Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Software News › [Fud] ATI physics to stick to CPU
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Fud] ATI physics to stick to CPU - Page 3

post #21 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Villainstone View Post
I'm not sure if this is related to the topic but here is my 2 cents. I recently activated the physics ability of my 8800GT. Sense then I have not noticed any of my games shudder and seem laggy in certain situation. A good example is like in the game GRID... when I slide into the dirt initially when I got the game it would have a brief half second lag while the dirt kicked up. Now it seems much smoother and fluid then this happens. I actually had better control because that half second of lag always made me over steer and spin out. My driving actually improved and thats no joke. Another example, when the Titan blows in BF2142, when the Titans first appears blowing up. I would get that split second of lag right at the first initial explosion. Sense enabling the physics of the card I have not notice that happening. Like I said, it may not have anything to do with the topic at hand but I honestly think that it made a difference.

Just a thought though.... BF2142 is maxed out as far as setting go. I mean MAXED right the hell out using nHancer utility to override the game setting and NV control panel settings. My 8800GT runs it smooth smooth smooth (minus that one little part I mentioned). So if in fact the physics did load onto the GPU I doubt that it made any more of a load on the GPU. On the other hand a game that is DX10 I'm sure would have a much profound and noticeable impact on the GPU ability to keep up.
Do any of these games actually support GPU Physics or is it maybe placebo?
post #22 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by ENTERPRISE View Post
Nothing I have said suggests that. I know GPU's have far more processing potential in the Physics world than CPU. I am just saying that for now and the near future that CPU's should cope just fine.
Have you ever messed around in the Crysis Editor? You need GPU physics there because ones you have about 100 boxes falling at once the frame rate drops because it cant process the physics.
Unto The Void
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6800k Gigabyte G1 X99-Phoenix SLI Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 32GB RipJaw 4 DDR4-3000 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 850 500GB Crucial M4 2 x Spinpoint F1 Samsung 850 1TB 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 LG Ultrawide 29" Asus 24" 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech 810 EVGA P2 650 Watt In Win 303 Logitech G502 
  hide details  
Reply
Unto The Void
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6800k Gigabyte G1 X99-Phoenix SLI Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 32GB RipJaw 4 DDR4-3000 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 850 500GB Crucial M4 2 x Spinpoint F1 Samsung 850 1TB 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 LG Ultrawide 29" Asus 24" 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech 810 EVGA P2 650 Watt In Win 303 Logitech G502 
  hide details  
Reply
post #23 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by OJX View Post
Do any of these games actually support GPU Physics or is it maybe placebo?
Could be placebo, but none the less the games run better. For what ever reason it may be my eyes don't deceive me every single time I play lol.
BloodRed i7
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 930 Foxconn Bloodrage ATI HD5870 6GB OCZ i7 Certified 1600mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 7200.12 1TBx2 Lite-on 20x DVD burner Windows 7 Ult x64 Samsung 2494HM 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Zalman 850w ZM850-HP CM Stacker 830 G500 Razor XactMat X 
  hide details  
Reply
BloodRed i7
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 930 Foxconn Bloodrage ATI HD5870 6GB OCZ i7 Certified 1600mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 7200.12 1TBx2 Lite-on 20x DVD burner Windows 7 Ult x64 Samsung 2494HM 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Zalman 850w ZM850-HP CM Stacker 830 G500 Razor XactMat X 
  hide details  
Reply
post #24 of 36
It would be nice if you could use sli to help physics and rendering at the same time. Considering my dual card setup is overkill almost 90% of the time unless im using a tremendous amount of filters. If you could 1 card to render and the other to do physics and help with rendering like do the filtering for the other card that would be amazing. Or if you could have your main card then a 8600 or something less powerful to do the math work.
Atilla
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
intel 2500k 4.5GHZ 1.31V ASUS Sabertooth p67 Evga GTX570 HD 830/2000 Corsair Vengeance 8gig(4x2)@1.5V 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial m4 64gig + Western Digit caviar 320 Crucial m4 64gig h60 push/pull Silverstone FM121's 7 professional x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS VE247H 1920x1080 g15 thermaltake black widow 850 watt cm 690 ii advanced Nvidia edition 
MouseMouse PadAudio
logitech g5 rocket fish aluminum pad G35 
  hide details  
Reply
Atilla
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
intel 2500k 4.5GHZ 1.31V ASUS Sabertooth p67 Evga GTX570 HD 830/2000 Corsair Vengeance 8gig(4x2)@1.5V 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial m4 64gig + Western Digit caviar 320 Crucial m4 64gig h60 push/pull Silverstone FM121's 7 professional x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS VE247H 1920x1080 g15 thermaltake black widow 850 watt cm 690 ii advanced Nvidia edition 
MouseMouse PadAudio
logitech g5 rocket fish aluminum pad G35 
  hide details  
Reply
post #25 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by ENTERPRISE View Post

So perhaps the CPU to optimize the physics for now is the best way to go as there is nothing out to fully harness the GPU physics processing power and CPU should be more than enough for now. Not only that but it means ATI does not need to spend lots of cash on R&D for this.

I think personally keeping it on CPU for now is a sensible move.
But here's the thing... didn't ATi announce a few years ago that three card crossfire would have one card dedicated to physics calculation? And that third card could be your leftover gpu from you last build? That's what they hyped, it was their idea, and so far they haven't even begun to deliver on it. If they were the ones that pioneered it you'd think that by now they at least have a prototype, perhaps even something to show off. But now they aren't even talking about it.
post #26 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by ENTERPRISE View Post
This does make sense. Yes from what I understand GPU accelerated physics are awesome as there are many more calculations per second performed on a GPU comapred to a CPU due to architecture differences and a GPU is much more geared up towards Physics processing.

HOWEVER

You then have to ask yourself if there are any games that even come close to using the sheer power of GPU physics. I am not aware of a game that even scratches the surface of ''Extreme physics'' Dont say Crysis because I dont consider that ''Extreme phyiscs''

So perhaps the CPU to optimize the physics for now is the best way to go as there is nothing out to fully harness the GPU physics processing power and CPU should be more than enough for now. Not only that but it means ATI does not need to spend lots of cash on R&D for this.

I think personally keeping it on CPU for now is a sensible move.
supreme commander would absolutley benefit from physics on GPU as the sheer number of physics calculations on a 8 player game with 1000 unit cap is enough to bog down the best cpus out
R3d R4mpage
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q9450 ASUS Rampage Formula 2 x Visiontek 4870 CrossFireX 2 x 2 GiB G.Skill DDR2 1066 
Hard DriveOptical DriveMonitorPower
Western Digital Cavier 7200 RPM 640 MiB Blu-Ray/HD-DVD Combo Drive Vizio 26" Widescreen HDTV Silverstone Decathalon 750 watt 
Case
Lian-Li 60-Plus 
  hide details  
Reply
R3d R4mpage
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q9450 ASUS Rampage Formula 2 x Visiontek 4870 CrossFireX 2 x 2 GiB G.Skill DDR2 1066 
Hard DriveOptical DriveMonitorPower
Western Digital Cavier 7200 RPM 640 MiB Blu-Ray/HD-DVD Combo Drive Vizio 26" Widescreen HDTV Silverstone Decathalon 750 watt 
Case
Lian-Li 60-Plus 
  hide details  
Reply
post #27 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarhead View Post
But here's the thing... didn't ATi announce a few years ago that three card crossfire would have one card dedicated to physics calculation? And that third card could be your leftover gpu from you last build? That's what they hyped, it was their idea, and so far they haven't even begun to deliver on it. If they were the ones that pioneered it you'd think that by now they at least have a prototype, perhaps even something to show off. But now they aren't even talking about it.
Yes they did and to be honest it went very quite and it didnt really go anywhere. Im not sure why lol.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Twinnuke View Post
Have you ever messed around in the Crysis Editor? You need GPU physics there because ones you have about 100 boxes falling at once the frame rate drops because it cant process the physics.
Out of Interest what CPU was this on ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by liqwidstyx View Post
supreme commander would absolutley benefit from physics on GPU as the sheer number of physics calculations on a 8 player game with 1000 unit cap is enough to bog down the best cpus out
In that instance I can see why GPU physics would most definately be a benefit.
post #28 of 36
I'm going to go ahead and disagree with you Enterprise. The Havok engine already has a large number of games running it, and many of those are series with sequels planned or likely. If AMD were to accelerate Havok on their GPU's it would give them a massive eye-candy edge in a lot of popular series. Unlocking extra eye candy on the Source engine alone would give them a huge boost in the gamer market. Nvidia has a powerful engine that nobody is using whereas Havok has a hardware limited engine with a large installed base. The argument that nobody is using it doesn't fly - GPU physics acceleration has been available for all of two weeks. If you make the tools readily available developers will use them. Many of them have already incorporated the Havok engine into their games, throwing more stuff into that engine is trivial.
It goes to eleven
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E6300 DS3 EVGA 8600GTS 2GB XMS2 DDR2-800 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
1.294 TB Arch Linux/XP Samsung 226bw Eclipse II 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair 520HX Lian-Li v1000B Plus G7 
  hide details  
Reply
It goes to eleven
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E6300 DS3 EVGA 8600GTS 2GB XMS2 DDR2-800 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
1.294 TB Arch Linux/XP Samsung 226bw Eclipse II 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair 520HX Lian-Li v1000B Plus G7 
  hide details  
Reply
post #29 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by rabidgnome229 View Post
I'm going to go ahead and disagree with you Enterprise. The Havok engine already has a large number of games running it, and many of those are series with sequels planned or likely. If AMD were to accelerate Havok on their GPU's it would give them a massive eye-candy edge in a lot of popular series. Unlocking extra eye candy on the Source engine alone would give them a huge boost in the gamer market. Nvidia has a powerful engine that nobody is using whereas Havok has a hardware limited engine with a large installed base. The argument that nobody is using it doesn't fly - GPU physics acceleration has been available for all of two weeks. If you make the tools readily available developers will use them. Many of them have already incorporated the Havok engine into their games, throwing more stuff into that engine is trivial.
You make a fair point. I did not realise how many games having Havok incorperated into it. Im not sure what ATI's future stance will be on this. However I wonder if AMD/ATI are waiting for there fusion CPU before going aheadt strongly with the physics side of things.
post #30 of 36
But why use it on a GPU. If Nvidia / ATI made Decent SLi - Crossfire drivers and alot of games took advantaged of it. We wouldn't resort using the second GPU has a Physics card. Besides. I would want more Frames per second than A crazy Physics game with very low frames.

Sure I can spend alot of money and get myself A 280. Why though?. I can get A 8800GTX for way less and have about the same performance has the 280 doing Physic & rendering while my CPU does the same Physics.

On another note. Best all to luck to Nvidia & ATI
Gaming PC
(16 items)
 
HTC 10
(9 items)
 
Good Price/Performance for gaming
Intel Core i5-4690K OEM Quad Core Processor (3.50GHz-3.90GHz)
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 4690K (Delidded) MSI Z97 MPOWER AC MAX EVGA 980 Ti Hybrid  CMY16GX3M2A2400C11R @ 2800Mhz 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
CMY16GX3M2A2400C11R @ 2800Mhz A-DATA Cheapo SSD 2x ST2000DM001-1ER164 ASMedia® ASM1061 (External) 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
swiftech h320 Stripped Win 10 x64 15063 *M* SAMSUNG LS24F350 *S* LG 22MP48HQ 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Corsair RM850w Corsair Obsidian 750D Corsair Harpoon RGB Fiio E7 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 [OC] Adreno 530 2x 2GB LPDDR4 32 GB eMMC Flash 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Passive Android 7.0 2.51.617.1 Super LCD 5: 2560x1440 (565 PPI) Sony Xperia Keyboard 
Power
3,000 mAh Battery 
  hide details  
Reply
Gaming PC
(16 items)
 
HTC 10
(9 items)
 
Good Price/Performance for gaming
Intel Core i5-4690K OEM Quad Core Processor (3.50GHz-3.90GHz)
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 4690K (Delidded) MSI Z97 MPOWER AC MAX EVGA 980 Ti Hybrid  CMY16GX3M2A2400C11R @ 2800Mhz 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
CMY16GX3M2A2400C11R @ 2800Mhz A-DATA Cheapo SSD 2x ST2000DM001-1ER164 ASMedia® ASM1061 (External) 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
swiftech h320 Stripped Win 10 x64 15063 *M* SAMSUNG LS24F350 *S* LG 22MP48HQ 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Corsair RM850w Corsair Obsidian 750D Corsair Harpoon RGB Fiio E7 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 [OC] Adreno 530 2x 2GB LPDDR4 32 GB eMMC Flash 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Passive Android 7.0 2.51.617.1 Super LCD 5: 2560x1440 (565 PPI) Sony Xperia Keyboard 
Power
3,000 mAh Battery 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Software News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Software News › [Fud] ATI physics to stick to CPU