People were stating the physx cards were a waste of time - which they were. Caught in a vicious cycle of people not taking them up meant devs had no reason to really take much notice of the cards, which meant people didn't buy them etc. I think nVidia has done the best thing for the physx SDK in general by implementing it in CUDA for their 8 series and similar.
-
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.
R.I.P Physx Hardware
- Thread starter Tom|Nbk
- Start date
And?
A debate/discussion on a discussion forum who'd have thunk it.
And? We've heard it all before. Many, many, many, many times. I have no problem with debate, but lets see if we can avoid the whole issue of someone puttin the ppu down, pottsey coming back, lather/rinse/repeat.
The cards, as they are, are dead, lets let them sleep peacefully.
And yes Tom, we all know your opinion on the PPU almost as well as Loadsa's on the 9 series from NV!!
(Sorry Loadsa!!)A wasted oppourtunity?? LOL. What do you think the ATi folks will do if they want Physx?, they will buy the NVIDIA GPU's and we all know this is much better than buying some tat add on card with a low markup and no doubt high production cost, it will sell more GPU's and increase market share thus hurting ATi more.
I saw this coming.
Good reply. Come back when you have a credible argument.
Not sure what this means on the whole nVidia, AMD (ATi), Intel situation, though. It could mean that Intel and nVidia collectively oust AMD from the graphics market by both having strong hardware physics acceleration (Havok and PhysX respectively) while AMD tries to implement some solution of its own. Very interesting situation here.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
wrong. a physix card, done right, is somethign that would cost peanuts to build and something that could make a killing on. for all those people who would choose amd over intel, it would still be an option = more money for nvidia. its not as straight forward as kill off the cards and hope people will make a switch.
i think everybody saw this coming.
child.
“Pottsey I do remember you saying the Physx card would handle physics better than a GPU but this obviously can't be the case right otherwise they wouldn't have killed them off.“
I don’t recall saying the Physx card are better than the GPU. I said a PPU should be better than a GPU which is true. We still don’t know if the Physx card is faster or slower then a GPU. I only ever argued the CPU is to weak for physics, never did I say as far as I recall that a GPU would be to weak. I did say more then once I see the GPU as the 2nd best option but still way better then the CPU.
“ Pottsey.
If it was worth it, PEOPLE WOULD HAVE BOUGH IT. I would have, most of this forum would have!!”
When have I been saying it’s worth it, not for well over a year or more, could even be 2 years now. I often said game support is lacking and it’s not worth it. Some of you guys don’t seem to get my posts. I have been arguing for hardware physics for a long time. Not just for Physx PPU’s only.
” Success requires sales, the card DID NOT sell lots, so its not a success in any shape or form”
I agree, then again I never said the PPU was a success. Its game support is very bad and Ageia did a terrible job of marketing it. The PPU came out to early with not enough game support. GRAW 1 did more harm then good and the first few drivers also did a lot of harm.
I don’t recall saying the Physx card are better than the GPU. I said a PPU should be better than a GPU which is true. We still don’t know if the Physx card is faster or slower then a GPU. I only ever argued the CPU is to weak for physics, never did I say as far as I recall that a GPU would be to weak. I did say more then once I see the GPU as the 2nd best option but still way better then the CPU.
“ Pottsey.
If it was worth it, PEOPLE WOULD HAVE BOUGH IT. I would have, most of this forum would have!!”
When have I been saying it’s worth it, not for well over a year or more, could even be 2 years now. I often said game support is lacking and it’s not worth it. Some of you guys don’t seem to get my posts. I have been arguing for hardware physics for a long time. Not just for Physx PPU’s only.
” Success requires sales, the card DID NOT sell lots, so its not a success in any shape or form”
I agree, then again I never said the PPU was a success. Its game support is very bad and Ageia did a terrible job of marketing it. The PPU came out to early with not enough game support. GRAW 1 did more harm then good and the first few drivers also did a lot of harm.
Clearly not, they've had years to have it 'done right' and refine the process. I think the NVIDIA marketing heads have a little more knowledge than you and hence the reason that the PPU was dropped.
The PPU had a bad reputation which even NVIDIA wouldn't be able to turn round IMO. Encoding the API into CUDA is the best thing to have happened for NVIDIA in recent times. They will sell more GPU's for this FACT.
Infact, the GPU's will have a higher markup than the PPU so this makes perfect sense.
James, the only child here is you with your over reacting and twisting of words and creating problems which don't even exist, but hey keep coming out with this and maybe one day you'll win a debate
.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
keep convincing yourself of that tom.On another note, I think it's good that Ageia got bought by nVidia rather than them becoming little but a patent troll like some companies do (*coughrambuscough*).
And again, on the graphics front, this presents an extremely complicated situation... Intel (larabee) and nVidia will have the physics argument for their graphics hardware, however, Intel and AMD are likely to show mutual support when it comes to multi-GPU configurations on their chipsets with nvidia being the 'loner' in that department.
And again, on the graphics front, this presents an extremely complicated situation... Intel (larabee) and nVidia will have the physics argument for their graphics hardware, however, Intel and AMD are likely to show mutual support when it comes to multi-GPU configurations on their chipsets with nvidia being the 'loner' in that department.
I'm wondering what ATi's answer to this will be. Havok FX has been ditched so this poses a big problem to them ATM.
Cheers for getting it back OT.
Im sure Nvidia will continue to provide support for the existing hardware though
Boy I hope that was sarcasm
You guys argue when Physx was still alive and you still argue when it's dead and everyone knows its dead and people on the street are throwing dead kittens on Physx corpses the world over with children screaming and the Crying and the Hurting and the Pushing and Shoving :/
”You guys argue when Physx was still alive and you still argue when it's dead and everyone knows its dead and people on the street are throwing dead kittens on Physx corpses”
You seem to be mistaken. Physx has never been more alive it’s a long way from dead. It’s just got a massive boost. We are going see more and more Physx from now on. Not less.
You seem to be mistaken. Physx has never been more alive it’s a long way from dead. It’s just got a massive boost. We are going see more and more Physx from now on. Not less.
I think he means the dedicated PhysX card.