Print 51 comment(s) - last by wordsworm.. on Sep 18 at 5:30 AM

Intel reaches definitive agreement to purchase physics software developer Havok

Intel has announced it has signed a definitive agreement to purchase software developer Havok, Inc. Havok provides various software development tools to digital animation and game developers and is one of the largest providers for software physics.

“Havok is a proven leader in physics technology for gaming and digital content, and will become a key element of Intel’s visual computing and graphics efforts,” said Renee J. James, Intel vice president and general manager of Software and Solutions Group.

“This is a great fit for Havok products, customers and employees,” remarked Havok CEO David O’Meara. “Intel’s scale of technology investment and customer reach enable Havok with opportunities to grow more quickly into new market segments with new products than we could have done organically. We believe the winning combination is Havok’s technology and customer know-how with Intel’s scale. I am excited to be part of this next phase of Havok’s growth.”

A recent trend is to offload physics processing to either a GPU or dedicated physics processor. So far, though, Ageia, ATI, and NVIDIA have not made much headway in the physics market.

Both NVIDIA and ATI have previewed CrossFire and SLI Physics, however, neither company has delivered any actual physics hardware yet. It’s pretty interesting to note that both ATI and NVIDIA’s physics solutions rely on Havok FX. However, it is unlikely that Intel’s acquisition of Havok will affect Havok’s partnership with either AMD or NVIDIA.    

“Havok will operate its business as usual, which will allow them to continue developing products that are offered across all platforms in the industry,” said Renee J. James regarding the future of Havok.

Essentially, Havok will operate as a subsidiary of Intel and will continue to operate as an independent business. This reinforces the belief that current partnerships will not be affected.

Havok has partnerships with many of the largest names in the gaming community such as Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, NVIDIA, and AMD. Havok has provided software physics for games like Halo 3, The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, Half Life 2 and Lost Planet: Extreme Condition.

In addition to providing software that adds physics realism to games, Havok also provides physics for professional software such as Autodesk’s 3DS Studio Max 9

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By InternetGeek on 9/16/2007 4:21:51 AM , Rating: 2
So how long until Intel Processors include Physics SIMD Extensions?

By Freddo on 9/16/2007 4:33:04 AM , Rating: 2
That's what I'm wondering too. I've always felt that would be a better route to go than physics cards or using graphic cards for it.

Of course, if it happens, then I hope AMD manage to give support to their CPUs as soon as possible as it could be a major sales argument among PC enthusiasts, while the various versions of SSE never really mattered much. It's not until now that games starts to require SSE and SSE2.

By StevoLincolnite on 9/16/2007 8:16:44 AM , Rating: 1
SSE is an Evolution of the MMX instruction set.
SSE was originally launched with the Pentium 3 Katmai Processors. (The processor line straight after the Pentium 2 chips).
Games like Decent 3D and Quake 3 arena were among the first to support SSE.
SSE 2 was first launched with the Pentium 4 Willamate.
And games have been supporting that instruction set for quite some time.

By Freddo on 9/16/2007 3:42:56 PM , Rating: 2
I know what SSE and MMX are. But supporting something and require something are two very different things.

The first game I know that require SSE2 is Colin McRae Dirt which was released earlier this summer.

By StevoLincolnite on 9/17/2007 7:08:37 AM , Rating: 1
Thats SSE 2, not SSE though?
Eh it was late (4am) when I wrote my last comment, and missed the "Required".

By Dactyl on 9/16/2007 7:43:07 AM , Rating: 2
Probably at the same time as Intel includes special ray-tracing speed-up instructions.

By RW on 9/16/2007 3:50:17 PM , Rating: 1
That means no more physics for AMD CPUs

By Operandi on 9/16/2007 7:59:40 PM , Rating: 4
Unless Havok and/or Intel wants to be taken to court they will continue to support AMD GPUs and CPUs.

By jak3676 on 9/16/2007 10:54:46 PM , Rating: 2
Sure it will continue to work, but for some unknown reason the compiler won't be as optimal as it used to be for AMD/ATI.

By InternetGeek on 9/16/2007 11:33:54 PM , Rating: 2
I think this has been discussed before. It's not like Intel makes AMD processors run slower on their compilers. Intel's compiler simply doesn't optimize its code for AMD processors, meaning, it doesn't take advantage of AMD's particular implementation to perform certain operations or sucessions of them. Which is something it does for Intel processors.

I don't think Intel wouldn't mind including AMD-oriented optimizations if AMD provided them. But AMD might not be too keen of doing that in fear of spilling any strategic bit of information to Intel.

In the other hand, AMD has access to Intel's bits that can be obtained from any particular Intel-oriented optimization given that anyone can download Intel's compiler from their website for free.

By stonemetal on 9/16/2007 11:50:41 PM , Rating: 2
Yes actually they do. Say you compile some code with the intel compiler it generates several code paths for new processors that support some version of sse and another for older processors that don't. Code generated by intel will check to see if you are running an intel chip not just a chip that will support sse before deciding to use the sse optomized code path If your non intel chip properly reports the supports sse bit intel's compiler will not allow it to run sse code.

By Justin Case on 9/17/2007 1:24:36 AM , Rating: 2
What kind of "strategic information" would AMD be giving Intel that Intel doesn't already have? You think Intel can't reverse-engineer AMD's CPUs (or vice-versa)? They already share a lot of information (about current CPUs, not future ones, of course), and a lot of the stuff is covered by patents so they wouldn't be allowed to copy it anyway.

I'm sure Intel's compiler coding team will gladly include AMD optimizations... about one day before they're fired. ;)

Intel is a business. If they can optimize for their chips while "unoptimizing" for the competition, you can be sure that's what they'll do (in fact, they already do it; changing the CPU manufacturer id string on an AMD CPU to report "genuineintel" makes some code run faster - not a huge difference, though; the last thing Intel wants is another anti-trust lawsuit).

AMD has a simple way to answer: deliver a compiler of their own, or work with 3rd party developers to optimize for their platform (which they already do - including open-source compilers, so there goes your theory about Intel "not having access to the information").

Compiler and CPU are two sides of the same coin (something Intel learned the hard way with the Itanium).

By melgross on 9/17/2007 12:21:53 AM , Rating: 2
That depends on what the contracts say. Many say that either party can refuse to re-enter negotiations after the contract period is over.

If that happens, Intel might not be obliged to continue to supply this to them. AMD could sue, but it doesn't mean they would win.

On the other hand, now that Intel owns the company, AMD might feel too open to Intel if they continue using the code. They may want to develop their own.

By Samus on 9/17/2007 5:21:26 PM , Rating: 2
That's fine, ATI has their solution to Physics already cooked up. It's nVidia that has to get on the boat now.

By imperator3733 on 9/16/2007 8:56:46 PM , Rating: 2
Those would be nice

By Justin Case on 9/16/2007 9:29:42 PM , Rating: 1
Never. Or rather, they already do. But that's not the issue.

The kinds of operations involved in physics calculations aren't very different from existing SIMD instructions. The real issue is that physics, like graphics, needs massive memory bandwidth. Which Intel's current designs cannot deliver. Until Intel changes its architecture to something closer to AMD's (which should happen with the introduction of CSI), it would be pointless to add any "physics instructions", just as it would be pointless to duplicate GPU instructions on the CPU, because there simply wouldn't be enough bandwith to keep those parts of the CPU fed.

My guess is Intel's move is related to something completely different: consoles. Intel needs some competitive advantage to get back into the console business, and by buying Havok not only to they gain an edge in terms of existing physics APIs, but they also strike a blow against nVidia's "Havok FX" hardware acceleration.

ATI was rumoured to be working on a physics API of its own, but it's not clear if AMD is interested in pushing that forward at this time (they probably have other things to worry about, such as actually turning in a profit).

Havok will be highly optimized for Intel chips (and probably "highly deoptimized" for AMD chips), but given Intel's system architecture it cannot really compete with dedicated physics hardware.

So the biggest loser here is nVidia (they were the ones working on hardware acceleration for Havok). The biggest winner might turn out to be... Ageia.

By InternetGeek on 9/16/2007 11:49:53 PM , Rating: 2
Hi, I think Intel's compiler doesn't deoptimize for AMD processors. It just doesn't optimize for their particular implementation. Even though AMD's support for X86 doesn't mean they have to follow Intel's design guidelines. Just as long as whatever they do produces exactly the same result as Intel's everything is fine.

By Justin Case on 9/17/2007 1:32:20 AM , Rating: 2
I was talking about the Havok API compiler.

Anyway, Intel's C++ compiler does "unoptimize" some code for AMD CPUs. It turns off some optimizations that are perfectly compatible with the K8 and above. Simply changing the CPU manufacturer id string from "authenticamd" to "genuineintel" will make some code run faster.

If Intel deliberately made all code run slower on AMD chips, they'd be exposing themselves to another anti-trust lawsuit, so what they do is turn off some (AMD-compatible) optimizations using the pretext that "they don't know whether they're compatible or not".

Not very ethical, perhaps, but perfectly legal and "fair", IMO. It's up to AMD to deliver an optimized compiler for their chips, or help the people making VC++, gcc, etc. (which they already do, to a degree).

By ultravy on 9/17/2007 5:16:32 AM , Rating: 2
let say:AMD purchase Havok!they do the same, unoptimize Intel CPU's!turn off some optimizations using the pretext that "they don't know whether they're compatible or not"

By Justin Case on 9/17/2007 3:20:44 PM , Rating: 2
How would AMD buy Havok when Intel has just done so...?

What, exactly, is your point? That AMD would do the same? No, they wouldn't. Not because they're "nice", but because they are simply in no position to do that. You seem to be forgetting that Intel has about 80% market share. AMD has 20%. If AMD made their products (ex., ATI graphics cards) deliberately slower on Intel systems, that would only benefit nVidia.

If AMD had a bigger market share than Intel you can bet they would make the ATI driver slower on Intel systems. Welcome to the real world.

By RW on 9/17/2007 3:39:18 PM , Rating: 2
An even smarter move would be that AMD to buy AGEIA.

By darkpaw on 9/17/2007 5:13:59 PM , Rating: 2
At the rate their going, AMD won't be able to afford to buy an AGEIA card.

SLI and Vista
By wordsworm on 9/16/2007 11:29:54 PM , Rating: 3
I would seriously consider putting in a physics card. But last time I checked, Vista doesn't support SLI. Is there any word on when this will be fixed? I went around looking for an answer to that question, and the only one I found suggested it'd be up and running by July. Unfortunately, as we all know, that time has come and gone with no SLI for Vista. Hopefully someone here has some insider information that they might share :)

RE: SLI and Vista
By Kim Leo on 9/17/2007 4:37:24 AM , Rating: 2
crap.. i voted you down by accident.. srry dude..

RE: SLI and Vista
By Master Kenobi on 9/17/2007 8:47:35 AM , Rating: 3
I wouldn't bother with SLI anyways. A single 8800GTX is more than enough.

RE: SLI and Vista
By darkpaw on 9/17/2007 8:59:02 AM , Rating: 2

Not sure about ATI, but Nvidia has (finally) gotten SLI to work in Vista in the last couple of driver releases. That said, I'd agree with the post above mine and just skip SLI all together, it really hasn't been worth it.

RE: SLI and Vista
By Spivonious on 9/17/2007 12:47:39 PM , Rating: 2
AFAIK Crossfire has always worked in (32-bit) Vista.

Other Cores for Physics?
By Fulvian on 9/17/2007 4:38:17 AM , Rating: 2
A recent trend is to offload physics processing to either a GPU or dedicated physics processor.

Why not offloading it to the 2nd/3rd/4th CPU core? Could someone explain it?

RE: Other Cores for Physics?
By GoatMonkey on 9/17/2007 8:55:27 AM , Rating: 2
They could, but a GPU or PPU is currently faster at processing this type of data than CPUs. However, that could change in future generations of CPUs.

RE: Other Cores for Physics?
By Targon on 9/17/2007 9:34:39 AM , Rating: 2
A chip dedicated to a certain type of calculation will always be faster than a general purpose chip like a CPU. A CPU is designed with the idea that it should be able to handle all sorts of different applications, without being focused on one particular application.

Now, the reason a GPU can handle physics is in the nature of physics processing. Physics is one of those applications where you can run things in parallel, and the design of a graphics chip is based on running calculations for multiple pixels at the same time. By adjusting the calculations of the GPU, you can get physics processing rather than graphics processing done.

Now, keep in mind that a dedicated physics processor will be better at physics than a graphics processor, but at this point, physics processing is a very young technology, so there is a lot of room for improvement in implementation.

AMD is looking at this sort of thing for their future chips, where you could have a CPU with 4 CPU cores, 2 graphics cores, a physics core, and who knows what else for the 8th core. The key is what the best mix is for overall system performance for the different markets.

I personally am very curious if/when we will see a practical application of physics processing in games. I don't care about "more realistic" looking explosions if the explosions don't do things like over multiple explosions causing walls to become weak enough to break through for example, or to make it so an explosion will rip a hole in the floor allowing either access to a lower level or for a tactical approach to the game challenge, whatever it may be.

Things like smoke effects don't strike me as being a terribly useful use of physics, because current software methods can do a "good enough" job.

One other thing, if physics does not improve the performance of a game while at the same time improving the appearance, it will have very little appeal. 3Dfx did well with the original Voodoo and Voodoo 2 chips because game performance was higher while at the same time providing better video quality. It was a winning combination that we have yet to see with physics processors.

RE: Other Cores for Physics?
By Martimus on 9/17/2007 12:08:47 PM , Rating: 2
Currently all cores are identical in the multi-core x86 chips. None of these cores are optimized for physics calculations however. AMD plans to change that with Fusion, by making at least one of those cores a graphics core (PPU). Of course that is a ways in the future, and I wouldn't expect to see that for at least two more years.

Havok on a chip
By dudde on 9/16/2007 7:40:00 AM , Rating: 2
maybe Intel plans to use Havoc's own APIs into a hardware solution and pop it in their 80+ core tera project...

RE: Havok on a chip
By DallasTexas on 9/16/2007 7:55:43 AM , Rating: 2
Hmm.. Wonder if Larrabee graphics project factors into this. Ya think?

Incredible maneuver
By thartist on 9/17/2007 3:22:20 PM , Rating: 2
It's incredible to me how Intel has scored so big making such a smart investment. Compare: As AMD thought that buying ATI would make them huge and unstoppable or even scary, Intel just thought much more out of the box and bought Havok. What for? Not only because Havok is the major physics provider, but to get first hand into the technology to develop future Intel graphic cards with physics acceleration support. Intel will then be 3 things: Microprocessor, Graphics cards and Physics cards provider (the latter 2 integrated or separated). And all that, spending an insignificant fraction of the almost $ 6 billions ATI was for AMD.

Fantastic move, as simple as it is. I applaud, being an AMD user.

RE: Incredible maneuver
By wordsworm on 9/18/2007 5:30:53 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know if you remember, but Intel was talking about eating up Nvidia. It turned out that it was simply too big. ATI is a much more significant graphics provider. With Ageia out there, there's a good possibility that it too could get gobbled up by an AMD that has regained its profitability, which we could very well see should Phenom end up competing with Intel's high end. There are doubts at this time, but we will with certainty when they start pushing them to retailers. Furthermore, I fully expect the graphics division to become more competitive. The merger was difficult, but the long term possibilities are remarkable to say the least. As queen's gambit is my favorite opening, I appreciate a move that offers short term loss for long term game.

By Phenick on 9/16/2007 5:02:33 AM , Rating: 2
"However, it is unlikely that Intel’s acquisition of Havok will affect Havok’s partnership with either AMD or ATI. " should be nVidia and ATI?

RE: oops
By neothe0ne on 9/16/07, Rating: 0
The next big thing.
By crystal clear on 9/17/2007 8:03:48 AM , Rating: 2
After mobility & virtualization the next big thing for Intel is gaming & graphics.
They want a dominant position in this sector.

See this link to get an idea what they have in mind-

They do not have the competition in focus rather their own
technologies/platforms that they are developing.

All their investment/acquisations are made with Intel technologies/platforms in mind.
Example-Intel VPro & Intel Centrino Pro to name a few.

So all investment in companies have to fit in the framework of their paltform & technologies.

VMware And Intel Capital Announce Investment


I think you will hear more in detail soon at-
Intel Developer Forum
Sept. 18-20, 2007

Intel Preps for the 2007 Fall IDF,1895,2183526,

They certainly are not going into the console business as widely rumoured & quoted here by somebody.

Just-in-case if you do not know-
TOKYO (Reuters)—Japan's Sony Corp is in talks to sell its production facilities for advanced microchips used in its PlayStation 3 game console to Toshiba Corp, sources close to the matter said.
The sale, which would include production lines for the "Cell" microchips, dubbed "supercomputer on a chip," is part of Sony's strategy to shed costly semiconductor assets and focus on the production of strategic products such as image sensor chips used in digital cameras and camcorders, they said.,1895,2183646,

Starcraft 2 uses Havok
By GoatMonkey on 9/17/2007 8:57:58 AM , Rating: 2
Good news for Blizzard, since they're using Havok for Starcraft 2. This means it will be well supported in hardware in the not too distant future.

By DeepBlue1975 on 9/17/2007 9:05:53 AM , Rating: 2
I think this is a VERY smart move.

These acquisitions by Intel, AMD and the likes more and more resemble a very long and never ending chess game.
But for this time, I think Intel made the smartest step: havok will bring them an extra income in no time, and a possibility of securing their future by getting hold of a knowledge that so many in the game industry will need to license.

That and the little spoiler for AMD and Nvidia about their physics integration coming from Havok, now it'll be Intel they'll somehow have to deal with and pay royalties to if they want to keep that train going and they'll know that Intel will likely be a very powerful third competitor in the future physics acceleration market.

The one who loses the most terrain everyday in the physics market is, however and IMHO, Ageia.
I don't see Ageia anywhere in the years to come, maybe at best they get bought by nvidia / amd or intel itself and that ought to be the best deal they could ever get.

We need DirectPhysics
By giantpandaman2 on 9/17/2007 1:11:28 PM , Rating: 2
Seriously, who wants different physics API's that work on some hardware and not on others? That's simply not good for the game industry. It wasn't good when there were several graphics API's and it's not good now.

Nice card...
By daftrok on 9/16/07, Rating: -1
RE: Nice card...
By The Boston Dangler on 9/16/2007 3:57:52 AM , Rating: 5
yeah, they're going to be big someday

RE: Nice card...
By Smurfer2 on 9/16/2007 10:00:46 AM , Rating: 2
That comment made my day. :)

RE: Nice card...
By Xerio on 9/17/2007 10:03:19 AM , Rating: 2
I was going to rate you up, but you are already maxed. Freakin' hillarious!

By Ringold on 9/16/2007 10:57:34 PM , Rating: 2
You registered just to say that? :P

Epic Lulz
By BruceLeet on 9/16/07, Rating: -1
RE: Epic Lulz
By Treckin on 9/16/2007 1:11:06 PM , Rating: 5
Hardly the same thing...

RE: Epic Lulz
By DeepBlue1975 on 9/17/2007 10:09:42 AM , Rating: 1
Havok does not and never meant to build graphics cards.
Intel HAS its own graphics team. That they only produce IGPs
that are "great for everything" but gaming is another story, I guess they could get out a good graphics solution out of the oven but they're not interested in that market yet.

Havok is, in some way, a fuel many game writing companies consume, and a fuel ATi and AMD were willing to consume to make up their so called physics solutions... And now Intel will own this fuel.

"So, I think the same thing of the music industry. They can't say that they're losing money, you know what I'm saying. They just probably don't have the same surplus that they had." -- Wu-Tang Clan founder RZA
Related Articles
Havok Teams Up With Autodesk
October 18, 2006, 5:25 PM
Announcing Havok 4.0
July 11, 2006, 4:19 PM
The Forecast for AGEIA
June 5, 2006, 6:43 PM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki