PhysX: intentionally ineficient?!?

[Kenshiro]

---

Physics should better be coded on the CPU because of multi cores. Having more and more cores and threads for cpus physics would be more effecient if run on CPU.
Why do we have to get another GPU just for physx when there are a lot of cores and threads on the CPU that are unused. Its just horribly inefficient when you get unused CPU cores and you need another GPU for physx. Nvidia is spending tons in bribing developers to using physx rather than cpu accelrated physics processing which is more efficient and cost effective.

Its really about business and fooling cunsumers are part of it. There are times when these monkey business is so obvious that ordinary consumers would notice.
Nvidia is good at this remember wood screws for the fermi press release?

Id rather wait for CPU accelerated Physics than buying GPU physx from Nvidia.

[boom_box]

Dapat i release maka release ang ATI sa ilang Havok..
The problem is that not even a word from the dev's of ATi release of Havok with such promising updates..

Anyway, GTX260 pa jpun ako vcard.. so far so good kaya paman bahalag ga andar ang Physx..

[P0w3rM0v3]

@boom_box: Havok is not owned by ATI or AMD, sir. they are a different company. There are already many games using this engine: Havok - Available Games

Havok is free to use btw. But you only get the basic software suite with it. To get all of the premium features, you have to pay the company for it. This is why Havok is widely gaining popularity and already used more than PhysX.

[dmelsie]

cpu's has lower processing cores compared than GPU, dormant lang ang processing power sa GPU mao bitaw ni push sad ang nvidia para sa ilang CUDA mao sad nag bikil na sila sa Intel

as what mostly akoa na observe during intel seminars mo promote man gane ila speakers na mas maka benefit pa kuno sa games if mag upgrade og processors like dual to quad hehehe magkatawa lang ko nila

[spookey]

as for my opinion, i prefer physx to be on the gpu. first, i don't need to upgrade my proc and mobo just to keep up with physx. i can keep my old setup and i will just have to buy a better vc for physx. it is easier to upgrade 1 component in your system than all three.

[P0w3rM0v3]

@dmelsie: interesting you say that bay because if you remember ang intel ug nvidia used to have a partnership. It ended very badly.... Ang nvidia has been pushing GPGPU technology which is making the cpu ang gpu work in unison to achieve tasks.

@spookey: Mao ba bro? that doesnt make a whole lot of sense to me though, since cpus are generally cheaper and consume less power than gpus... meaning having something work on a cpu is far more cost effective than making it work on a gpu... Also, its common knowledge that games run efficiently on 3 cores or less. The 4th core is basically unused. If you have that to spare, why not use it rather than buying a dedicated graphics card for physX?

[loloyis.com]

@boom_box: Havok is not owned by ATI or AMD, sir. they are a different company.

Havok is owned by Intel.

Here's an article from hothardware...it's a good read. contains 3 pages.
NVIDIA Sheds Light On Lack Of PhysX CPU Optimizations - HotHardware

[P0w3rM0v3]

^^ nice find. I just read it.


notable excerpts:
"the simple reason that NVIDIA wants PC users to buy GPUs because of PhysX, which does make it less interested in optimizing CPU PhysX."
---> $$$

"In this case, NVIDIA wants to monetize PhysX/CUDA, and the best way to do that is to encourage developers to use them. The snag is that software developers have a very long history of only using languages and features that they know will be supported by as much hardware as is possible. "
--> yep, its was a business strategy with regards to the proprietary nature of it. But in doing so, they alienate the market which is sentiments lagi namo ni personalamgt.

"we've already said that developers tend to support standards that a wide range of hardware can utilize, which means it is in NVIDIA's best interest to optimize PhysX for all sorts of hardware. The more platforms that run PhysX well, the more developers will use it. The better PhysX runs on the CPU...the smaller the chance that developers will go to extra effort to utilize the hardware-accelerated flavor, and the fewer consumers will opt to buy a GPU for whiz-bang special effects."
---> but is it right to intentionally cripple performance though even if you already paid for a dedicated physX card?

The good news is at least nvidia is working on a new SDK (Software Development Kit). hopefully with SSE and more optimized for performance.

[libido]

@all - sorry unsa man gyud ang main purpose sa physx...aside sa pam pa boost sa gaming experience nimo?.. ok ba sya sa rendering ug converting movies? sorry g kapoi nako research...mas maau nang ask nalang ko ninyo kay naa man moi mga nv cards nga naka physx...

[P0w3rM0v3]

@libido: pang boost ra jud sa gaming experience bro, nothing else. Just more eyecandy on the screen with physics effects. ang CUDA ang mo enhance sa encoding, rendering, etc. since mao ni ilang proponent for GPGPU technology.