|
|
| Page 1 of 2 |
Supino
Posts: 699
Location: Norway
|
 Posted: Wed, 9th Mar 2005 15:13 Post subject: New Physic Prosessing Unit (PPU) |
|
 |
About the Ageia PhysX:
http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/03/08/news_6119895.html
Ageia PhysX in Unreal Engine 3:
http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/03/08/news_6119896.html
Quote:
"Intel Pentium 4 or AMD Athlon 64, can support roughly 30 to 40 "active bodies," or physical objects that can interact with each other in-game. This limitation doesn't give developers much to work with in terms of physics simulation. Simulating a building blowing up in real time is impossible with such a small number of fragments, but increase the active body count to 32,000 or 40,000, which the Ageia PhysX PPU can handle, and then you'll have an explosion to talk about."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
proddan
Posts: 1066
Location: Gulf of Aden
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Mar 2005 15:19 Post subject: |
|
|
fuc.king insane ! but there still a problem you will need a ATI tripple gazillion mayham of destruction turbo card to render all the body counts !!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Mar 2005 15:46 Post subject: |
|
|
sounds interesting !!!
if we got more power the games are looking better so bring it on !!!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Mar 2005 17:05 Post subject: |
|
|
Cool.. Guess we'll see interesting games 2010 or so.
Duke Nukem Forever will be having this i guess.
"Make me a sandwich."
"What? No!"
"sudo Make me a sandwich."
"Okay."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Mar 2005 17:12 Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, In another 5 years or so games will be so beyond what we have now it'll be amazing.
The thing is that when we do reach this point we won't be so amazed because it'll be a gradual process. Imagine if doom 3 came out in the year 1999, we would probably faint because the graphics were so good.
"Techniclly speaking, Beta-Manboi didnt inject Burberry_Massi with Benz, he injected him with liquid that had air bubbles in it, which caused benz." - House M.D
"Faith without logic is the same as knowledge without understanding; meaningless"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Mar 2005 19:23 Post subject: |
|
|
AnimalMother:
Yea but then we'd be like... "Dude! I cant run this shiat!"
=P
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 10th Mar 2005 08:10 Post subject: |
|
|
| DethZero wrote: | AnimalMother:
Yea but then we'd be like... "Dude! I cant run this shiat!"
=P |
And this is different from nowadays how..?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Baleur
Posts: 2343
Location: South Sweden
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Mar 2005 02:26 Post subject: |
|
|
dude, doom3 runs friggen amazing, dont say anything else, unless you have like a geforce 3, why would you even expect to run it with that?
Back when i had the GeForce FX5800 (which by the way was stopped in production because it sucked so incredibly much with bumpmaps and shit), the thing that made me play trough doom3 wasnt the graphics or the gameplay, it was the fact that i was so damn happily surprised of how well it ran on max graphics after chopfiests like farcry and ut2k3/2k4 (i STILL cant run ut2k4 smooth, something is wrong with me lol).. if u cant run doom3 with a modern pc something is wrong with your pc, not the game, the doom 3 engine is amazing i tell u. but unreal 3 engine is more amazing 
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 RAM: 4gb Kingmax DDR2 800mhz Video: Asus GeForce 250GTS 1gb Sound: Asus Xonar.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 12th Mar 2005 18:15 Post subject: |
|
|
Once these are used the only thing your CPU will have to do is render the GUI and AI. Both of which arent very demanding.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nerrd
Posts: 3607
Location: Poland / USA
|
| Posted: Sat, 12th Mar 2005 19:28 Post subject: |
|
|
| Mchart wrote: | | Once these are used the only thing your CPU will have to do is render the GUI and AI. Both of which arent very demanding. |
AI is not very cpu demanding? What are you smoking dood?
back on topic.
More info about the chip straight from the horses mouth @
http://www.novodex.com/
Everyone should check out the phisics demo @
http://www.novodex.com/rocket/NovodexRocket_V1_1.exe
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 12th Mar 2005 23:21 Post subject: |
|
|
| nerrd wrote: | | Mchart wrote: | | Once these are used the only thing your CPU will have to do is render the GUI and AI. Both of which arent very demanding. |
AI is not very cpu demanding? What are you smoking dood?
back on topic.
More info about the chip straight from the horses mouth @
http://www.novodex.com/
Everyone should check out the phisics demo @
http://www.novodex.com/rocket/NovodexRocket_V1_1.exe |
What am I smoking? I must be magically typing up code for AI then, and knowing what happens with it to work in a game. The code for a realtime GUI in a game takes more processing power then AI does. Why? Because AI is event based, the CPU doesnt need to make calculations for AI every single clock cycle.
Trust me, You do not want to argue with me on this.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 12th Mar 2005 23:25 Post subject: |
|
|
| Baleur wrote: | | the thing that made me play trough doom3 wasnt the graphics or the gameplay, it was the fact that i was so damn happily surprised of how well it ran on max graphics after chopfiests like farcry and ut2k3/2k4 (i STILL cant run ut2k4 smooth, something is wrong with me lol) |
You dont think doom3 was a boring chopfest? it was a nice looking punisher with no real difficulty |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 12th Mar 2005 23:27 Post subject: |
|
|
| Sublime wrote: | | Baleur wrote: | | the thing that made me play trough doom3 wasnt the graphics or the gameplay, it was the fact that i was so damn happily surprised of how well it ran on max graphics after chopfiests like farcry and ut2k3/2k4 (i STILL cant run ut2k4 smooth, something is wrong with me lol) |
You dont think doom3 was a boring chopfest? it was a nice looking punisher with no real difficulty |
Doom3 is more then quite hard on nightmare mode. You basically only have 25HP throughout the entire game.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 12th Mar 2005 23:38 Post subject: |
|
|
yea but it was just go through a door kill some monssters go through another get a keycard run back open door kill some monsters.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 12th Mar 2005 23:43 Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, but I liked that better then HL2.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mutantius
VIP Member
Posts: 18594
Location: In Elektro looking for beans
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nerrd
Posts: 3607
Location: Poland / USA
|
| Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2005 00:55 Post subject: |
|
|
| Mchart wrote: |
Trust me, You do not want to argue with me on this. |
Then explain this. You host a server of any current multiplayer game that supports bots. Without bots your server runs perfect. With bots it doesnt. Add too many it stops to a crawl. Yet when you have the same amout of real players on the server your only problem might be lag. Keep in mind that most of the games out there have extremly poor AI.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2005 01:12 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2005 02:01 Post subject: |
|
|
Son of a ...
My only request to mods [for now]: Please, Please, Please ban McHart if he says one more word about Doom 3.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2005 02:28 Post subject: |
|
|
Warning Mchart stay on topic or else
Also this is great 40,000+ characters able to be processed instead of the normal 30 or so. Also rendering this stuff wouldn't be to hard as long as you don't use real time lighting and lots of lighting effects. Otherwise it's just a particle scheme with bump maps and that wont be to hard.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2005 05:44 Post subject: |
|
|
| nerrd wrote: | | Mchart wrote: |
Trust me, You do not want to argue with me on this. |
Then explain this. You host a server of any current multiplayer game that supports bots. Without bots your server runs perfect. With bots it doesnt. Add too many it stops to a crawl. Yet when you have the same amout of real players on the server your only problem might be lag. Keep in mind that most of the games out there have extremly poor AI. |
That has to do with netcode. Not the AI. Just think through it yourself. AI is completely event based. Compared to graphical calculations or even physical calculations, AI is nothing. The moment you start using operations which are used mainly only in physical and graphical processing, thats when things start getting hard. And obviously using geometric expressions is not needed in the area of AI programming. You arent finding some awkard angle of a ray jutting off a sphere with AI programming, and you arent finding the spectroscopticity of a surface when programming with AI. Instead, you are only really choosing between X or Y. Then once the circumstance is met, it moves onto the next choice X or Y statement, and so on. Yes, there are many instances where you want the code to change the code, but this is usually done at the loading of the game stages, and still can be done very fast on the fly. Yes, there are also many instances where the amount of choices that have to be made is mind boggling, but in the end, the CPU is barely breaking a sweat trying to do these tasks. Loading an integer into a variable and then reading that variable, then rinsing and repeating, is a CPU's primary function, and these are easy operations, like 1+1. Not some obtuse statement with many higher level operators. Unless the AI was programmed in a way where (try to visualize this) it used like mappings of a triangle or a given shape to try to give it a somewhat more realistic thought process, and something random to it (although nothing is ever random in the computer world). But I would not even want to think about getting that working, and I have yet for the life of me to see something like that. Yes, There are extremely advance AI's used in tech experiments, but not in your common computer game. Your common computer game, like I said, makes simple, pre-programmed choices. And if it generates and "remembers" on the fly, those are still very simple operations. Because it only has to recognize something has changed, then simply store, then edit in the new line so it recognizes it in the future, etc.. And if you notice, all these operations, are once again, x=y type statements. (Note that the = sign means STORE in simpler terms in C.)
I would also like to note that I was not the one which started the doom 3 topic shift.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Supino
Posts: 699
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2005 12:10 Post subject: |
|
|
It is ok to be offtopic here, there isn't much discussion around the PPU anyway. But I think physics is one of the most enjoyable things in games, and I really hope it will be a standard in futur PCs like the GPU. Nerrd thanx for the links!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nerrd
Posts: 3607
Location: Poland / USA
|
| Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2005 19:07 Post subject: |
|
|
np. Supino
Mchart, good post. I do understand that AI is event based, and doesnt really require any highly complicated calculations (so far). I just think thet when you have more advanced ai that has to make bigger predictions based on more factors (and thats only limited by how well it has been scripted), and then multiplay it by a number like 64 or even higher in some games it could get pretty CPU demending. What about if you wanted to make a game where you have 10,000 ai units, where each one has to for some odd reason understand what the other 9,999 are doing exactly at that very instant. Do you think that could be solved easly without slowing down to a crawl?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2005 19:20 Post subject: |
|
|
| nerrd wrote: | np. Supino
Mchart, good post. I do understand that AI is event based, and doesnt really require any highly complicated calculations (so far). I just think thet when you have more advanced ai that has to make bigger predictions based on more factors (and thats only limited by how well it has been scripted), and then multiplay it by a number like 64 or even higher in some games it could get pretty CPU demending. What about if you wanted to make a game where you have 10,000 ai units, where each one has to for some odd reason understand what the other 9,999 are doing exactly at that very instant. Do you think that could be solved easly without slowing down to a crawl? |
We are talking about now, not 3-5 years from now. And when things do get that advanced, we will of course, have much faster CPU's that will easily be able to handle these things. So the fact remains, now, or even in the future, it doesnt really matter.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nerrd
Posts: 3607
Location: Poland / USA
|
| Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2005 19:32 Post subject: |
|
|
Ok. So what you are saing is that the reason why the AI so 'not advanced' in current games is because of current hardware imitations. Is that not what I was saing in the first place?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2005 19:45 Post subject: |
|
|
No, not because of current hardware limitations, but because people arent making it as advanced as it could be. Even though the operations are simple, it is much harder then you think making "thinking" AI. Not because of slow computers, but because it takes a genius to write that kind of code.
Remember that movie that came out a few years ago, i forgot its name, but this dude created an AI program that was so real that the program became "alive" and real as an actress?
It would not take a super computer to handle something of that caliber, AI code wise at least, it just requires lots of time and correct layout on the programmers part.
There is no reason argueing this. You will never need a seperate AI operator add-on card of sorts, because it will be the only thing left for the CPU to do, other then the GUI. In fact, if you were to see an add on card of AI or GUI control, you would see a GUI add-on card first.
And of course by then the CPU would be totally dedicated to the AI basically.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2005 20:56 Post subject: |
|
|
You will never see a GUI addon card because GUI's by then will all be 3d and so would run through the video card and all it's glories pipelines. AI might get some extra help from cpu instructions modeled for it but no addon card
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2005 22:59 Post subject: |
|
|
On one hand, the PPU is an excellent idea: [in theory] the PPU could handle thousands of dynamic objects, which significantly reduces the load on the CPU. The problem here doesn't show itself until the third or fourth generation of games using the PPU: the first generation will be able to handle 100 objects, the second 1000, the third 10,000 and so on. Obviously, at the third stage, games will be developed based on the 10,000 model. The problem here is, what happens when a third-gen game is released, and a user has a first-gen card. Understandably, graphics can easily be substituted with lower-res textures, less model details, perhaps a lower resolution, etc. But if you have 10,000 stones rolling down a mountain, I think the experience would not be quite the same if it was scaled down to 100 stones =/. That, and the fact that 100 stones would create a significantly different game scenario than 10,000, and would require an entirely different game scenario. result - the devs would have to alter the game significantly, so instead of the effect of playing a game on a less-detailed screen, one would be playing a less-detailed game. Even more problematic is that there is no fallback - the CPU can handle fewer than 20 objects, so it does not provide much fallback value.
Of course, there's also the issue of money. With modern CPUs pushing $400, GPUs at about $500 and memory constantly increasing, I see an extra board in my computer as an extra few hundred I'll have to pop on each generation of computer, which isn't quite good news.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 14th Mar 2005 00:02 Post subject: |
|
|
| psychoace wrote: | | You will never see a GUI addon card because GUI's by then will all be 3d and so would run through the video card and all it's glories pipelines. AI might get some extra help from cpu instructions modeled for it but no addon card |
Exactly.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
