Oleg Maddox's Room #1

[proton45]

Originally Posted by 99th_Flyby

Actually, I'd bet granny's drawers SoW will be more cpu-dependent rather so than the GPU. PhysX actually works by taking some of that computational work off the cpu and sending it to the GPU. In an SLi format, once card could actually take on that extra bit of workload. Articles on PhysX claim that's oow it works, and does so because the GPU supposedly has more computational power
http://www.blachford.info/computer/articles/PhysX1.html

A nice OCP forum discussion here: http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1336975

I'm hopeful that a powerful GPU with over 512mb of memory will be sufficient for SoW; something like a 4870-1gb card, or even a GTX 260-12 should nearly dominate SoW. But the cpu...well that's another matter, especially with all those ground objects milling about. I'm only hopeful we can turn them down or off.
Flyby out

We will see...I just hope that everybody's GPU is powerful enough to take the performance hit. Some of the "tests" in that article showed a substantial FPS (drop) hit when the physics was processed on the GPU. It looked like the only cards that could handle it where the "above 8000" series Nnvidia cards (don't know the ATI equivalent_lol).

[usagold2004]

Oleg, I did a search for this topic on this thread, and found nothing. Sorry if I double post the same topic.

One aspect of WWII combat that I hope SoW will model better than IL2 is the effect of attacking out of the sun. I have been doing a lot of reading as I am sure your team has and it is a recurring theme that pilots hated to have the sun at their back unless they were attacking with it behind them. Will this be a larger factor in game play in SoW? in IL-2, i feel little threat from enemies coming at me undetected from the sun.

[SPUDLEY1977]

What is the point of Physx. If the GPU is directed to procress more data, what is the point? After all we already have multi core CPUs, many of which are available to process more carnage. THe cost of an additonal core on the CPU is a mere fraction of that of an additional GPU core.

It seems rather daft to use PHYSCOTIX to market vidcards, and further absolutly dumbfounding to imply that we might need a second GPU to process PHYCHE-x computaions. Use a CPU core.

I smells more of the SLI marketing BS. SLI never made sence and still does not, so now instead of needing a second vidcard for SLI now we need one for FUSSUX?

SLI fizzled, never delivered, never was remotely cost effective. Although they spent loads of $$ on hype and marketing which would have been better invested for the consumers in ditching the thoughtless stock cooling for more simple, cheaper, quieter, and tons more effective cooling like Artic Cooling Accelero coolers.

Please research before you buy the hype. I hear rumblings they will be marketing a third videocard dedicated to keeping your coffee and dognuts warm whilst flying and fragging. Oh say it ain't so.

FLYBYE - you soon will need a third job to build the future!

[flyingbullseye]

You're right and a little off Spud. The problem with physiX is just what you mentioned, that you need a second gpu or watch your fps drop like a rock. Hence the other alternative, havoc which is cpu bound and doesn't have the fps hit as long as you have at least a dual core.

However SLI now with the i7 chips is starting to stretch its legs as the drivers have been coded for multi core cpus, prior to i7 you'd have a decent argument but it still shows an improvement, however small or great it was, when the game is coded to take advantage of it. Xfire has yet to do that but could also show similar results if or when implimented for multi core chips. The biggest problem with the graphics cards is the drivers, both companies need to really really focus on releasing an excellent driver before they go on to creating a new card but there's no money in the drivers soooo you get the picture.

Flyingbullseye

[Flyby]

I imagine PhysX and ATi's equivalent could be worthwhile computational aides one day. But don't get the idea that I ever bought into SLi or Crossfire. I'm a fan of neither. Give me one solid-performing GPU and I'm happy.
It's one thing to try to keep up with some interesting concepts (like Hydra). But the reality is really all about what software codes gaming programmers are willing to use. So far only one or two games support PhysX. The best thing about it is that PhysX is now a software implementation for Nvidia, through it's drivers.
Imagine the day when Oleg releases recommended requirements. Better get your orders in for a Cray right about now.
Flyby out

[SPUDLEY1977]

Before everone starts kissing each others bum over Fishysicks, as long as you process min 60 FPS, your LCD will never show the effects of higher FPS.

Above that point it is just a meaningless number on your LCD screen.

[Abbeville-Boy]

i hope to have more than hit "I" to start motor in storm of war

[robtek]

I also hope for a "full real" CEM with different workloads for different planes!
NO BALANCING THERE !

[SlipBall]

I agree!...come on Oleg, just a couple more month's of work for the crew. Give it to us with a switch, if you do I'll buy a dozen copies and give them to my favorite people...you will be rich beyond belief

[stockplane]

Hallo to all,
i'm new for this interesting forum.
I have a question : I have two installations of Sturmovik 1946, the first
modded with UI v1.1 the second with ultra@pach, i wish, if is possible
add into UI tree missing planes: Cantz 1007, Hs-123 and PZL-24.
That is possible and if what is the correct method?
Sorry for my bad english and thanks in advanced for any further
informations about.
Regards.