The Register does PhysX - Review

SteveOBHave · 5 May 2006 at 11:29

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/05/04/review_ageia_physx_board/

Darkwave · 5 May 2006 at 11:44

Got one over at AnandTech, too.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2751

Not looking good at all TBH, stupidly lower frames.

SteveOBHave · 5 May 2006 at 12:10

Exsomnis said:
Got one over at AnandTech, too.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2751

Not looking good at all TBH, stupidly lower frames.

Yeah, but it is really important to note that the reviewers have gone to great pains to mention: "Early days yet".

This is a game of observation in my opinion.

HEADRAT · 5 May 2006 at 12:19

Yep observe others waste there money on a product that has come too early to market

HEADRAT

Lanz · 5 May 2006 at 12:27

*me waits two years for a tiny 2inch, passive cooled pci-e x1 PhysX card that costs £50*

Darkwave · 5 May 2006 at 13:28

Lanz said:
*me waits two years for a tiny 2inch, passive cooled pci-e x1 PhysX card that costs £50*

I'm with you on this one.

Jimbo Mahoney · 5 May 2006 at 14:02

HEADRAT said:
Yep observe others waste there money on a product that has come too early to market

HEADRAT

Bit mean matey.

I think it's cool for people to be keen and want to try new things, just as long as they are aware it's early days and might not be ready yet. Sucks if they were expecting great things...

/grammar nazi

'there' should be 'their', since the money belongs to them

HEADRAT · 5 May 2006 at 15:46

Jimbo Mahoney said:
Bit mean matey.

Mwhwahahhaha I'm pure evil me

, I'm all for early adoption of tech. but you really do have to know where to draw the line!

Cheers

HEADRAT

KizZ · 5 May 2006 at 15:56

I think the physics card are VERY immature technology at the moment. Give it some time and Im sure it'll get better.

superjimbob · 5 May 2006 at 17:09

Lanz said:
*me waits two years for a tiny 2inch, passive cooled pci-e x1 PhysX card that costs £50*

and on a 65nm process chip not 130, no doubt. At the moment it's just eye candy and vanishing debris on these big titles so pc gamers won't pay to take a performance hit ,If /when a big popular game becomes physx only meaning proper interaction and physical harm from flying debris,falling walls on so on, then sure. The PS3 has an advantage for game developers in this, as everyone has it.

HangTime · 5 May 2006 at 18:52

From 66 to 17fps with an FX-57? Well worth £200 of anyone's money

LoadsaMoney · 5 May 2006 at 19:01

HangTime said:
From 66 to 17fps with an FX-57? Well worth £200 of anyone's money

May as well wait for the 256mb and spend about £300.

Durzel · 5 May 2006 at 19:14

Jimbo Mahoney said:
Bit mean matey.

I think it's cool for people to be keen and want to try new things, just as long as they are aware it's early days and might not be ready yet. Sucks if they were expecting great things...

/grammar nazi

'there' should be 'their', since the money belongs to them

It's not mean really, its just fact. If people buy into hype and fancy product names then its their own fault when it bites them on the ass. As the old saying goes, a fool and his money are easily parted.

Not trolling - I just haven't got time for people who blindly buy completely unproven technology solely on the strength of hype.

I hate to say it but if AGEIA are relying on sales to fund continued development of these cards, the APIs that power them, etc then we could find them disappearing from the market as fast as they seemingly entered. Which would be a shame really, since hardware PPUs would - at least on paper - have the potential to work really well alongside CPUs doing regular math (AI, etc) and graphics cards drawing the results.

Darkwave · 5 May 2006 at 19:19

I wonder if ATi and Nvidia will do better than Ageia when they enable physics processing with Crossfire/SLi instead of with a dedicated card.

I also wonder if this will breed a new generation of fanboy. :eek:

The "dual GPU physics fanboys" versus the "dedicated physics card fanboys." :eek:

Time will tell, but 2006 is definitely going to be an interesting year in gaming.

Durzel · 5 May 2006 at 19:22

Exsomnis said:
I wonder if ATi and Nvidia will do better than Ageia when they enable physics processing with Crossfire/SLi instead of with a dedicated card. I also wonder if this will breed a new generation of fanboy. The "dual GPU physics fanboys" versus the "dedicated physics card fanboys."

Time will tell, but 2006 is definitely going to be an interesting year in gaming.

It should be "better" by definition, since it will have direct access to the GPU (completely abstracted from any PCI/CPU/PCI-E pathway) but I will be interested to see what standards (if any) ATI and NVidia adopt. I can't see them designing their own physics implementation for the same reason that PhysX is currently floundering - no meaningful developer support.

If ATI and/or NVidia buy wholesale into HavocFX on their graphics cards then it could be the nail in the coffin of PhysX before its even got off the ground.

Darkwave · 5 May 2006 at 19:30

Durzel said:
It should be "better" by definition, since it will have direct access to the GPU (completely abstracted from any PCI/CPU/PCI-E pathway) but I will be interested to see what standards (if any) ATI and NVidia adopt. I can't see them designing their own physics implementation for the same reason that PhysX is currently floundering - no meaningful developer support.

If ATI and/or NVidia buy wholesale into HavocFX on their graphics cards then it could be the nail in the coffin of PhysX before its even got off the ground.

I have to agree that using the second GPU in a Crossfire/SLi system seems a much more sensible option. As it currently stands, even without complex physics calculations, Crossfire and SLi need something to do (stupidly high resolutions and lots of AA/AF and post-processing effects) to push both cards, or you are burdened with the CPU limiting overheads which can actually reduce performance in many cases.

Giving the second GPU the task of doing a certain percentage of secondary graphics calculations, and the remaining percentage of physics calculations, might just be able to take so much load off of the CPU that it might go a long way to removing the CPU limitation and making the entire gaming experience smoother overall while still making it look fantastic.

Of course, people were saying this exact thing about Ageia PhysiX cards until we finally got to see one in action, so we won't know until ATi and Nvidia show us what they have in mind.

Eliot · 5 May 2006 at 20:15

why why why why should we pay more for this than the best xfi?
sound is probly 50 times more important than 'bits of rubble' plus a good sound crad INCREASES your frame rate and costs half the price.

Energize · 5 May 2006 at 20:41

A lot of people prefer massive explosions to great sound espically if they've never experienced it. Graphics cards cost more than the ageia physx ppu and yet people still buy them.

Darkwave · 5 May 2006 at 20:46

Energize said:
Graphics cards cost more than the ageia physx ppu and yet people still buy them.

That's because graphics cards don't drop your FPS through the floor though.

Energize · 5 May 2006 at 20:47

Exsomnis said:
That's because graphics cards don't drop your FPS through the floor though.

Yes but my point is that people spend much more on them on a soundcard because people want good looking games rather than sound. And if something makes a big difference it is worth the extra money.