This is irrelivant. The R.A.G.E engine does not use PhysX or CUDA, It uses an enhanced version of the europhia motion engine, Which simulates on the CPU. But @Force2013, You are wrong, The cars are infact fully deformable.
Look mate, i dont know what you're trying to proove or w/e, But i am a professional games programmer and physics is one of my specialitys, so i do know what im talking about. I mean you could make out what i meant anyway. Why the unnessecery debate? Just to sound l33t?
You're the one debating, and I don't give a shit if you're Bill Gates himself, all I said was that you spell Euphoria wrong. Listen to you, you sound like a royal douche, "I'm a physics programmer so I know what I'm talking about!". Well it's in plain english boy-o, right down below, you spelled it "europhia". Maybe one day you'll grow up, but I'm doubted as for now. Oh and being an amature with some shitty physics engine DOES NOT make you a proffesional. Good day.
And i mean the debate about the spelling, Only a jealous man would comment on something so insignificant. I am NOT a writer, As i said im a programmer.
Wait, You were saying that I DONT KNOW WHAT IM TALKING ABOUT, BECAUSE I SPELT SOMETHING WRONG. You CERTAINLY werent saying "Oh you spelt euphoria wrong", You were being hostile and you know it.
your so fast on the draw about spelling, and yet you messed up on your own grammar....if your no fucking better STFU, and if you need proof, ill give you a direct quote "Maybe one day you'll grow up, but I'm doubted as for now." (in case your too lazy to find it, it's your previous comment) Maybe your trying to sound smart, but that's still wrong, read a grammar book before you judge, get off his back, he never asked to be flamed over a typo.
Actually, that is proper sentence structure, so I don't know what you're bitching about. Oh and I didn't "flame" him, I told him that no body is going to take him seriously if he doesn't spell things right. Your not going to write a memo to your boss one day spelling things like you are now, are you? Exactly, so be quiet.
Sentence structure maybe....but when it comes down to it you wouldn't talk to people in every day life like that would you? no not unless your from the 1800's.
Oh and what the fuck is the point of telling me how i wouldn't talk to my boss? You aren't my boss so clearly i can talk to you however i want, all i was trying to get across is to stop being a douche about how this guy spells. so back off and shut up already.
will i be able to get this simulation thing like that kinda gamish thing like i can mash oil drums and stones like in the little clip or will i get it in a PDF file or will i get nothing at all...
a "physx" card will only help with games that use the "physx" dynamicd system, HL2 uses the havok physics engine, therfore it just using power, games that use physx can run without a physx card, just tend to be scaled down, when a card is present they are scaled up, softwere fluids are very limeted, but a card makes it seem oo so easy
They do infact have Phsy-X built in. NVIDIA made a partnership and it is so. Do your research next time and don't post ignorant comments to mislead others.
CUDA is implementing C Language within NVIDIA's 8 series GPU's and up to allow the use of PHYS-X within their GPUS's and NVIDIA DID make a partnership with Ageia and NVIDIA DOES have Ageia PHSY-X technology build in their GPU's. CUDA makes the running of Ageia PHYS-X technology possible. This is not all CUDA does.. it manages memory and allows for faster communication to the GPU as well as some other things.
NVIDIA coded their card to handle specific parts of the game "the whole pie" and the ageia card does the same thing.. that means the pies are overlapping.. one is trying to take data from another and so on... you won't notice a difference in some cases as far as running two at once but it can be harmful. and when your GPU has the technology built in already why get a Phsy-x card?
And if you think quad(4) core is enough,you're terribly wrong,there already is a working prototype of 64core CPU with advanced architecture(not Intel nor ATI),and for a change AMD-ATI collaboration brings 'fusion'(CPU and GPU in one device,PPU will come too)
Do you honestly think 64 core processors will appear soon enough to matter to present solutions? It is probably going to take decades to even become available to the general public; years after to get a decent install base, not forgetting the time needed to optimize software to utilise it.
I'm sure GPU companies and Ageia will simply sit around and wait for CPUs to overtake them.
Updated or not, they both have the ageia PhysX libraries, and they utilize one hardware thread for processing physics, so it could easily be done on an Xbox 360 or PS3, personally PhysX cards are not worth the money, and evelopers should instead work on utilizing multi core CPUs, like the Quad core in my rig :)
The difference is, that PPU is a specialized piece of hardware and it surpasses every general purpose CPU at doing physics. So while you can simulate a few physical behaving objects at the same time on an XBox or PS3, you could handle hundreds of objects on a PhysX. The only problem is, they are in somewhat of a chicken-egg situation that will take time to overcome.
these cards have potential... but the fact is no games support the tech, and never will because there is not a big enough install base of owners of this card to justify the implementaion of this over Havok physics that runs easily on a regular CPU. Tech demos are the only thing that uses this technology lol... oh and a handful of old games, and GRAW2 which has a hack to put all the physics onto the CPU and it runs perfect like that without a 300buck card.
That is the same situation we had with Hardware 3D acceleration in the second halve of the nineties and nowadays everyone has a 3D accelerated graphics card.
I feel that is a exaggeration, the PPU situation isn't 'that' bad.
Firstly they are much cheaper than $300 and secondly there are actually quite a few fun games that use them now such as Warmonger and UT3.
Ageia is in a good position with UT3, they can make mad physX levels and Epic doesn't have to worry about limiting their potential user base on PC. Games with modular content seem the best rout for growth right now, Ageia can produce their own content and not have to worry about a full game.
Ageia has superior game play physics acceleration, while Havok FX is better at using physics for special visual effects that have no impact on the game.
i cant wait till physics rules the gaming world and we wont have anymore cheapy pre rendered animations for things that blow up or just about anything in the game.
Nooooooo, who the hell think the mesh loaded for graphics and physics are the same. They are absolutely different ! Shapes for physic are much simpler for calculation times reasons !
And anyway, the vertice format is different...
Furthermore, a PPU has an architecture optimised for physics, a GPU which is optimise for streaming.
Seems most people here arent aware of GPU physics.
With the PhysX, the game has to request the PPU to handle the physics, and the results come back to the CPU for processing, before heading off to be rendered.
Now for the GPU(video card) physics, the game requests for the GPU to handle any physics, the video card then creates all the objects and draws them, without ever needing to send data back to the CPU.
I agree with those saying it gives an extra edge... I am a hardcore FPS gamer all the way, so this thing would be perfect for me... sure, it's a little expensive at the moment, but you gotta pay to get the best.
In my point of view the great advantage of using a PPU is the boundry-breaking ability to play games with real world object behavior and cinematics. Maybe this will give the extra adrenaline boost needed for most action games around. Its a great advance for sure! I believe that the next generation of game engines will have a special focus in Physics simulation.
LarryPalmer you are such a naif commercial idiot , This is the rocket, it's not supposed to show uber nice graphics it's to show the physics you moron...And don't use the Havokfx as argument as it isn't even released...
This is an example of a physics engine that requires hardware acceleration. Source is a game engine with a physics engine (havok I believe) integrated. This could be the next thing ADDED to source, or a feature of a new game engine, but alone it isn't a new game engine.The fact that there are no shadows doesn't mean a thing for this demonstration, it's a physics card not a graphics card.
I have had to install this on my computer for many games. I don't understand how this is used while building games. I don't know C++ so i guess that's the problem. But like in Java 3d i don't know how this could be incorporated. Into anything I could build.
A game is more then just programming every possible outcome.
To be perfectly honest, this is perhaps the worst way to design a game. So anyone who believes that this is completely useless for a game is a complete and total idiot.
unless u can smash in windows boarded up with corrigated iron HL2 style, or send bullets through, slowly denting it before smashing it right through, or blowing them out with grenates, loads of possibilities man. Not even mentioning racing games
Nvidia is better :3
omgitsgrim2 1 month ago
seems a little unrealistic u should make contact with the ceator of a game called Rigs of Rods for their deformation system.
11myedu 2 months ago
This seemed unrealistic.
ViolentBiscuits 2 years ago
LOL
kjulssfl 2 years ago
Can you download this demo somewhere?
paimail21 2 years ago
woiuld all these things work with an ATI card?
nurutoseks 2 years ago
More games need stuff like this
33399966 2 years ago
its like gta 4 car deformation
n11lc 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
gta 4 don't have car deformation it o´nly have a few shapes when you krash
force2013 3 years ago
you havnt played gta 4
n11lc 3 years ago 5
yes i have!!! i have it on pc
force2013 3 years ago
and you have a 7 series nvidia gpu
n11lc 3 years ago 6
This is irrelivant. The R.A.G.E engine does not use PhysX or CUDA, It uses an enhanced version of the europhia motion engine, Which simulates on the CPU. But @Force2013, You are wrong, The cars are infact fully deformable.
scratchyrice 2 years ago
i didnt say the engine uses physx or cuda
n11lc 2 years ago
Ok, So what connection did you make between the series of gpu, And his experience with the physics, Since the physics are calculated on the cpu.
scratchyrice 2 years ago
If the physics were calculated via cuda, Or the ati stream sdk, Then it would be relevant, But in this case its not.
scratchyrice 2 years ago
lol,
n11lc 2 years ago
Did you just try to prove a point when you don't even know the name of the physics engine you are talking about?
It's Euphoria, not europhia.
AngrySackBoy 2 years ago
Look mate, i dont know what you're trying to proove or w/e, But i am a professional games programmer and physics is one of my specialitys, so i do know what im talking about. I mean you could make out what i meant anyway. Why the unnessecery debate? Just to sound l33t?
scratchyrice 2 years ago
You're the one debating, and I don't give a shit if you're Bill Gates himself, all I said was that you spell Euphoria wrong. Listen to you, you sound like a royal douche, "I'm a physics programmer so I know what I'm talking about!". Well it's in plain english boy-o, right down below, you spelled it "europhia". Maybe one day you'll grow up, but I'm doubted as for now. Oh and being an amature with some shitty physics engine DOES NOT make you a proffesional. Good day.
AngrySackBoy 2 years ago
? So i spelt it wrong SO FUCKING WHAT? I know what im talking about, And quite clealy you are just a jealous little fuck.
scratchyrice 2 years ago
And i mean the debate about the spelling, Only a jealous man would comment on something so insignificant. I am NOT a writer, As i said im a programmer.
scratchyrice 2 years ago
Wait, You were saying that I DONT KNOW WHAT IM TALKING ABOUT, BECAUSE I SPELT SOMETHING WRONG. You CERTAINLY werent saying "Oh you spelt euphoria wrong", You were being hostile and you know it.
scratchyrice 2 years ago
your so fast on the draw about spelling, and yet you messed up on your own grammar....if your no fucking better STFU, and if you need proof, ill give you a direct quote "Maybe one day you'll grow up, but I'm doubted as for now." (in case your too lazy to find it, it's your previous comment) Maybe your trying to sound smart, but that's still wrong, read a grammar book before you judge, get off his back, he never asked to be flamed over a typo.
gothantic 2 years ago
Actually, that is proper sentence structure, so I don't know what you're bitching about. Oh and I didn't "flame" him, I told him that no body is going to take him seriously if he doesn't spell things right. Your not going to write a memo to your boss one day spelling things like you are now, are you? Exactly, so be quiet.
AngrySackBoy 2 years ago
Sentence structure maybe....but when it comes down to it you wouldn't talk to people in every day life like that would you? no not unless your from the 1800's.
Oh and what the fuck is the point of telling me how i wouldn't talk to my boss? You aren't my boss so clearly i can talk to you however i want, all i was trying to get across is to stop being a douche about how this guy spells. so back off and shut up already.
gothantic 2 years ago
will i be able to get this simulation thing like that kinda gamish thing like i can mash oil drums and stones like in the little clip or will i get it in a PDF file or will i get nothing at all...
jrompe 3 years ago
does the PhysX card only work with some games?
darkshiv 3 years ago
It works with the games that are built to require the cards ppu(physics processing unit)
Some games need just the drivers installed and work without requiring the card itself.
In case you were wondering if the card actually helps in other games with physics like hl2 for ex. then I can tell you, no chance.
MrDevlance 3 years ago
Dang, thanks. You saved me like $150.
darkshiv 3 years ago
a "physx" card will only help with games that use the "physx" dynamicd system, HL2 uses the havok physics engine, therfore it just using power, games that use physx can run without a physx card, just tend to be scaled down, when a card is present they are scaled up, softwere fluids are very limeted, but a card makes it seem oo so easy
alecTHElion 3 years ago
No, as the PPU only effect games using PhysX
Graylord88 3 years ago
Lol.. owned that can..
And every GPU 8800 and above has Phsx built in.. so don't waste your money on a phsx card unless you have a 7900 card and don't plan on upgrading..
StealthTools 3 years ago
That's bullshit, they do not have physX built in them...
Graylord88 3 years ago
They do infact have Phsy-X built in. NVIDIA made a partnership and it is so. Do your research next time and don't post ignorant comments to mislead others.
StealthTools 3 years ago 2
They have CUDA, which is based on PhysX, but a standalone PPU is still better.
Graylord88 3 years ago
PHYS-X and CUDA are two difference things.
CUDA is implementing C Language within NVIDIA's 8 series GPU's and up to allow the use of PHYS-X within their GPUS's and NVIDIA DID make a partnership with Ageia and NVIDIA DOES have Ageia PHSY-X technology build in their GPU's. CUDA makes the running of Ageia PHYS-X technology possible. This is not all CUDA does.. it manages memory and allows for faster communication to the GPU as well as some other things.
StealthTools 3 years ago
AND if you have a standalone PHYS-X PPU then it will conflict with your GPU if it is 8 series and up.
StealthTools 3 years ago
No it wont, i use both, first hand experience...
Graylord88 3 years ago
It is still conflicting.. even though you aren't realizing it. I wouldn't pair up a PHYS-X card with a GPU that already handles PHYS-X.
StealthTools 3 years ago
You dont know anything of what you are talking about...
Graylord88 3 years ago
NVIDIA coded their card to handle specific parts of the game "the whole pie" and the ageia card does the same thing.. that means the pies are overlapping.. one is trying to take data from another and so on... you won't notice a difference in some cases as far as running two at once but it can be harmful. and when your GPU has the technology built in already why get a Phsy-x card?
StealthTools 3 years ago
True graylord88, he dont know what he is talking about
Hamzic94 3 years ago
holy shit 0_0
mishuvishchuvu 3 years ago
Oh, yes of course.
CRISTO17pro 4 years ago
But where? do you have a link? i have looked everywhere. can't find it! Thanks!
CcCaniBal 4 years ago
Geez... Man! Just ask google! It's simple. God damn... Is that a problem for you? :/
CRISTO17pro 4 years ago
yeah it is! What did i just tell you?? "I have lokked everywehre" Cant find it!! You won't ether!
So i thogt you know..?
CcCaniBal 4 years ago
Can we downlod this so we can try?
CcCaniBal 4 years ago
the soft bodies and this are the most cool features of the physx engine sad that they aren't included in DarkPHYSICS
masterxilo 4 years ago
wave you ever seen that weak drums?
i havent.
And if you think quad(4) core is enough,you're terribly wrong,there already is a working prototype of 64core CPU with advanced architecture(not Intel nor ATI),and for a change AMD-ATI collaboration brings 'fusion'(CPU and GPU in one device,PPU will come too)
635574 4 years ago
Its not about how weak the drums are, Its about them be able to be deformed by the things around them.
thegrimreaper4088 4 years ago 2
Do you honestly think 64 core processors will appear soon enough to matter to present solutions? It is probably going to take decades to even become available to the general public; years after to get a decent install base, not forgetting the time needed to optimize software to utilise it.
I'm sure GPU companies and Ageia will simply sit around and wait for CPUs to overtake them.
AnnoyedDragon 4 years ago 2
now let's see some crash tests!
lolinternets1 4 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
dissapontimng shadows
pk3r72owns 4 years ago
where can i get this, anyone?
nuke583 4 years ago
yes but the xbox and ps3's physics cannot b updated.they r wut they r.plus, theres are nopthing compared to my physx card...
mOmOCrAp 4 years ago
Updated or not, they both have the ageia PhysX libraries, and they utilize one hardware thread for processing physics, so it could easily be done on an Xbox 360 or PS3, personally PhysX cards are not worth the money, and evelopers should instead work on utilizing multi core CPUs, like the Quad core in my rig :)
ZDoomCentral 4 years ago
The difference is, that PPU is a specialized piece of hardware and it surpasses every general purpose CPU at doing physics. So while you can simulate a few physical behaving objects at the same time on an XBox or PS3, you could handle hundreds of objects on a PhysX. The only problem is, they are in somewhat of a chicken-egg situation that will take time to overcome.
alizta 4 years ago
these cards have potential... but the fact is no games support the tech, and never will because there is not a big enough install base of owners of this card to justify the implementaion of this over Havok physics that runs easily on a regular CPU. Tech demos are the only thing that uses this technology lol... oh and a handful of old games, and GRAW2 which has a hack to put all the physics onto the CPU and it runs perfect like that without a 300buck card.
levo678 4 years ago
That is the same situation we had with Hardware 3D acceleration in the second halve of the nineties and nowadays everyone has a 3D accelerated graphics card.
alizta 4 years ago
I feel that is a exaggeration, the PPU situation isn't 'that' bad.
Firstly they are much cheaper than $300 and secondly there are actually quite a few fun games that use them now such as Warmonger and UT3.
Ageia is in a good position with UT3, they can make mad physX levels and Epic doesn't have to worry about limiting their potential user base on PC. Games with modular content seem the best rout for growth right now, Ageia can produce their own content and not have to worry about a full game.
AnnoyedDragon 4 years ago
agreed +1
ppl are beeing too critic with PhysX by AGEIA
and yea, its not as expensive as a graphics card, more ppl can get one. thats good imo
and i think its gonna make our user experience a lot better
and yea UT3 Warmonger Cell Factor..etcthere are like 50+ titles or more that soon will benefit from these amazing Physics
i mean look at the physics demos! its AMAZING!
so realistic imagine those ripples and realistic effects in games... it will be a new level of gaming!!
Cylon7x 4 years ago
To sie kurwa nie miesci w ludzkim pojeciu!!!
pilasiu 4 years ago
lol holy fuck
saudikid 4 years ago
which is better?
Havok or Ageia?
MetalliromanceXP 4 years ago
ageia
bodmondude 4 years ago
Subjective, both have their merits and downfalls.
Ageia has superior game play physics acceleration, while Havok FX is better at using physics for special visual effects that have no impact on the game.
AnnoyedDragon 4 years ago
does anyone know if you need a graphics card from the same manufacturer of the physx card and does it use a pci slot ?
lintingint 4 years ago
Not at all. I have a Nvidia 8800 GTS (GTX would not fit) and the Agei Physx card, and they both work in unison. Yes, it will need a PCI slot.
LessthanJake14 4 years ago
They need to apply that to all games now for them to count a next gen to me!
Kungfubean 4 years ago
Xbox 360 and PS3 both contain Physics processors.
LessthanJake14 4 years ago
But not many games take advantage of em like this!
Kungfubean 4 years ago
They will soon. Most PC games take advantage of physics.
LessthanJake14 4 years ago
i cant wait till physics rules the gaming world and we wont have anymore cheapy pre rendered animations for things that blow up or just about anything in the game.
yellowfellow 4 years ago
the guy controlling the block sure is a noob gamer - wheres ur skills??certainly not l33t
crazypants 5 years ago
You're cool, you can speak like a nerd.
gashnor321 5 years ago
yes i can, thus i am cool
crazypants 5 years ago
How can the GPU be the future of physics when it can only run physic simulations with the help of the CPU?
Without the CPU to allow program interaction it is eye candy and nothing more.
AnnoyedDragon 5 years ago
GPU is certainly the physic processor of the future.
This involves GPU holds the transformation matrix of each object, and shapes for physics (which is the case of... heu, say 0% of commercial games).
Galmiza 5 years ago
Nooooooo, who the hell think the mesh loaded for graphics and physics are the same. They are absolutely different ! Shapes for physic are much simpler for calculation times reasons !
And anyway, the vertice format is different...
Furthermore, a PPU has an architecture optimised for physics, a GPU which is optimise for streaming.
Moreover, PhysX is not Havok.
Galmiza 5 years ago
Can anynody explain what This thing does? I'm so sick of Havok!(Not really)Is this featured for the Next-Gen consoles? ...
SlurkSlisker 5 years ago
Seems most people here arent aware of GPU physics.
With the PhysX, the game has to request the PPU to handle the physics, and the results come back to the CPU for processing, before heading off to be rendered.
Now for the GPU(video card) physics, the game requests for the GPU to handle any physics, the video card then creates all the objects and draws them, without ever needing to send data back to the CPU.
So basicly:
PhysX: CPU->PPU->CPU->GPU->Screen
GPU Physics: CPU->GPU->Screen
Atomizer74 5 years ago
I agree with those saying it gives an extra edge... I am a hardcore FPS gamer all the way, so this thing would be perfect for me... sure, it's a little expensive at the moment, but you gotta pay to get the best.
Typhen 5 years ago
uff , too much useless comments here....
In my point of view the great advantage of using a PPU is the boundry-breaking ability to play games with real world object behavior and cinematics. Maybe this will give the extra adrenaline boost needed for most action games around. Its a great advance for sure! I believe that the next generation of game engines will have a special focus in Physics simulation.
badhorsie84 5 years ago
too many*
peckfeckler 4 years ago
agreed
Cylon7x 4 years ago
NEWS: AGEIA PhysX ACQUIRED BY NVIDIA
Cylon7x 4 years ago
Because 200,000 poly barrels are what every game needs. This will never be used in games...at least not for a long time.
mstews 5 years ago
all circular objects have 1000s of polys anyways, its not that far of a stretch for the tops and bottoms.
peckfeckler 4 years ago
newest physx sdk you get to play this demo! and the barrel is 1672polygons
joejoe133 3 years ago
LarryPalmer you are such a naif commercial idiot , This is the rocket, it's not supposed to show uber nice graphics it's to show the physics you moron...And don't use the Havokfx as argument as it isn't even released...
Panasonicp2 5 years ago
This is an example of a physics engine that requires hardware acceleration. Source is a game engine with a physics engine (havok I believe) integrated. This could be the next thing ADDED to source, or a feature of a new game engine, but alone it isn't a new game engine.The fact that there are no shadows doesn't mean a thing for this demonstration, it's a physics card not a graphics card.
ericpolicky 5 years ago
nice, i can see this being the next Source once its finished
ZiggityZhang 5 years ago
ahaha u suck at 3d...
this is a physic engine.. not a game engine,
like Reactor is to Source...
lpcrispo 5 years ago
I have had to install this on my computer for many games. I don't understand how this is used while building games. I don't know C++ so i guess that's the problem. But like in Java 3d i don't know how this could be incorporated. Into anything I could build.
gangstaI 5 years ago
can't see shadows from the barrels, hope Nvidia and ATI will make PhysX 50$
LarryPalmer 5 years ago
A game is more then just programming every possible outcome.
To be perfectly honest, this is perhaps the worst way to design a game. So anyone who believes that this is completely useless for a game is a complete and total idiot.
BrandonC3 5 years ago
nice hand eye co-ordination on hitting that barrel
tamrix 5 years ago
$300 USD. Not worth it.
defimus 5 years ago
no one can honestly say this is useless to gameplay...the amount of possibilities for interaction and cover etc in fps alone is amazing
robo3687 5 years ago
great stuff....how much does this cost
azzuri09 5 years ago
look useless to gameplay.
jeanclaude007 5 years ago
unless u can smash in windows boarded up with corrigated iron HL2 style, or send bullets through, slowly denting it before smashing it right through, or blowing them out with grenates, loads of possibilities man. Not even mentioning racing games
tehsimo 5 years ago
are you stupid?
sp0ngeb0bc00lpants 5 years ago
Instead of a barrel, say they use a wall as the deformable object. Still useless? One step closer to fully interactive environments.
ericpolicky 5 years ago
That's some good physics right there :)
codem0nkey 5 years ago
Pouha du bidon next gen !!! Du bidon mou !!!
flambyx 5 years ago
nice
YoJimBobaJoe 5 years ago
deformation looks very nice
alienddd 5 years ago