[Costin Moroianu]

The race Nvidia is winning is against AMD, not against Havok.

But with regards to that list you have to consider the console only games there, since the advanced features of PhysX only work on a PC.

[Hivez]

Sirnaq said:

I know where i want to see physx. Cyberpunk 2077 needs physx if they really consider that trailer to be target graphics. ›››

...what? Sorry, but who said that? I know next-gen is coming, but games will definitely not look like best CGI trailers.

And, to be honest, I don't think I'd like that if they could look so realistic etc. Shooting very realistic looking people in heads... Hm...

[Aver]

Costin Moroianu said:

The race Nvidia is winning is against AMD, not against Havok.

But with regards to that list you have to consider the console only games there, since the advanced features of PhysX only work on a PC. ›››

Search for "graphics card market share" in Google and check what are articles about. "AMD gains market over nVidia", "AMD gains GPU market share from nVidia" etc. Yes, nVidia has ~50% of market and AMD has ~35%. But AMD gains market share and nVidia looses.

And this process will probably accelerate with launch of new consoles - both of them will have AMD graphics cards and because of that devs will be optimizing games for AMD's chips.

[Costin Moroianu]

Quote

And this process will probably accelerate with launch of new consoles - both of them will have AMD graphics cards and because of that devs will be optimizing games for AMD's chips.

Those are unconfirmed rumors with regards to AMD providing GFX cards for the new consoles.

As for the market share, it has gone up and done over these last years, but Nvidia is still in the lead and will remain there for quite a while yet. I don't expect 2013 to be a good year for Nvidia considering how they delayed Maxwell, but once Maxwell comes out in 2014 then it's hold on the market will become stronger.

[Aaden]

Aver said:

Search for "graphics card market share" in Google and check what are articles about. "AMD gains market over nVidia", "AMD gains GPU market share from nVidia" etc. Yes, nVidia has ~50% of market and AMD has ~35%. But AMD gains market share and nVidia looses.

And this process will probably accelerate with launch of new consoles - both of them will have AMD graphics cards and because of that devs will be optimizing games for AMD's chips. ›››

The Xbox 360's graphics chip is from AMD/ATI as well. And considering the differences in development and architectures, I'm sure the Xbox 360 is the lead platform for multi-platform developing (PS3-development is too different to be practical as lead platform). Still, all these years we had way more Nvidia-optimized games than AMD-optimized. I think the reason is Nvidia's "the way it's meant to be played"-program, offering massive help to devs with optimizing their games. AMD is way behind with that as well.

I often have that feeling that AMD is like "yeah, it's kinda working, and the video cards are fast and efficient enough. that's all we want.", while Nvidia offers more of a Premium service, taking great care of their drivers, making sure that games run great on their hardware by helping the devs, aggressively promoting and supporting their exclusive tech like 3D Vision or PhysX.
AMD is great as a manufacturer, but seems to lack in terms of offering something more. Nvidia does that and consequently often costs quite a bit more, but they seem to be doing good with it.

[Aver]

Costin Moroianu said:

Those are unconfirmed rumors with regards to AMD providing GFX cards for the new consoles

They are kinda confirmed by lawsuit against nVidia. AMD accuses nVidia that they hired a guy who negotiated deals with consoles manufacturers and that they paid him to stole confidential data about deals with those manufacturers.

nVidia wouldn't do this if AMD wouldn't get a deal for providing GPUs for new consoles.

Quote

Still, all these years we had way more Nvidia-optimized games than AMD-optimized. I think the reason is Nvidia's "the way it's meant to be played"-program, offering massive help to devs with optimizing their games. AMD is way behind with that as well.

Well, I would say that recently AMD is winning in that matter too. They have deal for all Square Enix games, EA games on BF3 engine and now even Ubisoft joined to this group (FarCry 3). It seems that Crysis 3 will be "designed for AMD" too.

[Costin Moroianu]

Aaden: That's exactly why I chose Nvidia over AMD despite the price.

Aver: Well certainly but it doesn't mean AMD has gotten the deal for the GFX chip, could very well mean they got a deal for the CPU.

Even so making games for PC is different then from consoles since devs have to use an API for PC games.

[Aver]

Costin Moroianu said:

Aver: Well certainly but it doesn't mean AMD has gotten the deal for the GFX chip, could very well mean they got a deal for the CPU.

Well, every single gaming site says that it's sure that consoles will have GPU from AMD. nVidia's CPUs are designed for handled devices, so I doubt that they would risk illegal actions to get info about CPU deal.

I'm pretty sure about that, but we will see soon who is right. Sony will reveal some info 20th February - probably about PS4.

[Wut the Melon]

Obviously, a physics solution that works on AMD systems as well would be highly preferable to PhysX, but if CDPR feels they can do much more or work much easier with PhysX I can see why they would.

As to the AMD vs nVidia debate, well, I used to think nVidia was better too, but AMD has very decent drivers nowadays (+ RadeonPro). More important for me, however, is that for some reason nVidia GPUs are sold at ridiculously high prices here (Netherlands) compared to their US counterparts whereas AMD sells them at a much more reasonable (if still more expensive than in the US) price. Someone really needs to figure all these global price differences for identical products out... GOG should just take over all businesses in the world.

[BerrySenpai90]

Costin Moroianu said:

It's more then just 2 at least ( Borderlands 2 also had it ). Now of course most developers don't care about it, but then again the vast majority of developers don't care about top of the line graphics. CDPR does however.

Aver said:

I checked video presenting PhysX in Borderlands 2 and they used cloth physics only for environment - tents and flags: . So still they didn't care about character's clothes.

You both seem to have taken the words out off my mouth and ignored my post.

[Costin Moroianu]

Quote

You both seem to have taken the words out off my mouth and ignored my post.

You say that as if you were the first to mention Borderlands 2 when it was in fact the OP.

So yes, I did ignore your post.

[mothra]

PhysX is nice. Nothing more. It does not - imo - make stuff better or more realistic - on the contrary. Those particles look very "gamey" to me, crying "look at me, look at me" all the time. If they use it for subtle things like clothes and capes and tone it down so you do not really notice it I would like it. But as it is now it is - imo - just a show-off and draws too much attention in the scene. For Borderland2 it works (somehow) because that game is all about noise, not about subtlety.
And new consoles will have no impact whatsoever in the long run.
We all know the cycle. Console manufactures will have paid royalties to ensure chip producers will hold back with better PC hardware for quite some time so they can ship and show off and declare another "PC is dead" decade.
And a few months later new hardware will kick every console from the throne.
And a year later any laptop will surpass their closed, un-upgradable platforms.

[Costin Moroianu]

Quote

But as it is now it is - imo - just a show-off and draws too much attention in the scene. For Borderland2 it works (somehow) because that game is all about noise, not about subtlety.

I disagree. I played Batman: AC with Nvidia PhysX and it didn't draw too much attention from my perspective. Sure watching the Hawken video about it does make you think it's too much, but playing a game is vastly different to watching a video about it's effects.

You know what I do notice in TW2? Geralt's hair not moving properly, Henselt and Roche's medalions and their animations, the clingy clothes and so on.

[M4xw0lf]

Physx needs to die and be replaced by open source. Or go open source.
As it is, Nvidia and their proprietary GPU-Physx are inhibiting the wide-spread use of more advanced physical simulations - and I'm not talking about useless eye-candy (which is all Physx is about), but real physics with actual relevance to gameplay - that is, deformable materials, destructible environments, the good stuff.

[witchermasterofRolling]

Wut the Melon said:

Obviously, a physics solution that works on AMD systems as well would be highly preferable to PhysX, but if CDPR feels they can do much more or work much easier with PhysX I can see why they would.

As to the AMD vs nVidia debate, well, I used to think nVidia was better too, but AMD has very decent drivers nowadays (+ RadeonPro). More important for me, however, is that for some reason nVidia GPUs are sold at ridiculously high prices here (Netherlands) compared to their US counterparts whereas AMD sells them at a much more reasonable (if still more expensive than in the US) price. Someone really needs to figure all these global price differences for identical products out... GOG should just take over all businesses in the world. ›››

nVidia GPUs are sold at ridiculously high prices here as well I'm in Canada we pay almost the same price as the US I buy stuff online from a Canadian based company NCIX that gives me better priceing then US company's but you can get a 7970 for the same price as a 660. the 7970 will out preform a 670 on framrates in most games and is around 30% cheaper to buy

[Costin Moroianu]

Hmm odd. I can buy in Romania a GTX 670 for quite a bit less then an AMD 7970.

EDIT: I've checked the NCIX site and EVGA 670 is cheaper then an AMD 7970.

Quote

the 7970 will out preform a 670 on framrates in most games and is around 30% cheaper to buy

What about the games where it matters? The GTX 670 is better then the 7970 in Crysis 2, Batman: Arkham City, Battlefield 3, Shogun 2 and Metro 2033, some of the most demanding games out there. At least based on the becnhmarks I've seen.

[M4xw0lf]

Don't know where you did look, but this at least partially wrong.
BF3: http://www.pcgamesha...hmarks-1042773/
Metro: http://ht4u.net/revi...est/index25.php
Batman: http://ht4u.net/revi...est/index17.php

Generally, most reviews see the 7970 close to the GTX680, with the 7970 GHz-Edition at the top on average - in certain games and settings this ranking may of course vary.

[slimgrin]

Well whatever they use I just hope to see clothing that is detached in spots and free-flowing. I also hope to see more dynamic effects like fog parting when you walk through it, clouds shifting their shapes, better blood effects, etc. What the REDs did in TW2 was already amazing, they just need to take it to the next level.

[Costin Moroianu]

http://www.tomshardw...iew,3200-5.html

http://benchmarkrevi...=1&limitstart=5

http://www.bit-tech....70-2gb-review/3

So alright I wasn't right about it, but it does depend on the version the 7970 that you have ( and the version of the 670 as well ).

[M4xw0lf]

Regarding the tomshardware BF3-Bench: this is AULD. With AULD drivers />
AMD kicked the BF3-Performance up by nearly 30% in most settings since the 12.11 beta/13.1 WHQL-Driver.
With newer drivers, AMD has continually improved its standing over the last months. This Performance-Index at PCGH.de is based on fairly up-to-date drivers: http://www.pcgamesha...Geforce-678322/
It's the average of 11 games at three resolutions (1050p, 1080p, 1440p) with settings generally maxed out (for example, they bench TW2 with Ubersampling enabled ^^). The parcours includes for example Crysis 2, BF3, Batman, TW2, Dirt Showdown, Starcraft 2, Anno 2070... can't seem to remember the rest atm ^^