Havok says GPUs are fine for physics

[Tim]

Havok vice president Jeff Yates talks about why the GPU, not the PPU, is the better option for physics processing.

Source : Gamespot

edit: Read it....and I must say that in my opinion a PPU is much better for physics...bit of a biased person that guy I'm afraid

As with game physics implementations on the CPU, this depends on the balance that the game designer/developer wants to allocate and achieve. In a single GPU configuration, using a new Shader Model 3 graphics card, we think there is definitely room for basic physics effects with no appreciable impact on the graphics.

They "think" there is still room....not good enough to convince me

GPU-based physical effects will start with full collision of many thousands of rigid bodies running at typical game speeds, layered with state-of-the-art shading effects that deliver a seamless, compelling effect in the game. This is what we'd expect for a single, Shader Model 3-class GPU that is dedicated to a blend of physics effects and graphics.

I think that is just TOO much for the GPU, I certainly wouldn't want that

[iczerjones]

Just look at car stereos - component speakers are ALWAYS better than coaxial..

Home stereo systems - Component usually delivers a cleaner sound with more possibility for specialty components to really shine..

Water-cooling - Kit anyone? Yeah, components are quite better, yes?

AIW or X850XL + Wicked capture card?

I think the more specialty components you can get together, the more tools / horsepower you can really put out. A GPU that doubles to do physics IMO would not fair as well as a GPU dedicated to GRAPHICS and a PPU dedicated to PHYSICS working in tandem.

My .02

nice find though.

[Tim]

nice find though.

Wasn't my find...got it off XS

You made some good points....my 2 cents too

[Dil-tech]

Of course havok is saying GPU's are fine... If people go with the physX card, it means they won't be using the Havok physics engine anymore. Considering that engine is their money in the bank, they have a VERY good reason to make the claim that everything should be done by the gpu.

Now, if a company like id or epic make a statement like that, then I might actually believe it, but a straightforward competitor to the PhysX...no.

As with game physics implementations on the CPU, this depends on the balance that the game designer/developer wants to allocate and achieve. In a single GPU configuration, using a new Shader Model 3 graphics card, we think there is definitely room for basic physics effects with no appreciable impact on the graphics.

Basic effects... They're still going to do most of the physics rendering on the cpu, just basic physics will be offloaded to the gpu. Essentially, this is their way to try and fight against ageia(who just recently aquired another physics powerhouse company btw).