support PhysicsX and/or Havok?

[Codex]

nVidia bought the PhysX API from Agea and have now incorporated it into their drivers, which means all 8000, 9000 and the new 200 series of cards can run the PhysX API via a GPU shader. Smart move really, this means about 70 million nVidia cards can run Agea PhysX in hardware mode.

Don't know if Oleg will use the API in SoW, but I've always believed this technology can be employed for things far more sophisticated that just eye candy, I think it can actually enhance damage and flight modelling in the sim.

Also Goggle CUDA ... very interesting reading.

[proton45]

Originally Posted by Codex

nVidia bought the PhysX API from Agea and have now incorporated it into their drivers, which means all 8000, 9000 and the new 200 series of cards can run the PhysX API via a GPU shader. Smart move really, this means about 70 million nVidia cards can run Agea PhysX in hardware mode.

Don't know if Oleg will use the API in SoW, but I've always believed this technology can be employed for things far more sophisticated that just eye candy, I think it can actually enhance damage and flight modelling in the sim.

Also Goggle CUDA ... very interesting reading.

So the physics(X) is calculated on the GPU instead of the CPU??

Is the 8000 series a dual chip graphics card?

That seems kind of weird to me (but if it works it works)... my graphics card works pretty hard calculating the eye candy already, I can't imagine what my FPS would be if the GPU was calculating a bunch of bricks flying about and their shadows & reflections in a rolling mist...

It seems to me that you really need two chips (one for GPU, and one for physics) to see any true improvement in performance and visuals...

Interesting...

[mondo]

No, not two chips, more than one core on the CPU Look at the tech demos for "Alan Wake". They explain everything you'll need to know about how physics in games is progressing.

Originally Posted by Codex

Don't know if Oleg will use the API in SoW, but I've always believed this technology can be employed for things far more sophisticated that just eye candy, I think it can actually enhance damage and flight modelling in the sim.

You won't see a game engine that is a two tier system where more complex calculations are made on more complex hardware when it relates to calcualtion that all users will have to make e.g. FM's or DM'. Doing such things with eye candy is viable because it doesn't affect the games balance, although even that can be argued.

If that was the case you'd find people buying and using hardware that gives the most advantage to them online, not to mention the developer has to design and build every calculation twice, once for CPU only users and another for specialist hardware.

For anything other than a bespoke bit of software you build it to the most common specificaitons and especially set standards so the widest possible market and use the product.

[Flyby]

I think therefore I am (lucky I posted here!) good replies, and info!
thanks!
Flyby out

[Thunderbolt56]

To directly answer your questions, It was once stated (by Oleg or Ilya in some interview) that SoW:BoB will support dual core processors so we know it will do that for certain. They may have actually coded in support for quads since that interview, but who knows. Secondly, it was directly stated that they will NOT support the PhysX hardware but, again, that was at least 6 months ago (probably longer) and could have changed since it was originally written. As was already stated, PhysX has made some strides since it was first introduced though real-world applications are still showing less than stellar performance gains.


TB

[Flyby]

thanks TB,
It would be nice to know if quad cores were coded in or not, especially for those gamers among us looking to build new systems. IIRC only of the two new Nvidia cards, only the Uber GX280 will have the PhysX implementation. Maybe Oleg can address these issues in his next update?
Flyby out

[IceFire]

I imagine that once you get over the hurdle of making something dual core capable that moving things around to four cores isn't that big of a deal as you already have the frameworks in place. I'm saying this without any real programming knowledge...just some general reading on the subject.

What they should say is mutlicore programming or multithreaded programming. Once you get past just doing everything for one core I would think you could scare upwards...as long as you had threads that could be broken out into and still remain synchronized.

[Feuerfalke]

Both cards are at the moment basically used for eyecandy only. I think it would be pretty hard to make it worth much more. Consider that not everybody will buy this hardware and if you dedicate parts of the physics to these systems, you have to make physics the same for single- and multicore-PCs and both in combination with a physics coprocessor.

As tempting as it may sound, I doubt it will be more than providing additional eyecandy.

[JG27CaptStubing]

Well just to further comment about physx if you will...

I would really like to see the Damage models improve dramatically. Not only from taking damage from weapons but possible "bending" your plane as well. Being hit while under a strong G load can cause a catastrophic failure or if the game models more complex systems like O2 and fuel management that they can fail on you. Now I know that really doesn't have a lot to do with Physx but it would be nice to see this sim take it to the next level.

[Codex]

Don't forget each shader is a programmable core. The 280GTX has 240 of them. That is some serious parallel power, and they can be programmed using C and C++.

I suspect that is why Intel is making a lot noise lately about how GPU's will never be good for everyday computing. But I reckon their $hit'n their pants at the prospect that GPGPU's (General Purpose GPUs) are becoming more than just a fleeting hobby now.