PDA

View Full Version : Lightwave and Phys cards



oobievision
05-28-2008, 06:20 PM
ok Ive been hearing about these so called physics cards and how there gonna revolutionize gaming and what not. For those that dont know what a Physics card is, A physics card is an expansion card for computers, which is used to process physics interactions as to help produce more physical action in computer generated graphics. By taking over the processing of these effects, the CPU can use more of its power for other tasks. A physics card is centered around a physics processing unit, similar to the graphics processing unit on a graphics card, and also contains RAM for use in its processes.

So I wonder when it comes to Dynamics in lightwave could something like this be used to help process dynamics so the cpu wont have to and concentrate on animation and textures?

Of course I do realize that for something like this extra code would have to be written into lightwave in order to request the use of the hardware.

warmiak
05-28-2008, 06:32 PM
I think phys cards are a dead end technology.

The only company that was making them (as far as I am aware) is no more ...
What you gonna see is technologies like CUDA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CUDA) being used for this purpose.

oobievision
05-28-2008, 07:32 PM
yeah they where bought out by Nvidia, and they killed it. but what about in the sense of animation like for movies and such. for video. I think by using a phys card to generate the calculations of movement could improve on render time as well real time updating. so u get a better sense of your project. instead of spending all this money on third party render engines. and faster CPU's. also get more realistic dynamic interaction.

Dodgy
05-28-2008, 07:58 PM
Did they kill it or is it going into the new nvidia graphics chips?

warmiak
05-28-2008, 08:29 PM
Well, they didn't kill the engine itself, just the hardware part of it ...
They are busy reimplementing PhysX using CUDA which will basically allow the code to run on CUDA compatible cards ( any Directx 10 class hardware from Nvidia .)

Frankly, given that a card like Nvidia 8800 GTX internally contains the equivalent of 128 cores ( a greatly simplified implementation compared to a typical Intel/Amd core to be sure but still ) I don't think there is a need for any additional hardware.
I am quite interested what kind of performance Nvidia devs were able to get out of something like 8800 GTX . will see :-)

RebelHill
05-28-2008, 09:49 PM
I think phys cards are a dead end technology.

I seem to recall a tale of when the Tron (i believe it was) video game was being made, it was a very early 3D graphics title, but amazingly simplisticgraphics wise, obviously.... the creators at one point imagined a future where 3D graphics would be the norm for games, but abandoned developing it on the premise that noone would ever pay money for the dedicated 3D hardware that would be needed to run them.

prospector
05-28-2008, 10:11 PM
Did they kill it or is it going into the new nvidia graphics chips?
The new GPUs


The only way to get real physics with the scale, sophistication, fidelity and level of interactivity that dramatically alters your entertainment experience will be with one of the millions of NVIDIA PhysX-ready GeForce processors.*

*Note: NVIDIA will deploy PhysX on CUDA-enabled GPUs later this year. The exact models and availability will be announced in the near future.


When the new NVidia cards come with PhysX, I hope Newtek is ready...

jin choung
05-29-2008, 12:00 AM
Did they kill it or is it going into the new nvidia graphics chips?

yah, talk on the web is that they bought it to bury it. nvidia's doing their own thing with their gpus getting implicated into everything.

jin

Ztreem
05-29-2008, 02:13 AM
Nvidia is going to rebuild the physx software to work with their cuda enabled graphicscards instead of a separate physx hardware card. Ageia's hardware card didn't speed up the calculations much(according to reviews) and only had about 10 cores in the processor while nvidias gpu's have 128 cores. I think will see much more performance from nvidia then from the ageia card, and as a bonus you only have to buy a graphicscard and the phys card follows with it.

oobievision
05-29-2008, 12:52 PM
kinda makes you wonder why Nvidia killed the physics card. I guess they may have felt threatened by it.

Cageman
05-29-2008, 01:08 PM
I believe NVidia wanted the tech (software) and frankly speaking, this time I think the right thing was made. Ageia PhysX is impressive (the software part... just take a look at Liquid Pack for LW), but as Ztreem stated, the HW only took the load off the CPU to calculate the dynamics, but it wasn't that much faster.... and it didn't sell that well either. GFX-Cards with built in (and probably much better) HW for dynamics calc for games will sell very well. Gamers are a crazy bunch of people, but they make the HW we use so much cheaper. :)

And yes, hopefully Liquid Pack (which is using PhysX) will be upgraded to take advantage of the new HW when NVidia bombards the market!

Ztreem
05-29-2008, 01:19 PM
kinda makes you wonder why Nvidia killed the physics card. I guess they may have felt threatened by it.

Why would they feel threatend by the hardware card when they own it and produce them? doesn't make sense.
But it make sense to merge the hardware card and the graphics card to one card or in this case use the gpu on the graphicscard because it's more powerful then the one on the separate HW-card. I'm possitive about this one and as Cageman said, the most impressive thing about PhysX is the software not the HW thing, not at the moment anyway.

warmiak
05-29-2008, 01:21 PM
kinda makes you wonder why Nvidia killed the physics card. I guess they may have felt threatened by it.

No, the physics card in question was a total flop.

tayotain2
05-29-2008, 01:37 PM
saw this thread some time ago.

dstorm has plugin that uses cuda.
never tested it...
http://www.spinquad.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19092

Cageman
05-29-2008, 02:15 PM
saw this thread some time ago.

dstorm has plugin that uses cuda.
never tested it...
http://www.spinquad.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19092

Here is another thread on this forum:

http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71039&highlight=liquid+pack

Look for posts by Mr.Rid... he had some insane calctimes using native tools in LW, compared to what people using Liquid Pack had... :)

Cageman
05-29-2008, 02:20 PM
This is so funny:

Originally Posted by Mr Rid
This brief sim of 20,000 self-colliding particles took three hours to calculate in LW9, which is not nearly enough to really do something serious. http://www.box.net/shared/static/ytqofua2te.mov When I tried 30,000 points, the calculation froze on frame one forever so I gave up the thought of liquid in PFX.

And the response from Trevor:

Yikes, 3 hours.!
This little test I did did with dstorms pfx took only 3 mins, for a 230 frame simulation, You have to admit , thats pretty impressive, on a single 3 gig processor.
By my calculations, 5000 points per emitter, I cloned it 17 times, thats 85,00 points.
http://www.ogc-clan.com/images/screens/fluidfxp.avi
Divx codec 3 megs.

Just a note: Trevor is refering to Liquid Pack when saying "dstorms pfx"

Oh well...

EDIT: Both links are still working, so go fetch them before they dissappear!!!

Dodgy
05-29-2008, 03:10 PM
The liquid pack doesn't seem to be for sale any more?

Cageman
05-29-2008, 03:16 PM
You can download the trial from this page (just scroll down to the bottom)

http://www.dstorm.co.jp/products/plugins/liquidPack/

Clockmaster
05-29-2008, 03:28 PM
PhysX software is at least impressive: I have seen realtime demos going at 60 or more fps without any hardware on an AthlonXP 3000+.
Ageia Hardware board simply doesn't add much more to this, due to its architecture.
NVidia can do better and simply will do.

oobievision
06-11-2008, 10:15 PM
I downloaded that liquid pack and really saw no difference.

Cageman
06-13-2008, 08:29 AM
What?

It's way, way faster than standard LW-particles... btw... you have to use the LP tools, not the standard tools.