have.

I highly doubt both will be used at the same time. Too much work and money, because I could see Nvidia giving PhysX out for free, considering they already did to some extent, but Havok...

 

[TheMailMan78]

I'm in no way downplaying Havok, no one has, re-read this thread because the only API that has been downplayed here is PhysX, while I've been claiming equality.

But AMD adopting Havok is indeed a bad move by them, IMO. Not only it will be at Intel's mercy, but it starts later and in no way it has assured a better adoption from developers. As Wile said it's the CPU Havok that has been in use, not the GPU one. So actually the score is 7-0 at the moment, that I can remember right now: UT3, Mirror's Edge, Warmonger, Cryostasis, Crazi Machines, Metal Knight Zero and Nurien. And if you take Ageia PPU games into account, that's a 10-0, by adding Cellfactor, and GRAW 1 and 2.

Also the CPU Havok lacks a lot of features that PhysX has (like advanced cloth and fluids in real time*) and although I suppose that the GPU Havok has those, they are new to developers. And no matter how you look at it, the API will be very different from the one in the CPU. So the already known factor won't have a big role here.

Considering what AMD said about PhysX and it's short lifespan, GPU Havok has a much shorter life even in AMDs mind so it's a dead end even before it has been demonstrated. Nvidia at least believes in PhysX, but I highly doubt AMD sees this as much more than a short stop gap and a marketing tool to divert attention from PhysX and hey congrats AMD because it served it's purpose.

* There is an off-line or production Havok that is very different from the one in games, and that is the one used in Movies. If those movies would serve as any proof of Havoks superiority, I might as well say Nvidia has a much much better image quality, because MentalRay, it's production renderer and ray-tracer has been used in almost all mayor titles to some extent, or a good number of them. i.e Matrix trilogy. I say this just as an example that one good product doesn¡t automatically make all the similar ones from that company a better product. I'm just presenting a parallel example.

Nvidia is distributing PhysX for free to saturate the market in hope of Havok not becoming industry standard. The reason they are doing this is because of Intel. Intel owns Havok as you know and don't you think this alone gives it a HUGE advantage over PhysX? I mean Nvidia has to develop and support things for PhysX on their own when Havok has a MUCH larger support base in Intel. I agree PhysX is ahead of Havok in being GPU accelerated. No doubt. But with AMD/ATI working with Intel who do you see will be the long term "victor"? AMD and Nvidia are not the only two players in this particular game. Who do you think Microsoft is going to support if both x86 developers support one standard?

Also to clear the record I've always loved the idea of GPU acceleration.

 

[DarkMatter]

Nvidia is distributing PhysX for free to saturate the market in hope of Havok not becoming industry standard. The reason they are doing this is because of Intel. Intel owns Havok as you know and don't you think this alone gives it a HUGE advantage over PhysX? I mean Nvidia has to develop and support things for PhysX on their own when Havok has a MUCH larger support base in Intel. I agree PhysX is ahead of Havok in being GPU accelerated. No doubt. But with AMD/ATI working with Intel who do you see will be the long term "victor"? AMD and Nvidia are not the only two players in this particular game. Who do you think Microsoft is going to support if both x86 developers support one standard?

Also to clear the record I've always loved the idea of GPU acceleration.

Yes, but I don't see Intel pushing GPU Havok anytime soon, CPU Havok yes, but not the GPU one, until they have a GPU to compete. Don't you see that GPU Havok would make Intel CPUs look like crap? It's as if it screams "AMD is better for gaming" everyday??

Lots of developers have stated they like the idea of GPU physics so it may be posible they adopt PhysX if there isn't any other one.
I was not talking about that anyway. The idea is simple, Havok (Intel) will probably win, as you said, I'm not saying the contrary, but that doesn't mean AMD will win with them, GPU Havok in AMD GPUs will probably never see the light of day (except for 1 or 2 titles), so we will loose both implementations.

Anyway when it comes to giving support to something, I couldn't care less what is going to be the winner. I will always support the one that I think is better for consumers. I'm seing how many in this forum, you included, seem to support Havok just because it has more chances of becoming the winner. That's stupid. If you think it will win buy accordingly when it comes the time, if you wish, but don't let that affect your mind and your words. It would have been much better for William Wallace to scream "mercy", but that wasn't what he had to do.

 

[Mussels]

Yes, but I don't see Intel pushing GPU Havok anytime soon, CPU Havok yes, but not the GPU one, until they have a GPU to compete. Don't you see that GPU Havok would make Intel CPUs look like crap? It's as if it screams "AMD is better for gaming" everyday??

Lots of developers have stated they like the idea of GPU physics so it may be posible they adopt PhysX if there isn't any other one.
I was not talking about that anyway. The idea is simple, Havok (Intel) will probably win, as you said, I'm not saying the contrary, but that doesn't mean AMD will win with them, GPU Havok in AMD GPUs will probably never see the light of day (except for 1 or 2 titles), so we will loose both implementations.

Anyway when it comes to giving support to something, I couldn't care less what is going to be the winner. I will always support the one that I think is better for consumers. I'm seing how many in this forum, you included, seem to support Havok just because it has more chances of becoming the winner. That's stupid. If you think it will win buy accordingly when it comes the time, if you wish, but don't let that affect your mind and your words. It would have been much better for William Wallace to scream "mercy", but that wasn't what he had to do.

Why is it so unlikely that we'll see titles with GPU havok? they're doing a press release on it, the support is there... what makes you think that it wont take off? You seem completely sure that its going to fail, without providing a reason for that

 

[TheMailMan78]

Yes, but I don't see Intel pushing GPU Havok anytime soon, CPU Havok yes, but not the GPU one, until they have a GPU to compete. Don't you see that GPU Havok would make Intel CPUs look like crap? It's as if it screams "AMD is better for gaming" everyday??

Lots of developers have stated they like the idea of GPU physics so it may be posible they adopt PhysX if there isn't any other one.
I was not talking about that anyway. The idea is simple, Havok (Intel) will probably win, as you said, I'm not saying the contrary, but that doesn't mean AMD will win with them, GPU Havok in AMD GPUs will probably never see the light of day (except for 1 or 2 titles), so we will loose both implementations.

Anyway when it comes to giving support to something, I couldn't care less what is going to be the winner. I will always support the one that I think is better for consumers. I'm seing how many in this forum, you included, seem to support Havok just because it has more chances of becoming the winner. That's stupid. If you think it will win buy accordingly when it comes the time, if you wish, but don't let that affect your mind and your words. It would have been much better for William Wallace to scream "mercy", but that wasn't what he had to do.

You're fighting the good fight are you?

 

[DarkMatter]

Why is it so unlikely that we'll see titles with GPU havok? they're doing a press release on it, the support is there... what makes you think that it wont take off? You seem completely sure that its going to fail, without providing a reason for that

I already said: Intel.

You're fighting the good fight are you?

Yes, I am. Reason being: Intel.

 

[ShadowFold]

Do you not have an Intel CPU? They must be doing something right

 

[Mussels]

I already said: Intel.

I dont see any logic behind that.

If intel makes it x86, then AMD can run it, via can run it, etc.
If they make it GPU capable, then at least they're getting paid for it in royalties.