backtop


Print 64 comment(s) - last by crazymike.. on Jun 22 at 3:56 PM

No games are being announced that supports ATI's method, says AGEIA

Earlier this week at Computex, DailyTech reported that ATI officially announces its solution to physics processing. Called Triple Play, ATI's solution depends on three Radeon X1K series cards, two of which operate in CrossFire mode while a third card is configured for physics processing. The Triple Play solution, says ATI, uses the raw gigaflop performance of the Radeon X1K series to process physics, but users are concerned at the approach. The fact that customers are forced to buy three ATI boards ended up being questionable for many users as costs quickly escalate.  A system with two Radeons can still use one for physics calculations, but it is no longer dubbed Triple Play.

FiringSquad this week reported a response from AGEIA which attempts to explain the lack of value in ATI's solution. According to AGEIA, measuring the performance of physics processing by simply looking at the number of gigaflops in a GPU is analogous to saying that "the more wheels I have on my car, the faster I will go." AGEIA's vice president of marketing,  Michael Steele, said to FiringSquad:
  • Graphics processors are designed for graphics. Physics is an entirely different environment. Why would you sacrifice graphics performance for questionable physics? You’ll be hard pressed to find game developers who don’t want to use all the graphics power they can get, thus leaving very little for anything else in that chip.
  • “Boundless Gaming” is actually enabled by AGEIA’s Gaming Power Triangle in which the PhysX processor adds true physics to the mix instead of leaving it to a repurposed graphics processor.
AGEIA further says that developers are announcing more and more games that support its PhysX product, while no one is announcing support for ATI's method. Steele also mentioned that while he's glad that ATI has agreed that physics is important, ATI is delivering a "questionable" solution to physics processing.

Steele also emphasized that PhysX is available now while ATI's solution is not.


Comments     Threshold


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

ATI Lied About Performance
By AggressorPrime on 6/9/2006 1:27:10 PM , Rating: 2
Just so everyone knows, ATI thinks their GPUs are 10x faster than Ageia's PPUs. This is a lie as I will prove with the following links:

ATI saying that their X1900XTX can do "five million sphere-to-sphere collisions per second" and that Ageia's PPU can only do "about half a million sphere-to-sphere collisions per second"
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20...

BFG/Asus saying Ageia's PPU can do "Sphere-Sphere Collisions/sec.: 530 Million Max"
http://www.bfgtech.com/physx/index.htm
http://www.asus.com/news_show.aspx?id=3317

ATI's lie is 1060x off the truth.




By epsilonparadox on 6/9/2006 1:40:23 PM , Rating: 2
So you'd rather believe the manufacturers of the PPU card over the GPU maker? Until proper testing equipment and software are available to test these parameters, both of their numbers are useless.


RE: ATI Lied About Performance
By z3R0C00L on 6/9/2006 3:43:07 PM , Rating: 2
Easy response...
AGEIA is using theoritical numbers. ATi is using numbers from a realworld test.

As we know.. varying on the conditions/complexity of the tests.. results may vary.

I'll wait for tests.. but I'm more inclined to believe ATi over AGEIA.


"When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." -- Sony BMG attorney Jennifer Pariser

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki