• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Cellfactor and Physx

“oh how convenient is that? you claim massive improvement but have no proof to back it up.”
I showed you two games that give up to a 30% performance boost. It’s only the new GRAW benchmarks I didn’t post as I honestly cannot find any. Though I can find some older ones that don’t suffer a massive FPS drop. Why are you ignore the links and evidence I post? Don’t the benchmarks that show a boost count?

You can also read the driver notes and see when they fixed GRAW. Just go on the PPU website.





“ yet at the drop of a hat i can put out benchmarks to many sites that how hoe crap the physics card is and how it kills performance in its attempt to I posted proof.”
I bet you cannot show many new sites that show a PPU killing performance. I challenge you to find new reviews with the new fixed drivers that kill performance. 8+month old reviews with old buggy drivers don’t count. Its got to be relatively new with the fixed drivers.

The only reviews that show a FPS loss are over a year old with the old buggy drivers. You say you can do it at a drop of a hat then do it. Remember new drivers only not old buggy drivers.
 
those benchmarks are made on games which are rigged to show a performance increase like cell factor. look what happens in that game, they purposley rigged it so it runs like crap on any system that does not have a ppu then when a ppu is added it increases fps, but i bet 80% of that speed increase comes from the throttle on the fps being lifted just cuz the ppu card is in the machine. i bet is someone hacked the game to believe there was a ppu in the pc when there physically is not one in there the game would then run just as fast as if the ppu was actually in there, probably even faster.


the reason that i may not find new benchmarks in graw is because everyone has given up on the agiea card and its just a waste of time for them to play around with rigged hardware thats just a waste of time, effort and money.
 
Squakingcow said:
That's the old combat training, the fps difference is minute in that because it doesn't implement the naff software cloth effects like revolution :mad:
Click to expand...

Ah right, sorry then, just came across it and thought id put it here ;)
 
Tomshardware Physics reviews are extremely poor they made tons of mistakes that even amateurs wouldn’t make. Like they looked at Havok physics thinking it was Ageia then made a page full slamming Ageia because of those Havok problems. It’s still funny to read now.

That benchmark was unfair first it was the old drivers with performance problems, 2nd they used a beta program that’s unfinished and last they ran the CPU with much lower settings then the PPU. It wasnt just the cloth that was missing from the CPU.

Tomshardware has really gone downhill over the years. Its a shame they used to be a good site.
 
Last edited:
Cyber-Mav said:
those benchmarks are made on games which are rigged to show a performance increase like cell factor. look what happens in that game, they purposley rigged it so it runs like crap on any system that does not have a ppu then when a ppu is added it increases fps, but i bet 80% of that speed increase comes from the throttle on the fps being lifted just cuz the ppu card is in the machine. i bet is someone hacked the game to believe there was a ppu in the pc when there physically is not one in there the game would then run just as fast as if the ppu was actually in there, probably even faster.


the reason that i may not find new benchmarks in graw is because everyone has given up on the agiea card and its just a waste of time for them to play around with rigged hardware thats just a waste of time, effort and money.
Click to expand...

Do you have some proof that these games are rigged? If so please post it.

If not can you explain how you know a CPU could run the game as fast if not faster as I am sure the people at Ageia and Havok would be very interested in talking to you.
 
Pottsey said:
Tomshardware Physics reviews are extremely poor they made tons of mistakes that even amateurs wouldn’t make. Like they looked at Havok physics thinking it was Ageia then made a page full slamming Ageia because of those Havok problems. It’s still funny to read now.

That benchmark was unfair first it was the old drivers with performance problems, 2nd they used a beta program that’s unfinished and last they ran the CPU with much lower settings then the PPU. It wasnt just the cloth that was missing from the CPU.

Tomshardware has really gone downhill over the years. Its a shame they used to be a good site.
Click to expand...

im sorry to say this but il put this into perspective, if you had a choice between a 8800gts with ageia and a 8800gtx then i would get a 8800gtx hands down, simply put price tag of £120 is far too much for little improvment on 2 games, and as far as i can tell many games that come out this year arent supporting it, reason for that is it doesnt improve frames in a major differance an many people who own core 2 duos and quad cores can probably let their cpu handle it.

If this device was intergrated into a graphics card it would probably make a nice feature but then again companies would slap the already huge price tag ontop of that graphics card, The only reason i see for buying it is if a few games and i mean like 5 or more came out and the card itself is knocked down by a considerable amount and it showed an actual increase in frames i would consider it.

Their is simply no just cause into buying it, stated or not its not proven.
 
Pottsey said:
Tomshardware Physics reviews are extremely poor they made tons of mistakes that even amateurs wouldn’t make. Like they looked at Havok physics thinking it was Ageia then made a page full slamming Ageia because of those Havok problems. It’s still funny to read now.

That benchmark was unfair first it was the old drivers with performance problems, 2nd they used a beta program that’s unfinished and last they ran the CPU with much lower settings then the PPU. It wasnt just the cloth that was missing from the CPU.

Tomshardware has really gone downhill over the years. Its a shame they used to be a good site.
Click to expand...

Just FYI most of what you state is technically an ad hominem attack, why not stick to the facts and avoid the sophistry. Stating that the drivers have been updated has Cell factor demo would be quite sufficient. Attacking people you don't agree with just undermines any argument you wish to make; Tom's Hardware is patently still a good site and at the time highlighted problems with the demo and drivers.

Honestly for someone trying to win people over to physx you do a good job of putting them off. :rolleyes:

Gift.
 
Shiz said:
Just posted my latest review of the PhysX cards. Might show what they can do in a few more games :

Ageia PhysX Review
Click to expand...

Nice review, really shows the PPU potential (if more games really do it justice at anyrate). I dunno if saw my DMM link earlier but in case you're interested the fence breaking like physics may also be CPU soluble.

Gift.
 
Shiz said:
Cheers for the compliments dude. That link is quite interesting...
Click to expand...

Very good review, im impressed by some of the stuff...the only thing that i really didnt like was the snow particles behind the snowboarder....looked a bit crap tbh. But in the shot that shows the tank going over the fence is quite impressive as it looks as if it crumples at the spot where the tank went over it, instead of it just being a generalised break in the fence.

If more games implememnt support for this ppu, in games i like, and the price drops to sub £50, i will most definately get one...lets hope ageia make it that far, eh? ;)

Again, nice review mate :)
 
“technically an ad hominem attack, why not stick to the facts and avoid the sophistry.”
It was not ad hominem attack and I was sticking to the facts not using opinion. The fact is Tomshardware in a Ageia review looked at Havok physics found loads of problems in the game with Havok wrote pages on how Ageia is rubbish due to those problems with Havok. They took screenshots of Havok then wrote on how the PPU did nothing or made things worse with the screenshots of Havok as examples. After people pointed out there mistake they refused to correct it. They also lowered the settings for the CPU then went its faster then a PPU. Again fact not opinion.





“those benchmarks are made on games which are rigged to show a performance increase like cell factor. look what happens in that game, they purposley rigged it so it runs like crap on any system that does not have a ppu then when a ppu is added it increases fps,”
Your wrong is it’s easy to prove for 3 reasons. Reason 1 being as you know the Ageia Physics API is installed as a driver and all the Ageia games point to the driver and use it for physics even if you don’t have a PPU. If the Ageia Api was rigged to be slow when you don’t use a PPU then every single one of the Ageia games would be slow with the CPU but they are not. If the API was rigged to be slow 100’s of developers wouldn’t use the API.

Reason 2 is Ageia main money is from there API it would be stupid for then to rig there API to be slow on the CPU when there main goal is to sell there API for use by the CPU as a fast API. Doing what you say would hurt them more then anything. Why would Ageia rig slow performance on the CPU? That would put off developer from using their API.

Reason 3 is Ageia opened up there SDK to the public and lots of coders have played with the code and wrote there only public tech demos. You really think every single person who played with the SDK rigged there demo to be slow on the CPU?

If the game is rigged to be slow then you should be able to give evidence and show games without a PPU running fast with the same effects as Cellfactor. Post some evidence. You say PPU’s trash FPS and you can prove it easy with benchmarks yet you have not posted any evidence. All you ever do is go back to GRAW ingnor all the otehr games. All you ever do is go back to GRAW ignoring all the other games like Infernal.






“the reason that i may not find new benchmarks in graw is because everyone has given up on the agiea card”
No it because out of 20ish games only one (GRAW) had performance problems and that was fixed as per the driver notes on Ageias website. What about all the other games don’t they count? You seem to be basing everything on 1 bad game which isn’t even as bad now as it was over a year ago. You said the PPU kills FPS surly you can find old reviews on none GRAW games to back that up. Even if its before the driver fix.







“if you had a choice between a 8800gts with ageia and a 8800gtx then i would get a 8800gtx hands down, simply put price tag of £120 is far too much for little improvment on 2 games,”
Well there are about 20 ish games/demos out but getting GTX would be the smart thing to do. A PPU is a luxury that’s not needed for most people yet. Unless you have PPU games there’s no point in getting a PPU. But what about those that already have a 8800gtx and do have PPU games?
 
Last edited:
Pottsey said:
“technically an ad hominem attack, why not stick to the facts and avoid the sophistry.”
It was not ad hominem attack and I was sticking to the facts not using opinion. The fact is Tomshardware in a Ageia review looked at Havok physics found loads of problems in the game with Havok wrote pages on how Ageia is rubbish due to those problems with Havok. They took screenshots of Havok then wrote on how the PPU did nothing or made things worse with the screenshots of Havok as examples. After people pointed out there mistake they refused to correct it. They also lowered the settings for the CPU then went its faster then a PPU. Again fact not opinion.
Click to expand...

Feel free to link. And no, saying Tom's hardware is "going own hill" is clearly an ad hominem attack. Feel free to point out when they are wrong but extending that to suggest they are frequently wrong is not valid. It's simply a way of trying to discredit someone you don't agree with while not addressing their argument.
 
“Feel free to link. And no, saying Tom's hardware is "going own hill" is clearly an ad hominem attack.”
Its not a ad hominem attack when its true and posted with facts. At work so I cannot post links as there site is filtered out. But this isn’t the first time they have some something like this. Remember there Kyro reviews? I didn’t mean to sound like all the sites rubbish only that its got more major mistakes then it used to.

Saying the site has gone downhill is perfectly fair it’s not an attack. 7 years ago they wouldn’t write a review about 1 API while all the time using a different API.
It’s like writing a review on how bad D3D games are when you only using Opengl games and screenshots which you label as D3D. That wouldn’t have happen 7 years ago and if it did they would correct it. So I stand by what I said when I say they have gone down hill.

If you can get onto their site search for Ageia and read the long 6+page review and read the GRAW page’s. If you cannot find it I will edit in a link to this post when I get home.
 
Robbie G said:
Not sure who Giftmacher's in love with over at Tom's Hardware but there's clearly a flame burning for him / her!
Click to expand...

/Shrug, it's a decent site like anandtech, I just tire of the fanboisms, and pointing the finger everywhere when they don't like a review. Loads of reviews make mistakes, it happens, but saying a site is rubbish just looks churlish. I like the idea of GPU/PPU accelerated physics but it doesn't need this kind of cheer leading. Fact is there's little to really judge Ageia on right now and things will likely remain that way until unreal 3 is released, moaning when reviewers notice as much isn't sensible.

Gift.
 
“/Shrug, it's a decent site like anandtech, I just tire of the fanboisms, and pointing the finger everywhere when they don't like a review.“
Its got nothing to do with likening the review or not and its not fanboisms. Did you even read the review?

Its got to do with them messing up big time and refusing to fix the mistake. They wrote a review on the Ageia API while using the Havok API thinking it was Ageia. That’s a huge mistake. It makes the a large part of the review invalid and at worse missleading.





”Loads of reviews make mistakes, it happens, but saying a site is rubbish just looks churlish.”
I didn’t say Tomshardware is rubbish I said its gone downhill. IE not as good as it used to be. They are making more and larger mistakes then used to in the past and not correcting those mistakes as in my example.

There’s a big difference between saying something gone downhill and saying its rubbish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom