PhysX

[Richey79 10]

Since the other thread was closed for beginning with an 'inflammatory' post, let's start another thread with a statement from Bis about Physx in VBS2:

'Limited support for the PhysX library from Nvidia is being deployed within VBS2. Hardware acceleration is not required at this time. It is anticipated however that hardware acceleration of the PhysX routines will only be available on Nvidia platform video cards.'

So... at the moment Physx won't speed up the game's performance, but they have clear plans for it to do so in the future. Well, we can presume that the future engine tech will be included in Arma 3, with its 2012 release.

I think what ATI users are getting upset about is that there are other physics engines out there that would allow physics calculations to take place on the graphics card regardless of brand, whereas Bis have chosen to use Physx, which NVidia specifically made proprietory.

Why make a choice that - as is suggested by your own development road map - will significantly damage performance for around half your potential customers?

Edit - some interesting quotes from a Bis dev regarding Physx and reveals that will happen at E3 (with thanks to Daniel for digging them up):

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damu

I can assure you both Nvidia and ATI (including others) will be supported. No panic, please. Nothing is going to be changed, except the world.

Concerning E3:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damu

Yes, there will be some presentation of PhysX too, but note we have almost a year to do much more/better.

So, it seems likely that Physx will work fine on both Nvidia and Ati systems, with the possibility of some extra eye-candy on Nvidia systems thanks to Physx hardware acceleration. Looking forward to finding out a bit more at E3.

Edited June 4, 2011 by Richey79

[carlostex 38]

It was a BIS choice, it might be do to experience with PhysX and maybe it was the best choice for RV engine right now.

But i also don't like those who say tha AMD has no hw physics. That's just plain crap. Any AMD GPU can accelerate physics engines via OpenCL. End of story.

[Meek 10]

I'm wondering what type of things PhysX is used for.

In VBS2, PhysX is used for more "complex" vehicles (such as a trailer or something attached to the back of a vehicle), as well as for fast-roping.

Anything else? how deeply is it implemented, will all animations be directly tied into it? Just death animations?

[Nicholas 5]

What about the majority of us who have ATI cards, with we not be able to use the new Physics? Since it uses NVidia's PhysX?

[dale0404 5]

As has been said many times previously, ATI cards owners will be able to take advantage of PhysX, just not GPU based...

[jeza 5415]

What about the majority of us who have ATI cards, with we not be able to use the new Physics? Since it uses NVidia's PhysX?

Yeah good point im one of them, but if worst comes to worse for me I may spend 170£ on a 560 by then, as id love to get the best out of the game.

[carlostex 38]

You won't have HW PhysX at all. All Nvidia would have to do is to eithe allow PhysX to be accelerated in AMD's VLIW architectures or to allow their drivers to work with an AMD card. That way you could have AMD main GPU paired with a discrete NVidia just for PhysX.

[Meek 10]

What about the majority of us who have ATI cards, with we not be able to use the new Physics? Since it uses NVidia's PhysX?

You can run PhysX on the CPU.

But really, it's going to be released about a year from now, is it really too hard to upgrade accordingly?

[danny96 79]

ARMA III will have ragdoll physx?

[carlostex 38]

ARMA III will have ragdoll physx?

Yes it appears so.

And please people stop saying ATI. ATI went from a company to just a brand and now nothing. It's AMD since 2006.

[danny96 79]

ARMAIII looks like It will be incredible. When I saw that screens first, I though that It's photo of real people.

[bushlurker 45]

I may spend 170£ on a 560 by then, as id love to get the best out of the game.

...probably the best £170 you'll ever spend Jeza...

I moved from an old 8800 to a 560 just recently... like night and day... As long as I leave AA & PP off I can crank everything to "very high", VD to 4000, res to 1920x1200 and I rarely see under 40FPS...

From a PhysX point of view the aspect I'll be hoping for is better modelling - and better AI understanding of - fluids... Lakes and rivers that the AI understand as water... maybe even rivers that actually flow? - downhill???

We can but hope... :D

B

[[frl]myke 14]

You can run PhysX on the CPU.

But really, it's going to be released about a year from now, is it really too hard to upgrade accordingly?

It's not about being "hard", it is more about "what does it cost".

In my case, since i love the ArmA series i would like to enjoy all features it oiffers as far as possible. Personally i wouldn't mind to get a low-price nVidia card for PhysX acceleration...if it would work with Vista. As far as i'm informed (please let me know if i missed something) this could work with either XP or Win7 but not with Vista. So i would have to upgrade my Windows aswell.

But, my Vista just runs fine so i didn't saw any needs of upgrading to 7 so far.

And where i live, Win7 isn't given away for free.

Also i expect that i need to upgrade my PC for ArmA 3 aswell (atleast CPU which means i need new Motherboard which means i need new Ram aswell) so even more stuff i need to buy.

I really wished BIS would have chosed another physic engine which would have run on all GPU's not nVidia exclusive.

[danny96 79]

I want to see some next news as soon as they can! And any trailer...would be epic!!!!!!!!!!!!

What factions will be in-game?

I like the possiblity to customise character/clothes and physx! ARMAIII looks really epic! This will be epic game! BTW It looks like newest Rainbow six!

Edited May 19, 2011 by danny96

[Richey79 10]

You can run PhysX on the CPU.

But really, it's going to be released about a year from now, is it really too hard to upgrade accordingly?

When I upgrade card, I certainly won't be taking into account how many developers Nvidia have bribed to use their proprietory gimmick. The choice will be based on which manufacturer makes the most powerful card that runs the coolest at the best value for money.

That may be an Nvidia card by the time 2012 comes around, and I have nothing against the company apart from the cynical ploy that is Physx: - can't make fast cards at the same price point as the competition? Let's buy off dev teams to hobble the performance of our competitor's cards.

On the other hand, it may be ATI, in which case I'll have to wait and read the forums to see whether Arma 3 performs well enough on the card to justify a buy.

[Constantine 10]

Yes it appears so.

And please people stop saying ATI. ATI went from a company to just a brand and now nothing. It's AMD since 2006.

no it's not. My 6950 box says ATI. AMD still uses the ATI logo so we should as well. Plus the name AMD is associated with inferior performance, budget cpus which is not the case in their gpu department.

[liquidpinky 11]

Myke;1928783']It's not about being "hard"' date=' it is more about "what does it cost".

In my case, since i love the ArmA series i would like to enjoy all features it oiffers as far as possible. Personally i wouldn't mind to get a low-price nVidia card for PhysX acceleration...if it would work with Vista. As far as i'm informed (please let me know if i missed something) this could work with either XP or Win7 but not with Vista. So i would have to upgrade my Windows aswell.

But, my Vista just runs fine so i didn't saw any needs of upgrading to 7 so far.

And where i live, Win7 isn't given away for free.

Also i expect that i need to upgrade my PC for ArmA 3 aswell (atleast CPU which means i need new Motherboard which means i need new Ram aswell) so even more stuff i need to buy.

I really wished BIS would have chosed another physic engine which would have run on all GPU's not nVidia exclusive.[/quote']

Works with Vista 64bit (can't vouch for 32) Myke, tried it out with an 8600 for PhysX with my gtx 285s.

At the time you had to piss around with driver installs, I actually tried it run a separate monitor from my SLi display at the time but others used the same method to run it for PhysX. All you need is to make sure the card is PHysX compatible, 8000 series as minimum.

[hamm 10]

You guys still don't know if the game will feature hardware-accelerated PhysX for Nvidia cards...and if PhysX is used for animations and stuff as necessary as vehicle physics then it definite;y won't be an option you can turn off like in other games.

[PuFu 4591]

Works with Vista 64bit (can't vouch for 32) Myke, tried it out with an 8600 for PhysX with my gtx 285s.

At the time you had to piss around with driver installs, I actually tried it run a separate monitor from my SLi display at the time but others used the same method to run it for PhysX. All you need is to make sure the card is PHysX compatible, 8000 series as minimum.

yeah but you can't do the same if You got an ATI/AMD card as main GPU, and want to stick a NVidia just for the PhysiX...You can do this using some hacked drivers on both Win7 and XP (which is out of the question for A3)

[carlostex 38]

Plus the name AMD is associated with inferior performance, budget cpus which is not the case in their gpu department.

Is that common sensus because of crap that tech journalists write?

http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49#73

Intel has been found guilty of using CPUID vendor strings to cripple non-Intel processors performance on their compiler libraries. The majority of benchmarks are ICC compiled, some libraries will take a different path if you are using a non-Intel processor. On some libraries even though your non-Intel CPU may support the more advanced SIMD's it will compile it with the oldest code it can. On some it may use x87 actually.

On open source Phoronix test suite, Phenoms are very close and on par with nehalem I7's.

Anyone who owns a VIA CPU may actually confirm this. There are apps out there you can use to change your CPU vendor string. Change it to GenuineIntel and watch your performance go up. Change it to AuthenticAMD and watch your performance to be lower than ever.

Wait we just changed vendor strings, CPU still the same WTF??? :confused:

[dale0404 5]

Is that common sensus because of crap that tech journalists write?

http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49#73

Intel has been found guilty of using CPUID vendor strings to cripple non-Intel processors performance on their compiler libraries. The majority of benchmarks are ICC compiled, some libraries will take a different path if you are using a non-Intel processor. On some libraries even though your non-Intel CPU may support the more advanced SIMD's it will compile it with the oldest code it can. On some it may use x87 actually.

On open source Phoronix test suite, Phenoms are very close and on par with nehalem I7's.

Anyone who owns a VIA CPU may actually confirm this. There are apps out there you can use to change your CPU vendor string. Change it to GenuineIntel and watch your performance go up. Change it to AuthenticAMD and watch your performance to be lower than ever.

Wait we just changed vendor strings, CPU still the same WTF??? :confused:

Can you put ALL of that into a language that I understand please? Like English!

[madrussian 347]

I hope they accelerate everything with PhysX.

It will all still work just fine on AMD video card with their physics being calculated on CPU. And just think of how powerful CPUs will be in a year. The only difference would be Nvidia owners will get a boost. Looking at the scant list of PhysX titles available today, ArmA3 implementing PhysX is quite a welcome addition for Nvidia card owners.

And even if the hardware acceleration is limited to vehicles, isn't everything pretty much a vehicle anyway? Or at least, anything can be built as a "vehicle". Imagine entire buildings built of individual "vehicle" bricks, and then being blown to smithereens, all using the latest in hardware acceleration!

[ast65 10]

Smart move, BIS:

selling out to Nvidia and thus cuttin your fanbase in half :mad:

[froggyluv 2130]

When I was a young rebellious, idealistic F*ck da world, F* Authority lad -I supported and bought only AMD/ATI. Now as an older fat cat capitalistic performance whore - I prefer Intel/Nvidia ;)

[therev709 10]

Smart move, BIS:

selling out to Nvidia and thus cuttin your fanbase in half :mad:

I wouldn't call it selling out. If you own an Nvidia card you get to take advantage of Psyx hardware acceleration, and if you have an AMD card (like me) you don't.

Look at it from their perspective, very few physics engines offer hardware acceleration, and none do it as well as Physx. So basically you can go with no one gets HA or at least most do (since Nvidia has the bigger market share). AMD cards will just have to let the CPU do the work for physics calculation.

Don't call it selling out, its far from that.

How about we all just be happy that Arma is finally getting a real physics engine!

Edited May 19, 2011 by TheRev709