• 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.

Why do PhysX cards need so much RAM?

Associate
Joined
28 Jun 2005
Posts
2,174
Location
Behind you
Hi guys,

I was just wondering why these cards need 128mb ( and 256mb) of RAM? Surely all they need to hold is the basic object data and not textures and shaders ect. Sorry if i'm missing something and I seem dumb.
 
Last edited:
Dutch Guy said:
Good question actually, I wondered the same.

Maybe they stick RAM on it so they charge more?

Bet that's it! Can't imagine any real reason for that much! Just like metalmackey says!!!

gt_junkie
 
Has anyone tested to see if the 256mb cards are any faster than the 128mb ones? 32mb is probably enough for the cards to hold the data they need, unless, like I said earlier i'm missing something.
 
metalmackey said:
Hi guys,

I was just wondering why these cards need 128mb ( and 256mb) of RAM? Surely all they need to hold is the basic object data and not textures and shaders ect. Sorry if i'm missing something and I seem dumb.

Well going on the Cell Factor demo, all the card does is a few/cloth liquid effects, all the rest is done in software, so that all that RAM must do absolutely nothing :D
 
“Wonder if Pottsey knows the answer...“
Not got a clue. I could try and arrange an Q&A interview with one of the Ageia staff for my website. They seem to respond to peoples emails well.

But I need more then 1 question. If we could put together say 10 to 15 well worded questions there is a chance of a Q&A. I don’t really want to start another thread on this as everyone will jump at me again. So post your questions here or email me. There is no guarantee they will respond to me though.
 
Pottsey said:
“Wonder if Pottsey knows the answer...“
Not got a clue. I could try and arrange an Q&A interview with one of the Ageia staff for my website. They seem to respond to peoples emails well.

But I need more then 1 question. If we could put together say 10 to 15 well worded questions there is a chance of a Q&A. I don’t really want to start another thread on this as everyone will jump at me again. So post your questions here or email me. There is no guarantee they will respond to me though.

Sounds like a really good idea... my suggestions follow.

1) Would they consider future integration of their product with either graphics cards, motherboards or soundcards?

2) Are they working with Microsoft towards their promised Physics API?

3) What is the advantage of extra RAM?

4) Are their cards likely to see short gaps between 'generation' as graphics cards are currently - is their product likely to see the same 'race for development'?

5) How much processor headroom are their cards likely to have on upcoming titles such as Unreal 3?
 
- Will DX10 and Vista be an advantage or disadvantage for PhysX technology?
- How much game development is needed to make a game use PhysX?
 
Maybe its just there for a bit of future proofing, just because its not used now doesnt mean it cant be used in the future
 
Another question to ask Aegia pottsey. How much bandwidth does the card use and does having other pci cards (sound, network ect) affect the performance of the card?
 
How about this: With a unified Physics API would non-gaming applications be able to take advantage of Ageia's physics processing? Might Ageia's processors be useful to the workstation market where graphics rendering quality and accuracy are more important than rendering rate?
 
1. Can the card be used by people interested in non-gaming applications?
2. Is there a general physics API available for C/C++ for non-gaming ?
3. GPGPU applications have issues with GPUs todo with precision - usually GPUs only support float rather than IEEE double or extended. What precision does the card offer?
 
card needs memory to hold object data such as object shape, size and mass. if an object has been moved then its location and orientation needs to be stored somewhere, now storing it in main system ram is going to be slow since all these maths calculations need very low latency memory so that there is no hitching or jerking when lots of objects are moving around. object collision would also take up some memory. objects are not stored as whole units, just their wire frame status is required. the rest the cpu handles.

it could be something like this:

Look at an explosion scene in cellfactor when that level starts all the world objects need to be loaded into the ppu's ram and not just the objects you can see on screen. if an explosion takes place and a box files out of the players view and hits another object causing explosions or movment of other objects etc then its status in the world needs to be updated. and if the ppu is only calculating things in the players view then its not going to be of any use at all.

now imagine a land mine has been placed on the road outside a building and then the player runs inside the building the ppu needs to know about the mina and all the other things in the world otherwise explosions that take place out of the players main view will not be processed by the PPU if the ppu is configured to only process stuff in the players direct view due to memory limitations.

now the ppu needs onboard memory to hold all this data. most of this if not all of this is vector based data that the card holds on the entire world terrain and objects.
e.g. a table like this could be used by the ppu:

ObjectName, ObjectSize, ObjectDimensions, ObjectWeight, ObjectMaterial
box1 , small , 12x9x11 , 22kg , cardboard


something like the above needs to be held, along with lots of other information such as if the object is in motion then its rate of acceleration needs to be calculated and its friction level on the terrain. ObjectMaterial e.g cardboard will link to another table showing how to calculate friction e.g cardboard vs concrete or cardboard vs grass. lots of other factors to take into consideration such as mavity, air density, box strength etc.

all this table data is what takes up space in the ppu's memory. now the above is assuming that the ppu uses the most advanced form of physics which i really doubt the ageia implementation uses.

if you all sit back and look at your pc tables for a minute just imagine how much physics calculations would be needed to move an object over the desk alone.
the weight of you monitor etc could show stress points up on certain areas of your table. real physics is next to impossible to simulate since there is jut too many factors that need to be calculated for a single object. i really doubt the ageia implementation has this power to begin with. but then again im assuming that the physics will mimick that of the real world. the physics in halflife2 were very good best i have come across in a game but most of the time it was just scripted events that programmers already knew about.

e.g in real physics i could just blow up a wall or blow up a gate that i need to get through to get to the other side. but then this opens up another question, physics in a game will have to be limited to some extent otherwise its going to be too easy to clock a game.

there is so much to physics that ageia have not addressed and i believe its to do with the lack of power on their ppu.
what they are trying to do is make the movement of objects more realistic but thats not what they should be aiming for. the aim of this generation should be to get deformable terrains and breakable materials into play. then improve on that over the later years.
 
Would it not be next to impossible to implement "true" physics in a game though? Ie. A game set in a city, where instead of having to go down alleyway A to get to alleyway B, you can blow a hole in wall A, and walk straight into alleyway C. There's so many possibilities that it'd be mind-boggling. The amount of manpower needed to program all the posibilites would take forever.

That's why the majority of today's "open-ended" games are set outside. Take Far Cry, you can assault base A from the top of hill B, or you can bypass it and attack base B from hill D. But there's no need to think "will I go down street A, B or C? Will I blow this wall open, and just get to the end that way?"
The level is huge in Far Cry, but it's just a big level. And that's it. It's just a level, that's so big you can move 360 degrees around an objective and assault it from any direction. Basically there's a limited amount of decisions you can make, so it's a lot easier.

Same goes for Oblivion and the like.

Correct me if I'm wrong though, that's just my observation.
 
there is just a lot to calculate.

also if the cpu is doing all the work as in it holds all the table information on object data such as weight, size etc but the ppu is used to perform the calculations of movement then its going to get to the point that the latency of getting data from the cpu to the ppu and back is the limiting factor. i doubt ageia used this method seeing as how the ppu uses a pci connection.

also why not scrap physics and go for AI insted?

imagine playing fifa football then in the stadium a terrorist bomb goes off and then there is a riot in the crowd and the match has to be postponed. or the goalkeeper refuses to play becuase he is upset that his wife has been having an affair with the center forward in the team, so the goalie tries to purpously injust his own team mate. or something on those lines.

2 things in games that will NEVER be fully functioning: Physics and Artificial Intelligence. no cpu power in the world is able to generate that level of complexity, and i doubt it still will be able to do that come year 2200
 
Back
Top Bottom