Serifan said:
Yeah your right, And I would rather not pay 300 for a PPU but the fact at the moment is the PPU is the only way at the moment we can get this amount of physics in a game. until the right coding is done Im affraid the PPU is the way to go for now.
What a load of crap.
http://www.havok.com/content/view/72/57/
"Havok FX™ is a special effects SDK and tool chain that leverages Shader Model 3.0 class GPUs to enable ten's of thousands of object collisions occurring in real-time, without putting additional burden on the CPU or otherwise slowing down the game. Havok FX integrates seamlessly with Havok's industry-leading game-play physics technology found in Havok Complete™, allowing game-critical objects to interact with each other in split second timing, spawning eye-popping special effects physics that adds complexity and realism to the game-play experience."
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1979051,00.asp
"Microsoft appears to be working to add physics support inside of its DirectX application interface, according to a job posting by the software giant
...
On the other hand, Havok has optimized its solution to run on graphics chips,
which appears to be the direction that Direct Physics will take."
Lead industry players agree - in the immediate future, real-time physics computations will be done on programmable graphics hardware. Why?
1. Because GPU is suited for handling physics. Much like graphics, physics involves simultaneous processing of many objects and can therefore be parallelized on graphics hardware.
2. Because every gamer already has a GPU.
3. Because developers don't need to become familiar with some obscure API. Proficient in a shader language? Then welcome to the wonderful world of physics programming.
4. Because programmable graphics hardware is standardized. In most cases, a shader that runs on an nVidia card will also run on an ATI card, and vice versa.
What is PPU? Essentially, PPU is a programmable processor similar in design to your average GPU. However, unlike a GPU, PPU is programmable only through PhysX, a proprietary API/SDK. It *doesn't* support any of the standard shader models implemented on mainstream graphics hardware. Therefore, a developer who wants to write a physics engine with support for PhysX must first purchase an expensive license from AGEIA. Imagine what that entails; the developer will be investing a lot of time and money in developing an engine for a piece of hardware that is manufactured by only one company in the entire world. If (or should I say, when) PhysX flops and AGEIA goes under, his fancy new engine won't be able to run *on any system, anywhere* (well, except on those couple of dozen whose owners got suckered into paying $300 for a useless product).
On the other hand, even if Havok FX or Direct Physics fail to gain mainstream acceptance in the industry, the titles that use them will nonetheless perform optimally on all computers equipped with a GPU that supports Shader Model 3.0 (or in case of Direct Physics, 4.0), which is just about any system assembled since 2004.
http://www.havok.com/content/view/187/77/
"Does Havok FX Support AGEIA?
Havok FX supports all hardware that can execute standard OpenGL and Direct3D code at the Shader Model 3.0 level.
If the AGEIA card and drivers adopt and support Shader Model 3.0 industry standard, Havok FX support will be possible."
Whoopsy-daisy. Looks like Havok FX applications won't be benefiting from AGEIA PhysX any time soon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PhysX#Supported_Titles
Let's see the "impressive" list of titles that support PhysX:
Bet on Soldier: Blood Sport <--- crap
Bet on Soldier: Blood Of Sahara <--- crap
CellFactor <--- bound to be crap, proven to benefit from PhysX only for clothing simulations
City of Villains <--- decent, doesn't really need PhysX
Dark Physics (Consumer Development Tool) <--- useless
Gunship Apocalypse <--- never heard of it
Joint Task Force <--- seems OK, though I wonder how much an RTS can possibly benefit from physics acceleration
Rise of Nations: Rise of Legends <--- same as JTF
Stoked Rider: Big Mountain Snowboarding <--- never heard of it
Switchball <--- never heard of it
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter <--- crap, proven to run slower with PhysX than without it
Company of Heroes <--- same as JTF and Rise of Legends
The list of future titles is equally "impressive":
1944 D-Day Operation Overlord <--- never heard of it, sounds like crap
Alpha Prime <--- never heard of it
Arena Online <--- never heard of it, sounds like crap
Auto Assault <--- crap
Bet On Soldier Black Out Saigon <--- never heard of it, probably crap like the original
Crazy Machines 2 <--- never heard of it
CellFactor: Revolution <--- bound to be crap
Dogtag <--- never heard of it
Eye of the Storm <--- never heard of it
Fallen Earth <--- never heard of it
Forlorn World <--- !!!
Frozen Systems <--- never heard of it
Heavy Rain <--- never heard of it
Infernal <--- never heard of it
KARMA <--- never heard of it, sounds like crap
Loki <--- never heard of it
Monster Madness <--- never heard of it, sounds like crap
Rail Simulator <--- never heard of it
RoboBlitz <--- never heard of it
Sacred II <--- a sequel to Sacred can mean only one thing: crap
Silverfall <--- never heard of it
Tank Killer <--- never heard of it
Unreal Tournament 2007 <--- finally, something promising
Vanguard: Saga of Heroes <--- seems promising, though I doubt it will benefit from a PhysX card much
Warhammer Online <--- same as Vanguard
Conclusion: most of the games that support PhysX are crap, and just about all of them use hardware-accelerated physics as a visual gimmick that has no effect on gameplay whatsoever... which would be OK if one didn't have to shell out $300 for said gimmick.
