Ageia has big plans for PhysX

dafloppyone · 22 Feb 2007 at 22:00

Chief executive of Ageia Technologies, Manju Hedge, said in an interview that his company plans to offer a physics processing unit (PPU) for mobile applications, target the PhysX chips at non-gaming apps and offer third parties to integrate PPUs into a variety of devices, including graphics cards. In an interview with ChileHardware web-site Mr. Hegde said that his company has a plethora of plans to popularize its PhysX processing units among gamers and, more importantly, not gamers at all. Hedge suggests that PhysX will mimic some capabilities of today's latest graphics cards, including the ability to run general-purpose tasks and to run two cards in parallel. The company even intends to release a software development kit like Nvidia's CUDA to let programmers write general-purpose applications that take advantage of PhysX.

Additionally, Mr. Hegde said that it is possible to offer PPU for mobile devices and that the company is in talks with add-in card developers ATI, graphics product group of Advanced Micro Devices, and Nvidia Corp. as well as the world's largest producer of x86 chips Intel about integration of PPUs on other devices. Besides, Manju Hegde said that the more advanced versions of PhysX are coming.

Darkwave · 22 Feb 2007 at 22:05

Dear Ageia,

Make PhysX even remotely worth it on the desktop and we will care.

Sincerely yours,
The Mob.

darkblade · 22 Feb 2007 at 23:12

Didn't they have big plans when they first brought it out?!

Combat squirrel · 22 Feb 2007 at 23:26

*sniffs*

Hmmmmmmm smells like Ageia's old friend - desperation has reared its ugly head again

PhillyDee · 23 Feb 2007 at 00:19

Im surprised they still sell them. Seem pretty redundant to me.

Magic Man · 23 Feb 2007 at 00:19

dafloppyone said:
...the company is in talks with add-in card developers ATI, graphics product group of Advanced Micro Devices, and Nvidia Corp. as well as the world's largest producer of x86 chips Intel about integration of PPUs on other devices...

Looks like they are hoping to sell it off rather than wait for nVidia/AMDATI to trounce over them with their own implementations using GPUs instead.

Quixote · 23 Feb 2007 at 00:27

It's probably better, technologically, than ATI / NVidia's solutions but software support is what counts. They needed a 'killer app' - their own Mario 64 but PC companies don't seem to understand that. If it had been bundled with just one amazing game at a reasonable price it could have been a success.

Things change I've changed · 23 Feb 2007 at 01:12

PhillyDee said:
Im surprised they still sell them. Seem pretty redundant to me.

They released it too early thats all, I've said this before and I'll say it again, I think people forget that the unreal 3 engine supports physX natively and tons of devolopers of already taken a license out to use the unreal 3 engine for games development, during the course of the next couple of years there will be a whole host of games that will suport physX so I think thier still in with a slim chance.

Gashman · 23 Feb 2007 at 01:31

heres a thought, would the physx processor help keep supreme commander in check with loads of real-time weapon trajectories and such? anyone here own ageia physx card and supreme commander, give us the heads-up

lay-z-boy · 23 Feb 2007 at 01:36

Edited

I still have my hopes that these things will take off and be of use to us, however the hint of faster generation/different versions says to me the classic ' first generation of a new product will be outdated and slow by the time it gets put to use.'

dbmzk1 · 23 Feb 2007 at 01:46

Still not worth £130. Never will be imo.

Cyber-Mav · 23 Feb 2007 at 01:51

lowrider007 said:
They released it too early thats all, I've said this before and I'll say it again, I think people forget that the unreal 3 engine supports physX natively and tons of devolopers of already taken a license out to use the unreal 3 engine for games development, during the course of the next couple of years there will be a whole host of games that will suport physX so I think thier still in with a slim chance.

the unreal engine 3 is crap. look at rainbow 6 vegas, its gfx are like GRAW but require even more hardware specs, and the physics is crap in vegas.

dunno whats going on but the only thing left for pc games is the cryengine2.

Tom|Nbk · 23 Feb 2007 at 01:57

My post was deleted....why. :confused:

Things change I've changed · 23 Feb 2007 at 02:09

I would'nt judge the unreal 3 engine as crap just b-cos of one bad port and on top of that R6 Vegas DOES NOT USE THE UNREAL 3 ENGINE, it uses a hybride version of the 2.5 engine (2.5 unreal engine with a mix of the unreal 3 engine)

lay-z-boy · 23 Feb 2007 at 02:12

Tom|Nbk said:
My post was deleted....why.

Moderators patroleth the forums.....

Sorry mods, my bad

Shocky-FM · 23 Feb 2007 at 07:04

Tom|Nbk said:
My post was deleted....why.

Mine too, I thought it was funny at least....

bfar · 23 Feb 2007 at 09:44

If they were selling it at reasonable price - £130 is a laugh.

jrodga2k5 · 23 Feb 2007 at 10:04

Damn for a second I thought their BIG plans were to send them to iraq as weapons....oh well

Minstadave · 23 Feb 2007 at 10:07

Tom|Nbk said:
My post was deleted....why.

Not every thread needs about ten posts saying "Where's Pottsey?" if he wants to add anything he's free to.

Kamakazie! · 23 Feb 2007 at 10:33

lowrider007 said:
I would'nt judge the unreal 3 engine as crap just b-cos of one bad port and on top of that R6 Vegas DOES NOT USE THE UNREAL 3 ENGINE, it uses a hybride version of the 2.5 engine (2.5 unreal engine with a mix of the unreal 3 engine)

Yup, R6 Vegas runs like a dog becasue its a shoddy Xbox360 port. Nothing else.