Cryostasis Tech Demo showing off Nvidia PhysX

[trinibwoy]

what the hell are you talking about?

I'm just here for the pure comedy. Now Nvidia is pushing PhysX to try and forestall the triumph of multi-core CPU's. What evil scheme will this dastardly corporation come up with next!!! LOE is finding all sorts of nonsensical reasons why PhysX is a negative development. There will be a standard one day but somebody has to blaze the trail.

[Stanley Pain]

Why does everyone think a Core i7 will magically run physics calculations better? Those CPUs aren't THAT much faster than their predecessors and are still only 4 cores. Maybe with 4 extra cores dedicated to physics you'd see a difference.

[alexio]

Although I do applaud innovation, in my opinion relatively static physics effects currently make more sense. Someone noted already the fact that in Bioshock the water effects look just as good or better, I agree with him. Furthermore, the solid material physics in the demo look no better than in Half-Life 2 (= good enough). I'd like to conclude that realistic in-game physics only make sense if they enhance the gameplay (Portal anyone!?). The basis of any good game is good gameplay.


@LOE: Use the edit button please, thanks you.

[Manicdan]

looks like HL2 + Doom

[spursindonesia]

This isn't NVIDIAs decision to make... Vista (and likely future OSes) only allows one 3d display device's driver to be active at any time. I think people have gotten this to work with XP though.

I know that Vista doesn't allow two display device drivers at the same time, and AFAIK, the implementation on XP was some sort of a hack too. Fact that, before Ageia was bought by nVidia, peeps from both green and red camp can get Physx implementation in their system by using Ageia card.

Now, what is stopping nVidia from allowing ATi users getting good Phsyx experience with their chosen VGA card by making a special Phsyx acceleration card using their GPU, with special driver for it, exactly the way it was back then, but using their GPU endowed card this time ? Choices and competition are great for consumers, and nVidia certainly doesn't play nice on that regard with this proprietary Phsyx solution.

[Macadamia]

Any OTHER PhysX tricks other than sub-fragments of solid objects, cloth, or water? It's ALWAYS been the same stuff demoed.

And if you want it to hurt some more, sorry, DX10/OGL Geometry shaders themselves already make fluid simulations possible. http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_cascades_home.html

I see backtracking...


On a side note, if some certain company were to support DX10.1 from the start and pushed a certain game developer the same way, we wouldn't have extremely jaggy trees in a certain island based game.

[tiro_uspsss]

This isn't NVIDIAs decision to make... Vista (and likely future OSes) only allows one 3d display device's driver to be active at any time. I think people have gotten this to work with XP though.

Vista = cant do
W7 = apparently can do as WDDM is of a newer version

I know that Vista doesn't allow two display device drivers at the same time, and AFAIK, the implementation on XP was some sort of a hack too.

wrong. XP *easily* did multi display drivers, no hacks, nothing - did it myself

[spursindonesia]

Yeah, i know, but it's sorta like OCing, not exactly something that nVidia recommended & supported, correct ?

[tiro_uspsss]

Yeah, i know, but it's sorta like OCing, not exactly something that nVidia recommended & supported, correct ?

dunno, never heard anything from NV.. f*k what they say anyway!

[spoof]

Someone manage to run the demo on 4870X2? I get "Could not create fluid" error ...

[Decami]

just read threw all this thread, boy did this news post bring out the crazies, im not even touching this one!

[Final8ty]

Any OTHER PhysX tricks other than sub-fragments of solid objects, cloth, or water? It's ALWAYS been the same stuff demoed.

And if you want it to hurt some more, sorry, DX10/OGL Geometry shaders themselves already make fluid simulations possible. http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_cascades_home.html

I see backtracking...


On a side note, if some certain company were to support DX10.1 from the start and pushed a certain game developer the same way, we wouldn't have extremely jaggy trees in a certain island based game.

http://us.download.nvidia.com/downlo...cades_tech.wmv
Impressive & no PhysX in sight.
& listen to what is said.

[Eastcoasthandle]

Ok, but why nvidia compares themselves to ATI, with a game they poured money into, so the developers make it run their API? And not AMDs? Don't you understand this is not actual indication of performance? This test compares NVIDIA GPU hadrware physics to CPU software physics, not to the ATI GPU as they indicated

How can you compare 2 things in a scenario that handicaps one of the sides?

It's like putting a 10 year old kid to fight against heavy weight boxer, and that fight has to prove who is smarter?

This is very good point.

[Sr7]

This is very good point.

Not really.. this is obviously them benchmarking the overall experience you'll end up with, not a "which GPU is faster at processing physics". How much does it take you guys to see that not everything is GPU vs. GPU, CPU vs. CPU. They're fairly representing what you'll get on an AMD GPU installed... a lot of CPU work.

It's kind of like arguing "hey it's not fair to compare an Apple Macbook to a Windows laptop"... you get an experience with both and you pay for both to own them. Why not rate the overall experience instead of getting into the detail of what is running what? I guess the best example of this is that Apple switched from PowerPC procs to Intel without a hitch, and no one really cares because they still get the same experience they have come to expect. They're still selling tons of computers, because people who buy them care about experience, not details.

But the OP's review is clearly an end-user experience benchmark, not a raw hardware comparison benchmark.

[kromosto]

Any OTHER PhysX tricks other than sub-fragments of solid objects, cloth, or water? It's ALWAYS been the same stuff demoed.

And if you want it to hurt some more, sorry, DX10/OGL Geometry shaders themselves already make fluid simulations possible. http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_cascades_home.html

I see backtracking...


On a side note, if some certain company were to support DX10.1 from the start and pushed a certain game developer the same way, we wouldn't have extremely jaggy trees in a certain island based game.

nice speak

[Varsos]

Someone manage to run the demo on 4870X2? I get "Could not create fluid" error ...

Reinstall and let the nvidia physics to be installed. That was the ''trick'' for me.