|
|
Nvidia to release GPU PhysX pack next week
PhysX support added to GeForce 8 and 9-series cards, and a bundle of demos too
Now this is what we call quick work. Just over six months after acquiring Ageia, Nvidia has not only ported PhysX over to CUDA, but it’s now set to release a WHQL GPU PhysX driver on 5 August, along with a bunch of other PhysX goodies.
Nvidia’s product PR manager for Northern Europe, Ben Berraondo, told Custom PC that ‘on 5 August a PhysX pack goes out, which enables PhysX for all GeForce 8 and 9 series GPUs, and also the GTX 280 and 260.’ The pack not only includes a WHQL PhysX driver, but also features various PhysX demos.
According to Berraondo, two of these were demonstrated at Nvidia’s Editors’ Day in the US a few months ago, but there’s also a new fluid dynamics demo which hasn’t been seen yet. The pack will also add full game support for current PhysX-supporting titles, such as Unreal Tournament 3, Warmonger and Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter 1 and 2.
It looks as though PhysX packs are going to be regular releases too. Berraondo told Custom PC that ‘we’re going to try to release a PhysX pack now on pretty much a monthly or bi-monthly basis, and that won’t include a new driver every time, but it will include new software that uses PhysX.’
Of course, Nvidia’s purchase of Ageia will only really pay off if plenty of new PhysX-supporting games are released, and it looks as though these may well be on the way. Although no official announcements have been made by the game publishers yet, we have it on good authority that EA’s forthcoming DC comics tie-in, Mirror’s Edge, which is being penned by former Custom PC scribe Rhianna Pratchett, will support PhysX. As well as this, Bionic Commando and Backbreaker are also rumoured to support PhysX, although none of this has been confirmed yet.
Still, owners of GeForce cards from the 8-series and up can’t complain, as they’re effectively getting PhysX support for free on cards that are up to a year and half old now. Will you be downloading the new PhysX pack next week? Will PhysX be important in games in the coming years? Let us know your thoughts in the comments section below.
Reddit | Technorati
And still nothing on the 13th. Very dissapointing
Comment by Lightning_Pete at 6:19pm 13th August 2008
It doesnt work with any 8800's If you notice the physx drivers and tool clearly state no physx card is installed or in use, despite ticking the Geforce acceleration box. It doesnt work yet. Only for the GTX's 9800GX2 etc etc
Comment by Lightning_Pete at 12:34am 11th August 2008
if you go to this link, http://nvidia.co.uk/object/cuda_learn_products_uk.html you can find all the cuda drivers for the releavent graphics cards, i am going to test it out on my 8800GTX tonight when i get home from work
Comment by zaphod54 at 12:36pm 6th August 2008
if you go to this link, you can find all the cuda drivers for the releavent graphics cards, i am going to test it out on my 8800GTX tonight when i get home from work
Comment by zaphod54 at 12:36pm 6th August 2008
you need these pyhsx drivers http://drivers.softpedia.com/progDownload/Nvidia-PhysX-Driver-Download-66104.html and 177.79 driver set all 8800 seris r supported ive tested warmonger befor physx max 12-15 fps 2-3 min with 40-50 max 30- min so it works well graw works ass well with no drop in fps at all and this on a 939 146 opty @2800 and a 320 8800gts @675/1666/1053
Comment by damafia at 1:20am 6th August 2008
I think they missed the scheduled release date... damn >_>
Comment by chand2ler at 11:06pm 5th August 2008
no sign of the drivers yet the only ones out that support the physX is GeForce Release 177 WHQL Version: 177.39 Release Date: June 25, 2008
Comment by dmc_dc at 5:05pm 5th August 2008
video encoding and other things can be enabled using your gpu rather than cpu, i wont how? Cos hell i want to know.. GPUPOWER!
Comment by Lightning_Pete at 10:39pm 1st August 2008
Still isnt going down yet! Bring forth the physx goodness! I think Nvidia hit home well with this addon. Many games dont officially support it but i have had intel that some older titles add particles to explosion effects like BF2 and CODUO in games.... not as much as a physx enabled title. but thats still a lot better.
Comment by Lightning_Pete at 10:25pm 1st August 2008
Still isnt going down yet! Bring forth the physx goodness! I think Nvidia hit home well with this addon. Many games dont officially support it but i have had intel that some older titles add particles to explosion effects like BF2 and CODUO in games.... not as much as a physx enabled title. but thats still a lot better.
Comment by Lightning_Pete at 10:25pm 1st August 2008
What more needs to be said? 9800GT for £70 complete with PhysX support, makes the best budget performance card in my book.
Comment by C7ouD at 3:12pm 1st August 2008
"so far i could not play all new games, i knew there was something lacking! i hope this update will help solve the problems i had lately! i have all the top specs, 8600GTS graphics card. and couldnt play any new games. " Sorry to say so, but your video card is "teh suck", as we say on the interweb. Anything below 8800GT is not worth the effort if you want to play recent games at adequate resolutions and quality settings. Do yourself a favour, go out and buy an ATI 4850. At £120 it is a really good price for performance and it'll pound your card into submission. That's also what you should do with the sales guy who told you that the 8600 is "top-spec".
Comment by dune3 at 3:18pm 1st August 2008
so far i could not play all new games, i knew there was something lacking! i hope this update will help solve the problems i had lately! i have all the top specs, 8600GTS graphics card. and couldnt play any new games. so i hope this will end all that hassle! it would be nice if they read the forums as i had many problems many other people had. and no action was taken. so we had to take action ourselves! i am speaking on behalf of hundreds who had problems and was not heard. hope this time we will be heard. to nvidia, read the forums! help us to help you.
Comment by humourbash at 2:12pm 1st August 2008
Well Tiff, DX11 just around the corner so maybe there will be a DX11 patch for Assasins Creed to make up for it ;) I'm sure when it does finally arrive, game makers will jump on that bandwagon, as for DX10.1 ... what a waste of time that was lol
Comment by CSQuake at 4:32pm 31st July 2008
I totally agree csquake and you are absolutely correct, AS was one of the nvidia sponsored 'the way it is meant to be played' or whatever games. The point i was trying to make was by having 10.1 support removed because their hardware couldnt fully use it was in a sense holding back development. Considering the majority of big games are sponsored by nvidia would it be safe to safe no game would be true directx 10.1 until nvidia decides to release release capable gpu's?
Comment by tiff_lee at 12:18pm 31st July 2008
as soon as we find out what price/performance band gfx card performs physx as a dedicated card like an original physx card, we'll know if its worth using an old card, or whether its easier to leave it on the primary card, or just buy a physx card to prevent slow down under high graphics, high physx situations. either way its about time they officially released it for all 8 and 9 cards, those G92 jockeys have had it to themselves for long enough ;-)
Comment by soddit113 at 11:53am 31st July 2008
You don't want to be seen smoking Benson & Hedges if you have Marlboro splashed all over your F1 racing car!
Comment by CSQuake at 11:50am 31st July 2008
I thought the makers had to remove 10.1 because Nvidia was a sponsor and it looked a bit daft to have Nvidia sponsoring a game with a feature that could only be played on ATi?
Comment by CSQuake at 11:43am 31st July 2008
Ok if you want to be pedantic about it, they manipulated the game makers to remove Dx10.1 support to suit their own needs and as such held back what could be considered progress.
Comment by tiff_lee at 11:25am 31st July 2008
Now that there will be millions of physx enabled cards installed on machines everywhere plus both the PS3 and 360 can use the physx engine and the engine itself is free to license, using physx is a bit of a no-brainer now.
Comment by gavomatic57 at 11:16pm 30th July 2008
DirectX 10.1 support pulled from assassins creed thanks to Nvidia primarily because their cards are yet to support it. Back to the physx.. I agree that using an old card for physx rather than buying a dedicated card is alot more appealing please don't think I am bashing the idea. Like someone said it is a far better option then selling your old card for peanuts! How worthwhile it will be only time will tell, would help if intel/ati/nvidia could get round the table and establish some kind of industry standard for physics rather than make things even more confusing.
Comment by tiff_lee at 7:58pm 30th July 2008
I wondeer if these drivers could be the one to finally correct the 8800 having overscan issues with HDtv's, been doing my head in for months now and still no fix. Still gotta run reduced pixel quality just to see all my desktop :(
Comment by parksy81 at 7:55pm 30th July 2008
I wondeer if these drivers could be the one to finally correct the 8800 having overscan issues with HDtv's, been doing my head in for months now and still no fix. Still gotta run reduced pixel quality just to see all my desktop :(
Comment by parksy81 at 7:54pm 30th July 2008
but, at the moment isn't physics in games always handled by the CPU... and Havok is CPU based... so isn't Havok just a successful version of the standard physics engines that any game using physics has? and isn't the point of GPU based PhysX to extend physics beyond that which CPU calculated physics can achieve... the question is not is physx better than havok, but is it actually does GPU physics provide something better than CPU based physics (be it Havok, or any other physics engine), and will developers be willing to take it up? Also, I thought PhysX was something you could add as well as your CPU based physics solution, at least that is how most physX enabled games work at the moment... so why should we necessarily need to choose between the two?
Comment by NewParadigm at 6:25pm 30th July 2008
The reason that physx is now a good idea is that there is already a large base of physx enabled systems out there...when Ageia released there card they were stuck in the chicken and egg situtation
Comment by technogiant at 4:32pm 30th July 2008
All these titles use havok http://www.havok.com/content/blogcategory/29/73/ As the vast majority of PC games are multi-platform or just plain console ports, will the developers be bothered to re-code for PhysX?
Comment by frontline at 4:23pm 30th July 2008
"quite ironic really considering it is nvidia who bribed game makers to hold back development as it was in their own best interest" - when, and what was this?
Comment by CSQuake at 3:21pm 30th July 2008
I have a processor too! I think using your old card once you decide to upgrade would be far more attractive to people than buying a seperate dedicated physics card, and Nvidia's solution has the felxibility in being able to run on your main g.card if that is all you have/want in your system... overall I think it's a better strategy than the dedicated physx card... but we will see.
Comment by NewParadigm at 2:37pm 30th July 2008
Now all people have to do is wait a couple of years until it's clear what form of physics processing solution software developers want to code for and then release the games. Oh well, at least Valve will be releasing some havok games soon...
Comment by frontline at 2:17pm 30th July 2008
I like the comment about other hardware manufacturers bribing game makers not to use physx, quite ironic really considering it was nvidia who bribed game makers to hold back development as it was in their own best interest. Anyway something relatively on topic....with this talk of using old GPU's as a physics card wasn't that the whole point of the Aegia Physx card? no one seemed interested in them and it was claimed they were unnecessary yet now a driver update will convert a nvidia gpu (8/9xxx) into something similar it is a great idea?
Comment by tiff_lee at 2:25pm 30th July 2008
I like the comment about other hardware bribing game makers not to use, quite ironic really considering it is nvidia who bribed game makers to hold back development as it was in their own best interest. Anyway something relatively on topic....with this talk of using old GPU's as a physics card wasn't that the whole point of the Aegia Physx cards? no one seemed interested in them and it was claimed they were unnecessary yet now a driver update will convert a nvidia gpu into something similar it is a great idea?
Comment by tiff_lee at 2:11pm 30th July 2008
My system is currently running a 8800GTX for my main monitors and a 8800GTS (320) for my third and forth monitors. I'll have a look into whether I can get the GTS to deal with physics as when im gaming it is sat at a stationary desktop not doing much. This could just get it working now and then. Though i'd have to keep an eye on heat buildup with both cards working flatout for hours on end.
Comment by reashlin at 1:33pm 30th July 2008
poor old guy who had his post removed... I didn't mean my reply offensively either. If you looked at the name the comment was by it was Nvidia... I pretty much think that means he was making a joke about Nvidia thinking it was a bad idea, and not being rude to me at all (at least that is how I read it :)... well it was all off topic anyway I s'pose. I have no real plans to upgrade my 8800GT soon, but I will eventually (maybe another 6 months or so) and when I do it would be nice to use the 8800GT, which I doubt would be worth selling, for physX. As for it being overkill, I think that really depends on how developers utilise PhysX... I'd love physics to improve by the leaps and bounds graphics have in the last ten-twenty years or so. I am still concerned about the performance hit with just one G.card... but we'll see I guess.
Comment by NewParadigm at 1:26pm 30th July 2008
A question in answer to the story question: Why wouldn't you download a free PhysX addon for your GFX card? Of course we all will! Will it be used much in upcoming games? Only if the other hardware manufacturers don't balls'it-up by bribing the games makers into not using it! mitchell2k7, nice free advertising for your blog there, however, prewarn people before hand that it may be dull reading! Can't you pretend to be a Marvel Super Hero or something? :P
Comment by CSQuake at 12:30pm 30th July 2008
an 8800GT isn't exactly 'old' and considering the 9xxx are just 8xxx with smaller dies, a few extra features and a whole batch of ridicullous names it's not really even two generations old. And it's still one of nvidia's best price/performance cards out there. Would be interesting to have a whole 8xxx/9xxx/2xx card just for physics, not something i'd try myself, but the driver pack might hold some benefits
Comment by EdArch at 12:03pm 30th July 2008
Using an old card for Physx would be a great idea.
Comment by Zhaoman at 9:57am 30th July 2008
I bought UT3 for the physics, which looked good (check out that loin cloth!) but more physics can only do great things for a game that thus far has been bit of a let down. http://diesellives.blogspot.com
Comment by mitchell2k7 at 8:05am 30th July 2008
I would be interested to know how the cards will perform with the physx active and running.. how many frames will be dropped to allow for nice explosions etc... I have a 8800gtx and am very interested in the fluid demos and see how it looks.. will download next week and give it a good look.... but if its just turns out to be couple of extra fragments on screen then probably not worth the effort.
Comment by akoli at 4:08am 30th July 2008
Comments in this thread have been moderated. Please refrain from abuse, inappropriate language and keep discussion on topic.
Comment by Sifter3000 at 12:18am 30th July 2008
I will be getting it, would be a good excuse to re-install unreal tournament 3 to test this. and NewParadigm... an entire 8800GT for PhysX? just what the hell kind of physics do you expect to need to power... there is just no need at all for that kind of power in a PPU, however i do think giving a GPU more work to do isnt necessarily a good idea. I think the next generation of GPU from nVidia should include a seperate, much smaller core on the PCB that processes all of the PhysX data (sharing the GPU memory, wouldnt be a problem with a minumum of 1GB on the card). But, we will have to see how well it performs next week to decide if any of this is even necessary... maybe... just maybe... we underestimate the power of the GPU...
Comment by bscorpion at 12:10am 30th July 2008
I would love too be able too use an old card for physx rather than sell it on for next too nothing personally I full support multy gpu on different gpu's
Comment by dmc_dc at 10:00pm 29th July 2008
was if I could use my current 8800GT purely as a physX card when I upgrade to a new g.card... any news on how multi card set-ups will work with physX?
Comment by NewParadigm at 8:01pm 29th July 2008
Make a Comment
- One top four motherboard maker will die, says MSI
- AMD plans supercomputer with 1,000 GPUs
- Nvidia announces GeForce GTX 285
- Creative takes wraps off Zii processor architecture
- Nvidia announces stereoscopic 3D glasses
- BFG unveils hand built Phobos gaming PCs
- UPDATED: LiveJournal announces mass layoffs
- Top 10 PC games chart
- Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 gets 500GB on single platter
- Creative reveals new Zii processor
These are the most popular news articles over the past seven days.
- Phenom II overclocked to 6GHz
- GeIL unveils Cyclone RAM cooler
- Rumour control: GeForce GTX 260 GX2 in January
- Nvidia cuts price of 216 SP GeForce GTX 260
- VIDEO: PC version of Mirror’s Edge features hardware PhysX
- Get Half-Life for less than a dollar on Steam
- IBM plans to build virtual human brain
- RivaTuner 2.20 adds SLI and CrossFire support
- VIDEO: ArmA II trailer released
Mobile Broadband
Fastest, cheapest 3G mobile broadband dongles from 3, Vodafone, T-Mobile and Orange
from just £10/month
