NVIDIA Responds to ATI PhysX Comments

PC Games Hardware has a response from NVIDIA to a recent statement by ATI that developers other than Epic use PhysX for physics "because they’re paid to do it." NVIDIA's Nadeem Mohammed, Director of Product Management, PhysX, who says: "we do not pay developers to select PhysX instead of other physics solution." He also states that PhysX is not proprietary, even though it obviously is, saying: "PhysX is a complete Physics solution which runs on all major platforms like PS3, XBOX360, Wii, PC with Intel or AMD CPU, and on the PC with GeForce cards; it even runs on iPhone. It's available for use by any developer for inclusion in games for any platform - all free of license fees. There's nothing restrictive or proprietary about that."
View : : :
29.
 
Re: NVIDIA Responds to ATI PhysX Comments
Mar 13, 2010, 11:20
29.
Re: NVIDIA Responds to ATI PhysX Comments Mar 13, 2010, 11:20
Mar 13, 2010, 11:20
 
The comments regarding proprietary or the license fee situations are correct.

ATi came out with Tessellation way back with the DX8 8000 series... it was called Truform. Very few games supported it. We now have DX11 and it's the "new rage" for game developers... why? Because now it's a standard in the DX11 specs. Since ATi already had a tessellation engine... it helped them get DX11 card first to market.

This is what has to happen with Physics. A split market between Havok / ATi and PhysX / Nvidia ain't gonna cut it.

I still haven't seen anything overly spectacular with Hardware Accelerated Physics. Extra particles... whooptiedoo. The non-hardware accelerated physics from old games like the original Far Cry or Oblivion seem to be good enough.

Anyway... until it becomes a standard with DX and/or OpenGL... or until Developers start really using it in a spectacular way... it will remain a non-issue towards purchasing a game, IMO.
Get your games from GOG DAMMIT!
Avatar 19499
Date
Subject
Author
7.
Mar 12, 2010Mar 12 2010
4.
Mar 12, 2010Mar 12 2010
9.
Mar 12, 2010Mar 12 2010
15.
Mar 12, 2010Mar 12 2010
18.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
22.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
6.
Mar 12, 2010Mar 12 2010
26.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
27.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
8.
Mar 12, 2010Mar 12 2010
10.
Mar 12, 2010Mar 12 2010
11.
Mar 12, 2010Mar 12 2010
12.
Mar 12, 2010Mar 12 2010
13.
Mar 12, 2010Mar 12 2010
16.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
33.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
39.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
19.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
20.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
21.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
23.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
24.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
35.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
41.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
42.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
43.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
45.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
46.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
14.
Mar 12, 2010Mar 12 2010
17.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
44.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
25.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
31.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
37.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
38.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
 29.
Mar 13, 2010Mar 13 2010
Re: NVIDIA Responds to ATI PhysX Comments
49.
Mar 14, 2010Mar 14 2010
48.
Mar 14, 2010Mar 14 2010
50.
Mar 14, 2010Mar 14 2010
51.
Mar 14, 2010Mar 14 2010
52.
Mar 16, 2010Mar 16 2010