so wrong it laughable
-
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.
Physx is it used much ?
- Thread starter 2013
- Start date
so wrong it laughable
Its a lot more complicated than that.
EDIT: Besides which it was never about PhysX itself anyhow - offering access to PhysX was about getting wider support for CUDA (which supporting was a condition for having access too PhysX) which for obvious reasons ($$$) nVidia want as an industry standard.
Last edited:
Nvidia haven't been offered Mantle, AMD stated it should be handed over in the future, no hypocrisy there.
They took steps to block PhysX running on low end Nvidia cards with a main AMD GPU (not something I approve of as I would like cheap PhysX on my CF R290 machine) under the guise of doing it to stop problems due to unsupported configurations, but we all know that isn't true as they also then stopped third party driver groups from bringing it back.
However that doesn't detract from the fact that they were very open to AMD using the tech, they are even on record saying they would be "thrilled" if ATi took it up.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 23,642
- Location
- London
Thing that still doesn’t make sense tho, is by the time they 'hand it over' Dx12 will be out and surely Mantle will be redundant by then, if they both achieve the same thing.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 23,642
- Location
- London
Ohh I like this, although dont know how true it is:
"Especially now that NVIDIA has drivers good enough to mostly eliminate the performance gap between the Mantle and DirectX 11."
"Especially now that NVIDIA has drivers good enough to mostly eliminate the performance gap between the Mantle and DirectX 11."
Seems nVidia have taken to overloading DX functions that are close to the driver level (not sure if its with the blessing/assistance of MS or not) with their latest drivers which provides in many cases performance gains some only 3-4% others can be massive due to either carnal knowledge of the GPU hardware and/or alleviating CPU bottlenecks. I assume its fairly early days and we'll see a little more benefits from that in the next few drivers as they get more used to whats possible there.
It isn't complicated, people are making it complicated, some Nvidia employees stated it wasn't offered/wouldn't be supported, then you get randomers saying Nvidia offered it, CUDA would have been even better if it wasn't locked in to Nvidia.
It's easy saying that when talking to a tech site, it's called PR-'hey we are the good guys'-but really it's under lock down.
Depends on performance, if DX is better, if AMD can't take it forward it's done, if Mantle is faster, then it has a future.
Pretty sure they could eliminate the fps number gap, depends on the quality of delivery whether it's of a tangible benefit.
Associate
- Joined
- 28 Feb 2013
- Posts
- 2,468
- Location
- Birmingham
That's debatable, and I say this as someone who uses CUDA quite regularly for developing simple particle simulations.
Nvidia have some performance improvements, about 10% in some games.
Its a very long way from "mostly eliminate the performance gap between the Mantle and DirectX 11"
In the CPU bound performance difference in Mantle enabled games and Nvidia on DX; Nvidia are still WAY behind. they need to get 100% + CPU bound performance improvements to match Mantle.
Last edited:
I wonder if developers could use the built in graphics on most CPUs to run physics in games?
Pretty much every modern processor has a built in GPU.
Just a thought. Of course Intel and AMD would have to do some work to get it working (drivers and such) but it would benefit most people and look pretty to boot
Pretty much every modern processor has a built in GPU.
Just a thought. Of course Intel and AMD would have to do some work to get it working (drivers and such) but it would benefit most people and look pretty to boot
Associate
- Joined
- 28 Feb 2013
- Posts
- 2,468
- Location
- Birmingham
What interests me is how the ARM CPU built into the next-gen Maxwell cards will be utilised - it is possible that a lot of PhysX calculations could be dedicated to this, leaving the rendering to the GPU cores themselves.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 23,642
- Location
- London
Didnt know this. So maxwell will have a second chip? Hmm
Maybe the main gpu will be the renderer and the arm chip the conductor (I.e a cpu but on the video card rather than a traditional cpu)
That isn't the GPU accelerated stuff. Have a read about it before it gets more embarrassing
.Edit: to be clear, some effects can't be ran on the CPU because nVidia don't allow it. Technically there's no reason why they couldn't but PhysX is nVidia tech so it's their choice. Away from the morals of that you can run some PhysX effects on the CPU but obviously there'll be fairly large slow downs. However, as I say some effects require GPU acceleration.
So in a title where GPU accelerated effects are present with an AMD GPU you would never see them.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 20,679
- Location
- The KOP
That isn't the GPU accelerated stuff. Have a read about it before it gets more embarrassing
Edit: to be clear, some effects can't be ran on the CPU because nVidia don't allow it. Technically there's no reason why they couldn't but PhysX is nVidia tech so it's their choice. Away from the morals of that you can run some PhysX effects on the CPU but obviously there'll be fairly large slow downs. However, as I say some effects require GPU acceleration.
So in a title where GPU accelerated effects are present with an AMD GPU you would never see them.
Please do show me a screenshot side by side to mine. I had PhysX on Normal.
From what I have seen, from Batman AC vs Nvidia tech trailer then isnt any difference?
Screenshots here
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 20,679
- Location
- The KOP
But why when I watch the PhysX trailer for Batman AC do I see the same thing when I run the test be it less FPS??
Am not talking here about other games that lock out PhysX from CPU totally am talking about the selection of games that do allow like Batman and Metro 1&2, Arma 3 they is more just can't remember right now.
Associate
- Joined
- 28 Feb 2013
- Posts
- 2,468
- Location
- Birmingham
Didnt know this. So maxwell will have a second chip? Hmm
Maybe the main gpu will be the renderer and the arm chip the conductor (I.e a cpu but on the video card rather than a traditional cpu)
I believe that the plan is to have an ARM chip built onto the Maxwell graphics cards, hopefully that idea is still going ahead as I can see it being quite beneficial - it could even be a hardware solution for dealing with more draw calls, but I'm not entirely sure what it will do yet, we shall hear more in the next few months I expect.
Read my post above - GPU accelerated effects cannot be ran on the CPU. As I said, what difference they make to IQ is a different question. One I'm not really that interested in personally.
It's up to game devs to implement features if they wish.
It's up to game devs to implement features if they wish.