• 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.

nVidia buy Ageia

Pottsey said:
Didn’t think of that. Ageia have a PCIE chip for motherboards. Perhaps that’s Nvidias plan not GPU’s.
Click to expand...

Quite. Either way integration is the way forward as I have regularily said. Lucky I'm so smart LOL

Cereal tho, even if they throw the PhysX chip into mobos in the form of PhysX edition 750i's or 780i's or similar they are going to get a better market penetration than Ageia could have. Even if the chip only gets utilised every now and then the consumer is still getting some value for money from a very good mobo and this was thing thing that the PhysX hardware was missing - value for money.

As was mentioned a while ago, Ageia were mearly biding their time before they managed to sell themselves. Quite possibly this was egged on by Intel buying Havok. It will be interesting to see how this pans out and what ATI are going to do in response.

EDIT: it's in our interests as consumers that ATI still exist, unless of course intel start making performance graphics cards. Either way market competition not only drives the innovation but keeps the price down *cough* kinda...
 
Last edited:
I thought Intel were looking into doing just that and entering the Grpahics Card market....not like they cant afford to! lol!

I guess it's good new but a blow to ATi(AMD) in a way. If they want to use Havok or Physx in their Cards they will be paying Intel or NVidia! Great stuff. It really looks like they are going to have to pull something out the bag should Intel or NVidia start to make some moves into getting the hardware out there and into the masses.

Interesting times but surely years away yet
 
they will probably have the PPU built onto the GPU but also sell the extra cards so ATI users can still get PhysX, or even microsoft bringing out Direct Physics and the PHysX cards being DXP compatible along with ATI's current GPU physics also being made compatible
 
That fluids demo was pretty cool and yes, I would love to see that in games. Let's hope in the future we will see that.
 
J.D said:
That fluids demo was pretty cool and yes, I would love to see that in games. Let's hope in the future we will see that.
Click to expand...

Can you say half life 4? maybe in 6-8 years :cool:

i always wonder when a game comes out with very realistic physics, like being able to shoot away any object, make it degrade. Make water flow in a different direction, punch a hole in a massive dam and watch all the water flow out :)

i wish they would make a virtual reality system, they only seem to be advancing in graphics the past 10 years and nothing else. Physics is a small step forward toward the big goal
 
Fingers crossed this leads to much better support of the hardware, and integration, rather then needing a separate card.
 
This will be great.
Hopefully The way its meant to be played Games will have the introduction of ageia physics thus making it a lot more popular.

Just hope that Nvidia can make this work as it will be brilliant. May be a new turning point for games and physics.
 
To be honnest i think this is a good thing. i think currently agiea is totaly useless and they have no game support. The only one they did have which was good was UT3 and they screwed that one right up.

However, nvidia has loads of game support. Every big game seems to have their logo on it. This should be good news as now they have the support and the money to make something decent!

I wonder if this is to get at intel because currently quads could be adapted to run physics and now if nvida bring out killer PPU cards then intel wont have a reason to bost their quads as much :p

But think about it. new graphics cards coming out cost a bomb anyway. Now imagine how much they cost with a PPU attached. There also has to be some downside to having a ppu and a graphics card. More heat means lower clocks etc. I think having them stuck together is bad bad idea. Keep em separate.

HarryPainful said:
I wonder if Pottsey will still be Ageia Warrior...
Click to expand...

wonder if he has an ati card :p
 
“The only one they did have which was good was UT3 and they screwed that one right up.”
What? How did they screw that one up? How is boosting FPS a screw up?



“Now imagine how much they cost with a PPU attached.”
Not a lot and that’s if they do add a PPU. They don’t need a PPU added on to do physics on the GPU.




“wonder if he has an ati card ”
Nope apart from The Rad 9700 Pro which was amazing every ATI card I have had has been extremely bad mostly due to drivers. Had nothing but bad luck with ATI. My first choice is PowerVR and when that’s not an option I go for Nvidia. Dont touch ATI due to driver problem after driver problem.
 
Every time a PPU thread is started it turns in to the exact same arguments all over agian... it's like a bloomin broken record.
 
Lets just hope this does not go the way of when Nvidia brought 3Dfx.

Their first range of cards using tech from the 3Dfx boys resulted in the dire FX5*** range...
 
Pottsey said:
“wonder if he has an ati card ”
Nope apart from The Rad 9700 Pro which was amazing every ATI card I have had has been extremely bad mostly due to drivers. Had nothing but bad luck with ATI. My first choice is PowerVR and when that’s not an option I go for Nvidia. Dont touch ATI due to driver problem after driver problem.
Click to expand...




Pity ati's drivers surpassed nvidia's a few years back in terms of overall quality. Your first choice is powervr? Dont think thats even been a choice for about 5 years or more.
 
It depends wether nvidia become stupid and force people to buy a physics card...

Or if they get smart and intregrate the ppu into a gpu...
 
“Pity ati's drivers surpassed nvidia's a few years back in terms of overall quality. Your first choice is powervr? Dont think thats even been a choice for about 5 years or more.“
For the PC that’s right they haven’t been an option for years. If they where I would be useing them. They are still the best choice in the mobile market excluding laptops.

Not used ATI in a few years so cannot comment on their current drivers. Back when I used ATI, AMD didnt own them.
 
Gerard said:
Pity ati's drivers surpassed nvidia's a few years back in terms of overall quality. Your first choice is powervr? Dont think thats even been a choice for about 5 years or more.
Click to expand...

Agreed nvidia drivers suck at times almost like when they can be bothered or ati brings something out,but at moment nvidia's cards are good but maybe old tech like someone would say :p but i am glad ati are catching/caught up.
 
I dont think either nvida or ati drivers suck any more. Nvida had a rough start on the 8800s but to be honest lets face ATI's were just as appaling. The fact that ati have clawed back a lot of performance from their 2900xt's from drivers was impressive. But perhaps that just means they were badly scripted orginaly or the 8800s drivers were perfected quicker? Who knows.

I gues im the onlyone who thinks its a bad idea tio have ppu and gpu on the same peice of silicon?

Id rather have a great ppu but have it separate. Although tbh id rather just ahve a great cpu which can do it instead still.
 
I think if more work can be done for less (i.e. putting the PPU on the same package/chip as the GPU) then the more the better. Really, the industry should focus on bringing together more parts of the computer, not forcing the consumer to buy more add-in cards, wasting more money, taking more space and consuming more 'leccy (than they would being integrated into another product).

I think this is true of GPUs and CPUs, too. I believe the best route to take would be to transition the current X86 architecture into something far more parallel (not in the way that multi-core CPUs are going - that'll only get so far I think - but more in a manner where the execution cores are simpler but more scalable, perhaps eventually just having X86 as legacy support).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom