So Shift doesn't use PhysX hardware acceleration with the supplied Nvidia drivers but it does with the hacked ATI+PhysX drivers? Lol, that's rich.
So Shift doesn't use PhysX hardware acceleration with the supplied Nvidia drivers but it does with the hacked ATI+PhysX drivers? Lol, that's rich.
That's the only way I can enabled it with my gpu,also notice the poster from nogripracing.com has a ATI+Nvidia for physx setup.
Last edited by Hell Hound; 05-24-2010 at 12:25 AM.
Well if the hacked drivers are unlocking hardware acceleration for Shift, I wonder how many other games it would work for.
Last edited by Solus Corvus; 05-24-2010 at 12:37 AM.
Originally Posted by Hell Hound
Scalable terrain fedelity http://www.bfgtech.com/physx/bfgphysx.html (under features & benefits tab)
If your tires are not warmed up you may loose a second or two or If a piece of rubber is on the track and you drive over it you will feel it in your tire's.PhysX has potential.
Hell Hound
Bro, I really don't think you understand what you are talking about. I have read all your posts and you seem to think the whole game is physics.
Pavement & friction? Do you understand what a Physics API is, does? Or, the difference between physics & an algorithm? Do you even understand why the compression of spring rate or dampening, would NEVER need the use of PhysX to resolve... etc. It appears that you seem to think that a physic's library (ie: PhysX) is anything calculated in a game. It is not.
Additionally, I though it was made quite clear to you (in another thread), that nobody here is discussing Scientific Computing.
Using hardware (PhysX or Physics), where people render a physical event, to illustrate an effect, scenario, or law of physics, etc. Where someone in a lab, used a bevy of Nvidia cards in SLI, utilizing PhysX to help them render something (non game related). Like your Frog demo... that is nothing more than illustrating how powerful, or robust the API is @ scientific computing, not gaming!
Ironically, the PhysX doesn't "accelerate" anything. "PhysX" can be accelerated... but real time, is real time... , so either it works, or it doesn't!
Coincidentally, whether or not Need For Speed utilized the PPU, CPU or GPU is irrelevant to this discussion, because it is safe to say that you DON'T need an Nvidia card to play the game, nor calculate the PhysX being used. Your own links demonstrate this.
It could easily just use a few idle cores of a modern CPU, with the same result.
Lastly, almost all of us understand what "physics", in a game are, what it does... we are saying that PhysX Only on the GPU is to protect Nvidia (so they can sell more video cards) and is an illusion created by Nvidia.
lol reading comprehension is bad here,I was talking about the possibilities of using terrain fidelity.Second physics is physics the way you use it is your choice,and yes the whole game is about physics its a driving game.Now what part of that is being accelerated by physx,not engine but collision and objects around the track and the handling.
Quote from YodaStar @ nogripracing.com
"Live HDVehicle trace enable" traces car handling or such and outputs it to a log file in the game folder.
The "<prop name="Disable PhysX switching" type="Bool" />" is just the ID for the engine to understand the command. It just defines the type of value boolean, float etc.
For the "<prop name="Disable PhysX switching" data="true" />" you could check for perfomance impact when colliding with cars or track objects. Disable vsync, set graphic settings to low aswell as resolution and check framerate with for example FRAPs.The thread is about hardware accelerated physx but people keep saying cpu cpu cpuwhether or not Need For Speed utilized the PPU, CPU or GPU is irrelevant to this discussion
It seems you don't know that its take computational power to game,many many calculation's,how is calculating not scientific.The more real or accurate the program the more computational power is needed.Dedicated hardware is made to do specific calculation to simulate a more real or accurate program.Who said damping calculations was depended upon physx that's stupid to even say that.I said PhysX supports damping calculation acceleration.I believe your understanding of what is being talked about is limited not trying to say anything wrong just saying that's all.
The PhysX api can use hardware to more accurately accelerate the calculating of damping,when the steering wheel simulates data given it will be more accurate or real.
Someone's Grand Prix Legends Core.ini file settings
allow_force_feedback = 1 ; Use FF if device has it
force_feedback_damping = 200.0 ; force feedback damping coefficient
force_feedback_latency = 00.001 ; force feedback latency (secs)
max_steering_torque = 250.0 ; steering torque in N*in giving max device force
Last edited by Hell Hound; 05-24-2010 at 12:41 PM.
Hell Hound, I think you're running in circles here, mate.
The thing is, all the "effects" that you think PhysX or whatever API could bring to a racing or driving simulation is already being done for DECADES. Nothing that PhysX brings to the table is new per se.
Modern race-sims engines can be pretty CPU intensive and, theoretically, all the PhysX API could do is offload some calculations from the CPU.
Edit:
Sorry, mate, but you just proved that you don't know what you're talking about.
Spring and damper are just FFB effects that can be simulated by your wheel. And every simmer knows that both allways should be set to 0% and centering should be turned off aswell.
Last edited by Caparroz; 05-24-2010 at 12:49 PM.
Murray Walker: "And there are flames coming from the back of Prost's McLaren as he enters the Swimming Pool."
James Hunt: "Well, that should put them out then."
That's what the whole thread is about hardware acceleration ,not bringing something new to racing sim's.
Which still remains to be proved.
Read my edit. It should improve your lap times.
Murray Walker: "And there are flames coming from the back of Prost's McLaren as he enters the Swimming Pool."
James Hunt: "Well, that should put them out then."
Which still remains to be proved.
Spring and damper are just FFB effects that can be simulated by your wheel.
Because sim's didn't use it,where do you think the data comes from.I used that to point out damping being used on a game.
Also why are people not acknowledging the ppu only lights up in use.
Get a ppu and you will see the light.
Last edited by Hell Hound; 05-24-2010 at 01:05 PM.
LOLWUT?!?Because sim's didn't use it,I used that to point out damping being used on a game.
Do you even know what spring and damper Force Feedback effects are?
You do know that Grand Prix Legends is a sim made in 1997, right?
Murray Walker: "And there are flames coming from the back of Prost's McLaren as he enters the Swimming Pool."
James Hunt: "Well, that should put them out then."
http://www.teamslm.com/downloads_momo.html
Damper Effects Strength - 0% very VERY important to set this to 0%, this is probably THE most important setting, as it will greatly increase notchiness and wheel twitches, even though the Papyrus sims do not exactly enable it
The mechanical production of information sensed by the human kinaesthetic systems.Do you even know what spring and damper Force Feedback effects are?
FORCE FEEDBACK EFFECTS are EFFECTS SIMULATED FROM GAME DATA TO GIVE A HUMAN THE SENSE OF REALISM.
Now Let me ask you do you know what force feedback is ?
Last edited by Hell Hound; 05-24-2010 at 01:21 PM.
hmm, perhaps you are correct, ill be picking up my new PPU today and installing it to get the full feeling in a game. team fortress 2 is feeling pretty bland.
i7 2700k 4.60ghz -- Z68XP-UD4 F6F -- Ripjaws 2x4gb 1600mhz -- 560 Ti 448 stock!? -- Liquid Cooling Apogee XT -- Claro+ ATH-M50s -- U2711 2560x1440
Majestouch 87 Blue -- Choc Mini Brown -- Poker Red -- MX11900 -- G9
Think if a pedals had force feedback,each car would drive in a more believable manner.
look @ this
These are based off of oil pressure.
Man, you're making such a mess and confusing two complete and absolute distintic things that I don't even know how I can awnser you. Sorry if I'm being harsh, I really do not intend to be, but it's like writinig a thesis called "French Fries and Gamma Rays Burts: a correlation between the two".
I'll try anyway...
GPL in it's glory days had a very freaking advanced FFB code. It blew everyone away. It's one of the best around even after 13 years of it's launch. But like every piece of software ever released it came with a "few" bugs.
The FFB tweak in the core.ini for the FFB to work like it should is widely known among GPL'ers. In the first few days after the lauch Dave Kaemmer (race-sim supremo, developer of GPL) himself acknowledge the bug in FFB and worked with the community and this very simple fix was born instead of waiting for a patch.
Why you think FFB an PhysX are correlated, or "FORCE FEEDBACK EFFECTS are EFFECTS SIMULATED FROM GAME DATA TO GIVE A HUMAN THE SENSE OF REALISM" as you put it, is really beyond me.
I'm under the impression that you're thinking PhysX works like this:
A developer types "Air" in the PhysX developer tools and, BAM, there you have it, full drag/air resistance and flow accurate simulation inside the game. Type in "tyre and road" and you can thrown away Pacejka Formula for tyre/suface interaction between lateral and longitudinal forces.
Edit: My God, these set of Frex pedals is around for YEARS! What the heck does it have to do with PhysX?!? I had one of those when Athlon64 and X800 were braking world records, ffs...
Last edited by Caparroz; 05-24-2010 at 01:57 PM.
Murray Walker: "And there are flames coming from the back of Prost's McLaren as he enters the Swimming Pool."
James Hunt: "Well, that should put them out then."
I'm sorry for being harsh upon you but you keep thinking eye candy.This is not batman lol I don't want flying paper.Track data is simulated with force feedback,okay now if the physx api handles the track data where is the force feedback device getting its data from.?
No, I didn't think you're harsh at all.
Force Feedback is a very complex subject and is not by any means applied only in computer games. I'm no expert on that (you got to have an engineering/math degree to be an expert on that) and "interaction" with the virtual enviroment is only part of it. That's why only a handful of games deals properly with it. I suggest a google search with you're interested in that.
Back to PhysX. Virtual tyre/surface interaction isn't and it will never be handled by PhysX. Even if it would, FFB code would work completely independant of it.
Murray Walker: "And there are flames coming from the back of Prost's McLaren as he enters the Swimming Pool."
James Hunt: "Well, that should put them out then."
what a mess. i can't get rid of the impression that the OP has no clue what he's talking about and how things work at all
1. Asus P5Q-E / Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 @~3612 MHz (8,5x425) / 2x2GB OCZ Platinum XTC (PC2-8000U, CL5) / EVGA GeForce GTX 570 / Crucial M4 128GB, WD Caviar Blue 640GB, WD Caviar SE16 320GB, WD Caviar SE 160GB / be quiet! Dark Power Pro P7 550W / Thermaltake Tsunami VA3000BWA / LG L227WT / Teufel Concept E Magnum 5.1 // SysProfile
2. Asus A8N-SLI / AMD Athlon 64 4000+ @~2640 MHz (12x220) / 1024 MB Corsair CMX TwinX 3200C2, 2.5-3-3-6 1T / Club3D GeForce 7800GT @463/1120 MHz / Crucial M4 64GB, Hitachi Deskstar 40GB / be quiet! Blackline P5 470W
No, I didn't think you're harsh at all.
Force Feedback is a very complex subject and is not by any means applied only in computer games. I'm no expert on that (you got to have an engineering/math degree to be an expert on that) and "interaction" with the virtual enviroment is only part of it. That's why only a handful of games deals properly with it. I suggest a google search with you're interested in that.
Back to PhysX. Virtual tyre/surface interaction isn't and it will never be handled by PhysX. Even if it would, FFB code would work completely independant of it.surface reaction means what to you ?
what a mess. i can't get rid of the impression that the OP has no clue what he's talking about and how things work at all
Last edited by Hell Hound; 05-24-2010 at 02:48 PM.
PR talk.
Murray Walker: "And there are flames coming from the back of Prost's McLaren as he enters the Swimming Pool."
James Hunt: "Well, that should put them out then."
lol reading comprehension is bad here,I was talking about the possibilities of using terrain fidelity.Second physics is physics the way you use it is your choice,and yes the whole game is about physics its a driving game.Now what part of that is being accelerated by physx,not engine but collision and objects around the track and the handling.
Quote from YodaStar @ nogripracing.com
The thread is about hardware accelerated physx but people keep saying cpu cpu cpu
It seems you don't know that its take computational power to game,many many calculation's,how is calculating not scientific.The more real or accurate the program the more computational power is needed.Dedicated hardware is made to do specific calculation to simulate a more real or accurate program.Who said damping calculations was depended upon physx that's stupid to even say that.I said PhysX supports damping calculation acceleration.I believe your understanding of what is being talked about is limited not trying to say anything wrong just saying that's all.
Dude,
In your latest posts, it is clearly demonstrated, that you have no idea what a physic's library is (ie: PhysX/Physics) when related to gaming..!
Games don't have real physical objects, so when making 3d games, how objects react to one another has always been left up to the developer. Sometimes they get their calculation right, sometimes, things seems "off", or not simulated well. (ie: characters dieing animation in a game)
That is where a set of software libraries, that run a separate sub-routine (if you will), that uses KNOWN physical attributes. So that when objects, applied using such a lib, behave correctly without intervention from the game developer..
Understand?
Now.. that^ is not the same as having a physical object (spring on a car) that has known dynamics. Which would never need to use a "specialized library" (physx) to compute the spring weight & rate while it compresses, because the environmental dynamics are already known. The Developer would just use mathematics & arrive with the same answer, without all the complexity.
Additionally, it is only when the desires effect is needed on a myriad of different objects variables... that you may need to make use of such "specialized library". That is when physx/physics is a better choice, because it can then be applied to every instance of that object, without the need to program it, it will function on it own, within the confines of whatever parameters it is given.
Hooking stable objects into a real time physical emulator would be a waste of processing power & utterly pointless. (ie: idiotic)
Ironically, many forum members here have reminded you numerous times that you have no clue, matter -of-fact I don't think I can find anyone that does agree with you on any of this.....
BTW, there is no such thing as software physics, everything is done on hardware. Whether it CPU, GPU, or dedicated PPU.. get your terminology right!
Last edited by Xoulz; 05-24-2010 at 03:47 PM.
What I'm telling you is stop talking about every thing but hardware acceleration in this thread.
Also its you who does not know what physics is these calculation's are set in stone already,so to have a library of them is to have storage full of calculation's (data).anyway as I have showed the whole thread was about hardware acceleration in nfs shift anyway.
Funny thing is every one calls cpu acceleration software acceleration,and I bet I will see you say it as well.
Last edited by Hell Hound; 05-24-2010 at 04:36 PM.
OK.. wait. That^ linked quote, is where you derived at Need for Speed using PhysX to simulate tire/tarmac cohesion...?
Then, you extrapolate that to also mean force feedback and spring rate/dampening, because a game can output spring rate/dampening to a Force Feedback device..?
?
er, how about..
The surface of the quarter panels as they hit the wall? The surface of the windshield as it cracks? The surface of the water as a pebble hits it?
There are thousands of surfaces in a racing game, but you took that simple quote and argued a whole point, because you thought they meant the track surface?
I would think that one of the most stable environment in a racing game would be the tarmac. Slip angles and lateral G's and all types of physical forces are already known. Even if applying a variable surface co-efficient, such as being hotter on one part of the track, over the next, even oil spill..
Because the tarmac & tires have known physical attributes, that given the depth of the game, can have many different surfaces... but no need to involve a physic.lib
Absolutely one of the funniest things I have ever read... along with my new sig, thnx!
{edit] BTW... the topic of this thread is "Need for Speed; Shift.. uses hardware acceleration !!!" and you have done everything BUT discuss the use of PhysX in the game. Also, libraries don't have calculatins set in stone, the FORMULAS are.. do you even know how to do geomatrey, let alone diff eq & such...?
Last edited by Xoulz; 05-24-2010 at 04:53 PM.
You can not say that track surface isn't a surface that objects react to.
The PhysX api has Soft Bodies, Self-collision and damping support
This is how we got to damping acceleration.
Last edited by Hell Hound; 05-24-2010 at 04:52 PM.
you dont know what you're talking about do you?
HW physics refers to physics simulations that are run on an ASIC to boost performance.
BTW, there is no such thing as software physics, everything is done on hardware. Whether it CPU, GPU, or dedicated PPU.. get your terminology right!
SW physics refers to physics simulations that run on a cpu.
DID ANYONE READE POST NUMBER 66?
I can't believe you guys are actually talking to him. It's not a matter of right or wrong opinions, it's a matter of being open minded, and this guy is totally open minded in only one thing, the endorsement of fail products.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks