Are you ready for Physics Chipsets??

[ChrisGwinn]

You're not going to see onboard hardware for physics become common any time soon, if ever. The motherboard market has pretty tight margins, and they're not going to put anything else onboard unless they can charge more for it, or it's an expected feature. Until the aftermarket boards prove people are willing to pay for it, why would they build it into a motherboard?

[ChrisGwinn]

Game development times look they they are continuing to balloon to me, despite the fact that we have unprecedented ability to develop complicated software projects at out fingertips. I'm sure part of it is because game programming is still Assembly/C/C++ - languages that don't have some of the advantages of the modern OO languages in terms of ease of development (of course, they have their own upsides). Costs are rising. I'm not so sure that pre-made engines have helped out on average (I'd love to see some numbers though). Or, perhaps they can't help enough.

My understanding (which is second-hand) is that an awful lot of the balooning in dev times is due to content creation, not actual programming. Art assets, maps, sound, voiced dialogue,etc -basically all the stuff that isn't shared between games. Some of that's harder in 3D, some of it's easier. Some studios have full time people devoted to running their art pipeline (an ex-coworker of mine is doing that now).

Judging from my reading of dev process stuff in the corporate world vs/ the equivalent gaming publications, game developers are behind the curve on software development process improvements. I expect that's because the various costs and benefits of adopting those techniques are waited differently.

[Peacedog]

You're not going to see onboard hardware for physics become common any time soon, if ever. The motherboard market has pretty tight margins, and they're not going to put anything else onboard unless they can charge more for it, or it's an expected feature. Until the aftermarket boards prove people are willing to pay for it, why would they build it into a motherboard?

Well, that's what the article said. I didn't see how that was going to work without one of the major board manufactures deciding "we need this on all of our future boards". But I don't see where this is useful outside of gaming and machines that simulate certain kinds of things. I'm curious as to why the spokesperson for Ageia actually said that.

[The Meal]

It'd actually be a big boon, potentially, to some of the most power-intensive engineering simulations run, assuming it wasn't *just* a physics processor, but instead was a true math coprocessor. Dual-processors are the wave of the developmental future, but if you could cut some features out of the multiple processors, there is likely a decent-sized market for such beasties away from the gaming world.

~Neal

[Peacedog]

It'd actually be a big boon, potentially, to some of the most power-intensive engineering simulations run, assuming it wasn't *just* a physics processor, but instead was a true math coprocessor. Dual-processors are the wave of the developmental future, but if you could cut some features out of the multiple processors, there is likely a decent-sized market for such beasties away from the gaming world.

Well, that's the thing - it isn't a true math processor, which seems to me would limit it's non-gaming appeal. It seems, hmmm, odd for the comapny to claim there will be "on board" options to go along with expansion cards for the chips. I really think there is more working against this thing than just "whether or not it gets AAA support" (but hey, I wish them well).

As for dual processor setups, I'll be interested to see if a "non symmetrical" setup ever becomes standard. Perhaps where one of the chips really is a true math co-processor, or is design to primarily handle certain types of tasks. As opposed to "just slap two p4s in it!". I'm guessing it wouldn't for your typical home user, but I could see advantage elsewhere (your example, gaming, catapult simulators. . .).

[The Meal]

I'm unclear as to how the chip would be physics-specific, but inappropriate for use in other highly iterative mathematical processess. Does the chipset actually channel Newton from beyond the grave? Have a little physics simulator inside, much like an ant farm? House little people from the same genus as the little people inside the refrigerator who turn on the lights (or the little people who scream out in pain in volumes proportional to the acceleration seen by an accelerometer)?

I'm guessing that in essence it's a stripped down full processor that is geared towards finding iterative mathematical solutions to partial differential equations.

Maybe it's a limitation of my own brain, but I can't conceive as to how a piece of hardware capable of calculating positions of polygons more quickly couldn't be used for other highly repetitive arithmetic.

~Neal

[Peacedog]

I'm unclear as to how the chip would be physics-specific, but inappropriate for use in other highly iterative mathematical processess. Does the chipset actually channel Newton from beyond the grave? Have a little physics simulator inside, much like an ant farm? House little people from the same genus as the little people inside the refrigerator who turn on the lights (or the little people who scream out in pain in volumes proportional to the acceleration seen by an accelerometer)?

No, yes, yes (they're the ones who run the lab doing the physics simulation, natch).

I'm guessing that in essence it's a stripped down full processor that is geared towards finding iterative mathematical solutions to partial differential equations.

Instruction set? Physical design? I'm not entirely certain how these things would affect the ability to do math. Or whether they could also dictate more specific activities. *shrug*

This sort of gets into the cost of making these things. Obviously, it won't cost as much as a normal processor and they believe they can turn a profit (or else they wouldn't do it, though what they think they can do and what happens may in fact be separate things). However, if it's as simple as a stripped-down processor (and likely, it isn't), is sticking it in an expansion slot going to be a performance inhibitor? Is it really a cost effective move given how few things it is supposed to be doing (even if it does them in volume - like with out catapolt simulator)? My processor at home earns its money. I can't stress the one on my work machine (I've tried, on yes), which might go against recent suggestions that 64-bit processors are overrated are misplaced.

Maybe it's a limitation of my own brain, but I can't conceive as to how a piece of hardware capable of calculating positions of polygons more quickly couldn't be used for other highly repetitive arithmetic.

Maybe it is - and this specific press release was simply about showing one market the use for it. Has anyone seen anything else put out by this company? I don't, and all the company site talks about is games & doing physics stuff. It doesn't mention any general math application, and I'm unclear if that's a good indication it won't necessarily be good at those things.

[The Meal]

Yep. We need more information to answer the poll. And we *definitely* need more catapult simulators!

~Neal

[Peacedog]

We could cop out and just answer maybe. Though in the interest of wannabe curmudgeons everywhere, I'd argue about the lack of a "maybe not" option.

[The Meal]

Though in the interest of wannabe curmudgeons everywhere, I'd argue about the lack of a "maybe not" option.

You rule.

~Neal

[Beer Goggles]

Yep. We need more information to answer the poll. And we *definitely* need more catapult simulators!

~Neal

I like trebuchet simulators.

[Kobra]

You know i'm really getting sick of these companies trying to scam us out of more money.. LOL!

My friend at Nvidia told me months ago to expect $1000 video cards before summer.. Well, that has come true.

http://www.computerhq.com/Bfg_Technolog ... 48850.html

Worse, he tells me graphic cards will hit $1200 by the end of the year, and the next generation cards will come in around $699 base and reach $1200 for the top end. Now they expect us to pay $100-400 more for a friggen seperate engine to handle moving grass??

Let me tell ya, those next generation consoles are starting to look real good about now. I have this vision that after this year my PC's will be playing retro games, and i'll be playing the new stuff on the new consoles. No way in hell am I building PC's, then dropping $2000.00 worth of graphic processing gear in them.

They have lost their minds.