Guru3D.com Forums

Go Back   Guru3D.com Forums > General > Games, Gaming & Game-demos
Games, Gaming & Game-demos You can talk about the latest games here and more ..


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Nvidia demonstrate physx in hawken
Old
  (#1)
WhiteLightning
Ancient Guru
 
WhiteLightning's Avatar
 
Videocard: EVGA 780GTX ACX
Processor: i7-2600k HT @ 4.5 +H70 PP
Mainboard: MSI Z77A-GD65 GAMING
Memory: Gskill 2133Mhz 8GB
Soundcard: Onboard
PSU: Corsair 1000 watt
Default Nvidia demonstrate physx in hawken - 01-30-2013, 15:14 | posts: 23,440 | Location: Hoek van Holland, Netherlands

http://www.guru3d.com/news_story/nvi...in_hawken.html

not interested in the game myself, but it sure looks awesome!
   
Reply With Quote
 
Old
  (#2)
Darren Hodgson
Ancient Guru
 
Darren Hodgson's Avatar
 
Videocard: EVGA NVIDIA GTX 980 SC
Processor: Intel Core i7-4770K
Mainboard: ASUS Z87 Deluxe v2103
Memory: 16GB Corsair Veng 1600MHz
Soundcard: SB X-Fi Titanium HD
PSU: XFX PRO Black Ed. 850W
Default 01-30-2013, 15:21 | posts: 12,132 | Location: England

Is that this year's solitary hardware PhysX game then?

Looks good but I'm surely not the only one that feels like PhysX potential has been squandered by NVIDIA due to it not being fully supported by AMD cards (software, yes, but not hardware). As such there's little reason for developers to use it which is a shame as with better optimization and more support it would have been nice to have had as an extra in PC games not just one or two per year.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#3)
ricardonuno1980
Ancient Guru
 
ricardonuno1980's Avatar
 
Videocard: EVGA GTX 580 3GB :D
Processor: i5-2500K@4.5GHz CM212EVO
Mainboard: ASUS P8P67 REV 3.0
Memory: HyperX 2x4GB DDR3-1600
Soundcard: onboard
PSU: NOX 1000W
Default 01-30-2013, 15:32 | posts: 4,104 | Location: Carvalhos (Gaia)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darren Hodgson View Post
Is that this year's solitary hardware PhysX game then?

Looks good but I'm surely not the only one that feels like PhysX potential has been squandered by NVIDIA due to it not being fully supported by AMD cards (software, yes, but not hardware). As such there's little reason for developers to use it which is a shame as with better optimization and more support it would have been nice to have had as an extra in PC games not just one or two per year.
Yes, this game has hardware PhysX (for NVIDIA users only).
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#4)
naike
Maha Guru
 
naike's Avatar
 
Videocard: Asus EAH5870
Processor: Phenom II x4 965BE
Mainboard: Asus M4A89GTD Pro/USB3
Memory: 4GB OCZ
Soundcard: Asus Xonar ST & HD555's
PSU: Antec Quattro 850W
Default 01-30-2013, 17:01 | posts: 2,021

I don't care about PhysX.
Sure it looks awesome but I just don't like the idea that all this would be possible for all cards but just isn't.
It also holds games back in my opinion.
   
Reply With Quote
 
Old
  (#5)
k1net1cs
Ancient Guru
 
Videocard: Radeon HD 5650m (550/800)
Processor: Intel Core i5-520M 2.4GHz
Mainboard: Sony VAIO VPCEA16FG
Memory: 2x4GB CMSO4GX3M1A1333C9
Soundcard: ASUS Xonar U3
PSU: n/a
Default 01-30-2013, 17:13 | posts: 3,714

Quote:
Originally Posted by naike View Post
It also holds games back in my opinion.
How and in what way?




Interested in folding with fellow gurus? Click here to get you started!
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#6)
naike
Maha Guru
 
naike's Avatar
 
Videocard: Asus EAH5870
Processor: Phenom II x4 965BE
Mainboard: Asus M4A89GTD Pro/USB3
Memory: 4GB OCZ
Soundcard: Asus Xonar ST & HD555's
PSU: Antec Quattro 850W
Default 01-30-2013, 17:37 | posts: 2,021

Quote:
Originally Posted by k1net1cs View Post
How and in what way?
Why bother when half of the people can't even use it, and some of those 50% or whatever won't have the card to enable them anyway.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#7)
The Michael
Maha Guru
 
The Michael's Avatar
 
Videocard: MSI GTX 680 Lightning
Processor: Intel i7 860 @3.6
Mainboard: Gigabyte GA-P55-UD5
Memory: 8GB DDR3 1600
Soundcard: Realtek HD Audio / G35
PSU: Coolermaster 750W
Default 01-30-2013, 19:25 | posts: 1,456

I've been using physx with my 5870 i had before, without any flaws at all.
So i don't see the problem here.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#8)
Redemption80
Ancient Guru
 
Redemption80's Avatar
 
Videocard: MSI GTX 570
Processor: i7-2600K @ 4.5ghz
Mainboard: Asus P8P67 PRO Intel P67
Memory: G.Skill RipJawsX 8GB
Soundcard: ASUS Xonar D2
PSU: Corsair GS800
Default 01-30-2013, 20:29 | posts: 14,938 | Location: Glasgow

Not overly impressed with add on GPU PhysX effects anymore, can't help feeling it looks tacked on and slightly distracting and over the top.

Waiting more for PhysX 3 games where the GPU enhances the engine, rather than trying to force modern features onto an old physics engine.

Not that i believe they shouldn't bother, 50% is actually alot when you consider that only 10% of gamers see any PC specific effects, and i doubt many would say there is no point creating high res textures would they?
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#9)
thatguy91
Ancient Guru
 
Videocard: HIS R9-280x Iceq X2 Turbo
Processor: i5-3570K
Mainboard: Asrock Z77 Extreme6
Memory: DDR3-2400 2x8GB
Soundcard: ALC898 + Microlab FC-730
PSU: Enermax Platimax 750W
Default 01-30-2013, 21:10 | posts: 4,037 | Location: Australia

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Michael View Post
I've been using physx with my 5870 i had before, without any flaws at all.
So i don't see the problem here.

That's because the Physx ran on the CPU, not GPU. The Physx effects level may have been set lower.

Physx was deliberately designed to run poor on CPU to highlight the advantages of GPU Physx. This has been partially rectified with Physx 3 because Nvidia got caught out by using pure unoptimised code for CPU, but I doubt even with Physx 3 that it is highly optimised (SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, FMA4, XOP) etc, since Physx 3 is only SSE2).
FMA4, XOP are AMD only on Bulldozer and later CPU's
AVX2, FMA3 are upcoming instruction sets on the Haswell processors

Physx on GPU means you are taking GPU time away from actual graphics, so the benefits of GPU based Physx depends purely on how the game utilises the CPU. A properly designed game should realistically be GPU oriented, and in this case highly optimised CPU based Physx wouldn't be bad for performance.

But to answer the question why AMD doesn't have Physx, it is two-fold. AMD did have the chance, but they would have had to have the Nvidia logo on their boxes etc when sold... something very bad considering it is a direct competitor! The other reason is licencing costs, it would have cost AMD a lot of money just to support Physx.

The other point is Physx isn't the only option out there, it is just one of the more developed optioned. You also have OpenCL (cross platform) and Directcompute (Microsoft). I have a small suspicion that at least some level of physics processing will be available on the next gen Xbox using Directcompute, meaning that for Windows games Directcompute will be the future.

The closeness of the next gen Xbox to a PC could have both positive and negative effects. The positive effect would be, supposedly, that all Xbox games will be available on Windows. The negative effect will be direct ports, such that there really won't be any graphical improvement etc for the PC version. The latter would be very bad! but if the platforms are similar, it should make it easier for developers to make the PC version even better.

The reason why this is relevant is that if it is the case, basically no game developed for the next gen Xbox and ported will utilise Physx.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#10)
Redemption80
Ancient Guru
 
Redemption80's Avatar
 
Videocard: MSI GTX 570
Processor: i7-2600K @ 4.5ghz
Mainboard: Asus P8P67 PRO Intel P67
Memory: G.Skill RipJawsX 8GB
Soundcard: ASUS Xonar D2
PSU: Corsair GS800
Default 01-30-2013, 21:25 | posts: 14,938 | Location: Glasgow

Not Nvidia as they never developed the PhysX, it was Ageia/NovodeX.

The last line is based on what though?
UE4 if anything like UE3 will likely be the most used engine on next gen consoles, so alot of next gen Xbox games will utilise PhysX, and that is just from one engine alone.
   
Reply With Quote
 
Old
  (#11)
-Tj-
Ancient Guru
 
-Tj-'s Avatar
 
Videocard: ZOTAC GTX780 OC AmpFan
Processor: i7 4770K OC 4.7GHz @1.28v
Mainboard: ASUS Z87 Deluxe
Memory: Crucial BLE 16GB 2400MHz
Soundcard: Creative X-Fi Titanium HD
PSU: Chieftec NTRO88+ 650W
Default 01-30-2013, 21:30 | posts: 8,032 | Location: Urban`Jungle

I installed it and its kinda ok, but i didnt see any turbulence fx .. Only regular destruction fx.

About performance well its not so good, again lower gpu usage due to physx 2.8.4 inefficiency, especially in capture the point levels
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#12)
ViperXtreme
Ancient Guru
 
ViperXtreme's Avatar
 
Videocard: Palit GTX 660 OC 2GB
Processor: Intel Core i5 3570K @4Ghz
Mainboard: ASRock Z68 Pro3-M
Memory: 8GB G.Skill RipJaws DDR3
Soundcard: Integrated Realtek 7.1 HD
PSU: OCZ StealthXStream 2 600W
Default 01-30-2013, 21:34 | posts: 2,922 | Location: Philippines

some of the effects are overly done just for the sake of showing it :\
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#13)
Redemption80
Ancient Guru
 
Redemption80's Avatar
 
Videocard: MSI GTX 570
Processor: i7-2600K @ 4.5ghz
Mainboard: Asus P8P67 PRO Intel P67
Memory: G.Skill RipJawsX 8GB
Soundcard: ASUS Xonar D2
PSU: Corsair GS800
Default 01-30-2013, 21:36 | posts: 14,938 | Location: Glasgow

That is what puts me off.
The best thing about GPU PhysX is that it can take advantage of a game that might not be that GPU heavy, but so far that has not been the case, in any game.

Assuming the fact that Cuda is essentially emulating a PPU is the reason, but i really thought this would of been sorted years ago.

ViperXtreme, i agree i think it would look better if it was toned down abit.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#14)
-Tj-
Ancient Guru
 
-Tj-'s Avatar
 
Videocard: ZOTAC GTX780 OC AmpFan
Processor: i7 4770K OC 4.7GHz @1.28v
Mainboard: ASUS Z87 Deluxe
Memory: Crucial BLE 16GB 2400MHz
Soundcard: Creative X-Fi Titanium HD
PSU: Chieftec NTRO88+ 650W
Default 01-30-2013, 22:13 | posts: 8,032 | Location: Urban`Jungle

Yes.. Destruction particles looked ok, not overdone, but optimization is still not it.

Physx3 is also a bit questionable.
For example in Warframe (Scifi coop game) it uses apex turbulence, but again its not so groundbreaking like nvidia said it would be - multi core, sse2 and all that fancy talk (maybe its ~10-15% faster compared to physx2)



btw, Hawken started ok, avg. ~55-65fps (ultra setting, 1080p, gpu usage ~ 80-90%), but every respawn it went lower and lower to min ~ 30-40fps at end (gpu ~ 50-60%). Same thing in DM, although it wasn't so bad like in capture the points.

I guess its beta for a reason, o yeah its U3E dx9 game.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#15)
Cronik
Maha Guru
 
Cronik's Avatar
 
Videocard: GIGABYTE AMD R9 280x
Processor: FX-8350 Vishera 4.0Ghz
Mainboard: GIGABYTE GA-970A-D3P
Memory: 8GB of DDR3 G.Skill
Soundcard: Sound Blaster Z
PSU: KINGWIN ABT-850MM 850W
Default 01-30-2013, 22:20 | posts: 1,020

Quote:
Originally Posted by ViperXtreme View Post
some of the effects are overly done just for the sake of showing it :\
It's a gimmick..
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#16)
Spets
Maha Guru
 
Spets's Avatar
 
Videocard: GTX780Ti+GTX750Ti+G-Sync
Processor: Intel Core i7 2600k @ 4.5
Mainboard: GA-Z68X-UD7-B3
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws 16gb 2133
Soundcard:
PSU: EVGA SuperNOVA
Default 01-31-2013, 00:20 | posts: 2,069

Makes the game look better, I like the real-time twirling with the particles on the energy collectors, although the embers could have been done better. Would of been nice to see sph fluids for oil leaks though.

Last edited by Spets; 01-31-2013 at 00:22.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#17)
Cronik
Maha Guru
 
Cronik's Avatar
 
Videocard: GIGABYTE AMD R9 280x
Processor: FX-8350 Vishera 4.0Ghz
Mainboard: GIGABYTE GA-970A-D3P
Memory: 8GB of DDR3 G.Skill
Soundcard: Sound Blaster Z
PSU: KINGWIN ABT-850MM 850W
Default 01-31-2013, 00:50 | posts: 1,020

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spets View Post
Makes the game look better
I don't think out of place and overdone particle affects makes a game better.

PhysX will forever be a gimmick and a waste of performance.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#18)
naike
Maha Guru
 
naike's Avatar
 
Videocard: Asus EAH5870
Processor: Phenom II x4 965BE
Mainboard: Asus M4A89GTD Pro/USB3
Memory: 4GB OCZ
Soundcard: Asus Xonar ST & HD555's
PSU: Antec Quattro 850W
Default 01-31-2013, 00:56 | posts: 2,021

Wasn't the original idea by ageia to use a dedicated physics card or something?
I think that would be a pretty nice idea, if the majority of games supported it and the cards weren't that expensive.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#19)
Spets
Maha Guru
 
Spets's Avatar
 
Videocard: GTX780Ti+GTX750Ti+G-Sync
Processor: Intel Core i7 2600k @ 4.5
Mainboard: GA-Z68X-UD7-B3
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws 16gb 2133
Soundcard:
PSU: EVGA SuperNOVA
Default 01-31-2013, 00:57 | posts: 2,069

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cronik View Post
I don't think out of place and overdone particle affects makes a game better.

PhysX will forever be a gimmick and a waste of performance.
Right, like better shadows, AA, AO and other effects in video options within games. I'll take real-time simulations over scripted anytime.
The destruction looks good, you have a point with the turbulence though it does seem overdone.

@Naike, iirc Ageia's PPU's cost as much as graphics cards did.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#20)
Redemption80
Ancient Guru
 
Redemption80's Avatar
 
Videocard: MSI GTX 570
Processor: i7-2600K @ 4.5ghz
Mainboard: Asus P8P67 PRO Intel P67
Memory: G.Skill RipJawsX 8GB
Soundcard: ASUS Xonar D2
PSU: Corsair GS800
Default 01-31-2013, 01:10 | posts: 14,938 | Location: Glasgow

Most PC specific visual features are considered gimmicks by most people, but it doesn't mean they shouldn't be explored.

I will admit i'm not a fan of the overdone particle stuff, but physics in games needs a kick up the arse, everything else visually has progressed alot over the years, physics on the other hand is still all over the place, and it's still the scripted stuff being the most impressive looking.

Not saying PhysX is what will take it forward, but it's better than nothing.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#21)
ViperXtreme
Ancient Guru
 
ViperXtreme's Avatar
 
Videocard: Palit GTX 660 OC 2GB
Processor: Intel Core i5 3570K @4Ghz
Mainboard: ASRock Z68 Pro3-M
Memory: 8GB G.Skill RipJaws DDR3
Soundcard: Integrated Realtek 7.1 HD
PSU: OCZ StealthXStream 2 600W
Default 01-31-2013, 01:16 | posts: 2,922 | Location: Philippines

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cronik View Post
It's a gimmick..
not that i hate physx, some of the effects looks just weird (could have been better/believable)

Spilling dynamically simulated oil (with matching fire with it) could prolly look more interesting matching it with dynamic/volumetric smoke that reacts with the environment.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#22)
Zenoth
Maha Guru
 
Videocard: ASUS GTX670 2GB
Processor: Intel Core i7 2600K
Mainboard: ASUS P8P67 Pro B3
Memory: G.SKILL 10666 8GB
Soundcard: X-Fi XtremeMusic
PSU: Corsair TX750W
Default 01-31-2013, 04:01 | posts: 828

Why do they exaggerate the effects and then think that by doing so it'll look "cool"?

The effects would be much better if only made subtle, rather than being all over the place and distracting. I don't need a thousand pieces of concrete debris catapulted left, right, up and down with each one of my Mech's steps. Instead of making debris fly all around the screen seemingly out of nowhere as if something bad happened to gravity, instead use PhysX to crackle the ground or form a subtle crater the size of the Mech's foot based on its shape. And instead of making a million particles fly on a shield bubble just because you fire at it, instead use PhysX to create something more subtle such as water-ripples like effects onto the shield itself (similar to the visual effect in Independence Day when the missiles hit the shield of the alien ship).

That's what I don't like about PhysX, is its implementation made only to advertise and seemingly create a "oooooh! and "aaaaaah!" moment, when in reality most of us looking at it have the feeling that it's just too much of it for no particular reason and may only contribute to slow general performance down. It reminds me of the high PhysX setting in Borderlands 2, it's just exaggerated. Grab a vehicle and shoot at the ground, and then exit and look at all the debris. Ten lure in some mobs, use Maya's phase-lock ability and watch all them debris fly up in the air and start spinning around the phase-lock bubble. And then thrown some corrosive grenade and watch the acid flow around it, and then all of that falls back down and scatters everywhere after the phase-lock effect stops.

That's under an arranged, controlled condition that you would have provoked. The worst part is that during actual game-play I assure you sometimes it gets worse. I' had co-operative games which I hosted that made me lag like hell when all four of us created too much debris around and made things explode and barrels, grenades and particles... it filled up the screen and the game was a slide show for half a minute. I had to crouch away from the action and look away from it with my camera on several occasions to let the FPS go back up.

I lowered the setting since, but even lowered the actual effects themselves aren't "convincing", it's still just small sized debris flying around, it's not like there's a huge chuck on concrete flying away from a wall (with the wall's physical shape changed afterwards) and then breaking in smaller size chunks when hitting the ground, from a building or something. When I hear PhysX I immediately think "A wall suddenly hit by a missile that happens to magically let a thousand pieces of debris fly away from it without any traces of actual impact on the wall itself". I mean look at the video, at some point it shows the Mech shooting at concrete above it, you see like 100+ pieces of concrete flying away from the structure, even though the structure itself remains completely intact. It feels completely artificial.

The original Red Faction with the Geo-Mod technology did "physical effects" in a much more plausible, believable way and that was more than a decade ago. The technology of PhysX itself has a crap load of potential, my issue, to reiterate, is that it is badly implemented... of course that is in my opinion. If some of you guys around actually like that type of effects exaggeration, then cool for you. I have yet to see PhysX effects that seem "spot on" and fitting and not blatant "show-off" material that ultimately only serve to show-off how you can slow down your game's performance.

Last edited by Zenoth; 01-31-2013 at 04:06.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#23)
ViperXtreme
Ancient Guru
 
ViperXtreme's Avatar
 
Videocard: Palit GTX 660 OC 2GB
Processor: Intel Core i5 3570K @4Ghz
Mainboard: ASRock Z68 Pro3-M
Memory: 8GB G.Skill RipJaws DDR3
Soundcard: Integrated Realtek 7.1 HD
PSU: OCZ StealthXStream 2 600W
Default 01-31-2013, 04:47 | posts: 2,922 | Location: Philippines

heh i remember the original Red Faction and i also remember how deep ive been digging in the test section lol
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#24)
Noisiv
Ancient Guru
 
Videocard: GTX 460 HAWK Talon Attack
Processor: Q6600@3.5GHz
Mainboard: Gigabyte EP-43-DS3L
Memory: 4GB OCZ 5-4-4-4-12
Soundcard: Onboard Realtek ALC888
PSU: Silent Pro M700
Default 01-31-2013, 06:20 | posts: 3,005

It would be really nice if Nvidia had ANY kind of strategy when it comes to PhysX.

Like... role of PhysX, near and long term goal. Or by NVIDIA's own words:
  • Promote defend your productivity mentality
  • Define a long-term direction
  • Pick the most important near-term investment(s)
  • Ensure every project does something to improve your company's methodology
  • Explicitly allocate budget for methodology staffing
  • Involve the product engineers
  • Keep the lights on by maintaining your old flow while rolling out a new tool flow rather than suddenly cut over.
http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-n...s?pageNumber=1
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#25)
SLI-756
I have restricted access
 
Videocard: 760 SLI 4gb 1215/ 7000
Processor: Devil's Canyon i5 @4.8
Mainboard: gigabyte z97 G1 Sniper
Memory: 8gb dominator gt @2400
Soundcard: asus xonar dx
PSU: EVGA SuperNova 1200 P2
Default 01-31-2013, 06:57 | posts: 7,534 | Location: Sunny Scotland

So you fellas are unawares that Arma3 is gonna have PhysX?
Thanks for vid WhiteLightning!
PhysX = best graphics effect ever. (imo of course).
   
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com
Copyright (c) 1995-2014, All Rights Reserved. The Guru of 3D, the Hardware Guru, and 3D Guru are trademarks owned by Hilbert Hagedoorn.