Physics Processing Unit

EightySix Four

Diamond Member
Jul 17, 2004
5,122
52
91
WE FLEW half the way around the globe to see a cool new marchitecture and we haven't been disappointed. Yet.

After decades of listening about Central Processing Units, years of listening about Graphic Processing Units and millimoments of listening about audio processing units, it is time to learn the new term. It's time to start talking about physics processing units (PPUs).

I have a feeling that we will be talking much more about such PPUs in the near future as these are going to change the way computer games look like. The company behind this marchitecture is called AGEIA and is a "Fabless Company" with lots of investors around, including mighty Taiwanese giant TSMC and the almost almighty Bank'o'America. Here in San Francisco's Games Developer Conference the firm revealed its chip called symbolically PhysX. It?s the world first Physics Processing Unit (PPU), they reckon. These guys have taped out the chip and made a final product and reference card design ready as we write.

The answer is actually an add in card with either PCI Express or a PCI interface with up to 128MB of dedicated GDDR 3 memory that will take over all physics in the games. We saw some cool demos done in software on a laptop of what this card can do. It can operate with 32000 particles/rigid bodies or should I say bones? [You should, Fudo, you should. Ed.] When we talk about fluids, such cards can handle up to 50000 rigid bones. A CPU can do a couple hundred at the most.

The card operates under 25W (Watts) so the company is still not sure whether it needs an external power connector or not. The chip itself has 125 million transistors and it's quite a large piece of silicon but that's no probbo for TSMC. The chip and card designs are ready, so the company only needs retailers, OEMs and notebook manufacturers to embrace the marchitecture and start releasing designs. There will be cards for notebooks to boost gaming physics on notebooks as well.

The company said it's following the Nvidia business model as it wants to produce the chips and sell them to OEMs and manufacturers that will later make boards based on the design. Or "partners", as the INQUIRER describes such souls.

Companies such as Epic are actually very interested in the marchitecture and we are told that at least 15 significant games are going to be released using this marchitecture. We are told to look for the games by the end of the year and that's the timing for the so called "time to market".

We saw some cool demos where the company demonstrated "liquid fluids" with many "bones" and you can see the "lava" and "water" stimulations that look much better than ever before. It looks more real and much more alive.

Such cards can give some life to collision detection and can for example make a character go through grass and move every single grass while walking, adding a higher lever of realism into the scene than ever before. Looks cool I have to say. What need for grass?

We also saw some liquid simulations, where you could see blood spilled more realistically than ever before. It's especially good when you blow up a house into the smallest infinitesimal pieces, or bricks and mortar as the INQ calls them. It actually looks out of this world. I cannot imagine this in a war game. It will blow your minds. It almost looks like Bosnia and Herzegovina 12 years back.

Big guys like Gabe Novell, the developer of Half Life 2, asked for more physics and Jon Carmak of Doom 3 wanted the same. The industry likes the marchitecture and developers want to programme for it. The application programming interface (API) is the well known Novadek physics engine and AGEIA actually owns this famous physics engine company. The big publishers have worked on the titles for the last 14 months and you will see some of the releases very soon.

You can expect to see such cards in shops by the end of the year, and the company will release the things when enough developers finish their titles. µ

The Inquirer original article



Looks pretty cool to me, one step closer to life-like gaming?
 

Geforcer

Member
Sep 19, 2004
178
0
0
Sounds cool, it's just too bad the games have to be designed to use the technology. I guess they have to start somewhere with it
 

MrControversial

Senior member
Jan 25, 2005
848
0
0
DOA. This is stupid. With multicore CPU's on the horizon, this thing is useless. Developers could just have cores working on certain things. For example, the Xbox Xenon is rumored to have a 3 core CPU. One core could be used for A.I. one for setting up graphics, and the other for physics. Each core has it's own 32kb L1 cache and share 1MB L2 cache (which can be paritioned).
 

DanDaMan315

Golden Member
Oct 25, 2004
1,366
0
0
I agree with MrControversial, this sounds like a flop. With these multicore CPU and GPU's coming out I see know need for a dedicated "Physics" chip. Atleast in the near future.
 

EightySix Four

Diamond Member
Jul 17, 2004
5,122
52
91
THey said current CPU's can only do a couple of hundred objects, compared to this things thousands... Even with multicore I don't see it matching them if their specs are right.
 

akugami

Diamond Member
Feb 14, 2005
6,210
2,551
136
I don't see this hitting off that well. You are silly if you don't think nVidia and ATI aren't keeping track of the situation. If they think this is a threat to their business, watch them incorporate a lesser but similar physics chip into their boards. Heck, it can be an added feature of the high end $600 video cards which will later trickle down to the mainstream and value cards.

I can see uses for this in a 3D rendering programs such as Maya, 3DMAX and 3D animation programs as well.

The other problem is if ATI and nVidia don't add this on there is a chance AMD and Intel sees this as an opportunity to further enhance their multi-core cpu's they can include a dedicated physics core into their systems. It can happen, especially with the move to 65nm and smaller chip fabrication.
 

EightySix Four

Diamond Member
Jul 17, 2004
5,122
52
91
True, I think these guys will start something, but they won't be the ones on top for long, if they ever are.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,570
10,205
126
Originally posted by: MrControversial
DOA. This is stupid. With multicore CPU's on the horizon, this thing is useless.
No way. Sounds like this is a very-high-throughput FPU, intended for physics-sim processing, which is mostly matrix-math and some other ops. (Similar to the things that the Cell processor is supposed to be good for as well, perhaps that is what prompted the release of this device now.) There was another chip, low-powered, insane FLOPs, was actually optical-based, I believe, announced last year. Not sure if that's the same company, don't think that it is. The problem with one of these is, although it could be used as a powerful hardware-accelerator alternative to software - the game engine itself, and the game's playability, are dependent somewhat on the physics engine. It's not quite as scalable as the mostly-output-only graphics sides of things, the physics engine is part of the core engine of the game. So what about those players that don't own one of these accelerators? My guess is that the devs would effectively have to re-code two different versions of the game engines, one designed to have this card "plug in", and one that used a normal software physics-engine codepath. Then again, they mention that it supports the same API as their software physics lib does, so perhaps it really is a drop-in replacement.
 

Duvie

Elite Member
Feb 5, 2001
16,215
0
71
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: MrControversial
DOA. This is stupid. With multicore CPU's on the horizon, this thing is useless.
No way. Sounds like this is a very-high-throughput FPU, intended for physics-sim processing, which is mostly matrix-math and some other ops. (Similar to the things that the Cell processor is supposed to be good for as well, perhaps that is what prompted the release of this device now.) There was another chip, low-powered, insane FLOPs, was actually optical-based, I believe, announced last year. Not sure if that's the same company, don't think that it is. The problem with one of these is, although it could be used as a powerful hardware-accelerator alternative to software - the game engine itself, and the game's playability, are dependent somewhat on the physics engine. It's not quite as scalable as the mostly-output-only graphics sides of things, the physics engine is part of the core engine of the game. So what about those players that don't own one of these accelerators? My guess is that the devs would effectively have to re-code two different versions of the game engines, one designed to have this card "plug in", and one that used a normal software physics-engine codepath. Then again, they mention that it supports the same API as their software physics lib does, so perhaps it really is a drop-in replacement.



Just another stupid comment by him...a lot of talk and no brain power proceeding it....
 

FishTankX

Platinum Member
Oct 6, 2001
2,738
0
0
Originally posted by: MrControversial
DOA. This is stupid. With multicore CPU's on the horizon, this thing is useless. Developers could just have cores working on certain things. For example, the Xbox Xenon is rumored to have a 3 core CPU. One core could be used for A.I. one for setting up graphics, and the other for physics. Each core has it's own 32kb L1 cache and share 1MB L2 cache (which can be paritioned).

Then why do we have GPU's? Should we just assign a core for T&L and shaders, too?

Why have sound cards? Can't a Prescott run EAX4 in the background?
 

Malladine

Diamond Member
Mar 31, 2003
4,618
0
71
whatever, i can't wait to see some performance comparisons. I bet this will take off, makes total sense given the complexities involved with real time simulation of physics.

PhysX Processor Architecture has been designed to enable radical acceleration of:

* Rigid body dynamics
* Universal collision detection
* Finite element analysis
* Soft body dynamics
* Fluid dynamics
* Hair simulation
* Clothing simulation
 

MrControversial

Senior member
Jan 25, 2005
848
0
0
Originally posted by: Duvie
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: MrControversial
DOA. This is stupid. With multicore CPU's on the horizon, this thing is useless.
No way. Sounds like this is a very-high-throughput FPU, intended for physics-sim processing, which is mostly matrix-math and some other ops. (Similar to the things that the Cell processor is supposed to be good for as well, perhaps that is what prompted the release of this device now.) There was another chip, low-powered, insane FLOPs, was actually optical-based, I believe, announced last year. Not sure if that's the same company, don't think that it is. The problem with one of these is, although it could be used as a powerful hardware-accelerator alternative to software - the game engine itself, and the game's playability, are dependent somewhat on the physics engine. It's not quite as scalable as the mostly-output-only graphics sides of things, the physics engine is part of the core engine of the game. So what about those players that don't own one of these accelerators? My guess is that the devs would effectively have to re-code two different versions of the game engines, one designed to have this card "plug in", and one that used a normal software physics-engine codepath. Then again, they mention that it supports the same API as their software physics lib does, so perhaps it really is a drop-in replacement.



Just another stupid comment by him...a lot of talk and no brain power proceeding it....

You come across as a presumptuous know-it-all prick. How about dropping the ad hominem and attack my arguments instead. I'm waiting to hear your counter arguments...or something about how my mama is a fat b*tch. You lost the argument way before it began.

Can I interest you in tweezer for the beetle up your arse?
 

Cat

Golden Member
Oct 10, 1999
1,059
0
0
I've been using Novodex for about a year now. A single CPU cannot come close to what this chip is promising, so I don't think it's useless. It's very exciting, actually. I am concerned about reading back thousands of 4x4 or 3x4 single or double precision float matrices 60 times a second.
 

Malladine

Diamond Member
Mar 31, 2003
4,618
0
71
Originally posted by: MrControversial
Originally posted by: Duvie
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: MrControversial
DOA. This is stupid. With multicore CPU's on the horizon, this thing is useless.
No way. Sounds like this is a very-high-throughput FPU, intended for physics-sim processing, which is mostly matrix-math and some other ops. (Similar to the things that the Cell processor is supposed to be good for as well, perhaps that is what prompted the release of this device now.) There was another chip, low-powered, insane FLOPs, was actually optical-based, I believe, announced last year. Not sure if that's the same company, don't think that it is. The problem with one of these is, although it could be used as a powerful hardware-accelerator alternative to software - the game engine itself, and the game's playability, are dependent somewhat on the physics engine. It's not quite as scalable as the mostly-output-only graphics sides of things, the physics engine is part of the core engine of the game. So what about those players that don't own one of these accelerators? My guess is that the devs would effectively have to re-code two different versions of the game engines, one designed to have this card "plug in", and one that used a normal software physics-engine codepath. Then again, they mention that it supports the same API as their software physics lib does, so perhaps it really is a drop-in replacement.



Just another stupid comment by him...a lot of talk and no brain power proceeding it....

You come across as a presumptuous know-it-all prick. How about dropping the ad hominem and attack my arguments instead. I'm waiting to hear your counter arguments...or something about how my mama is a fat b*tch. You lost the argument way before it began.

Can I interest you in tweezer for the beetle up your arse?
calm down children
 

MrControversial

Senior member
Jan 25, 2005
848
0
0
Originally posted by: Viper GTS
http://www.ageia.com/

As for the multi-core CPU argument, a specialized chip could do it much better (Much like a GPU does for 3D graphics).

They actually address this here (Page 4).

Viper GTS

I'm still not enthusiastic after reading that. It comes across as PR hype. I've heard this all before. But the fact of the matter is that when the number of cores on CPUs increase, some will implemented as PPUs. To go back to the Xenon example, Microsoft will be using the multi-core CPU to act as an APU as well as handling physics and AI. Does this mean that it will be better than a PPU? Not at this time, but as the multi-core architecture matures and more cores per die are introduced, the advantages become clear. What would you rather have: Fast on-die processing or (relatively) slow communications between components. Hell, if they could put a 6800 Ultra on die, they would jump on it in a second and have everything on a chip.

If I ran this company, I would focus on the obvious fact that soon CPU's will be able to match those physics processing specs and just license the technology to Intel, AMD and IBM. I'd throw that thing on a CPU, call it day and watch the cash roll in.
 

MrControversial

Senior member
Jan 25, 2005
848
0
0
Originally posted by: Malladine
Originally posted by: MrControversial
Originally posted by: Duvie
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: MrControversial
DOA. This is stupid. With multicore CPU's on the horizon, this thing is useless.
No way. Sounds like this is a very-high-throughput FPU, intended for physics-sim processing, which is mostly matrix-math and some other ops. (Similar to the things that the Cell processor is supposed to be good for as well, perhaps that is what prompted the release of this device now.) There was another chip, low-powered, insane FLOPs, was actually optical-based, I believe, announced last year. Not sure if that's the same company, don't think that it is. The problem with one of these is, although it could be used as a powerful hardware-accelerator alternative to software - the game engine itself, and the game's playability, are dependent somewhat on the physics engine. It's not quite as scalable as the mostly-output-only graphics sides of things, the physics engine is part of the core engine of the game. So what about those players that don't own one of these accelerators? My guess is that the devs would effectively have to re-code two different versions of the game engines, one designed to have this card "plug in", and one that used a normal software physics-engine codepath. Then again, they mention that it supports the same API as their software physics lib does, so perhaps it really is a drop-in replacement.



Just another stupid comment by him...a lot of talk and no brain power proceeding it....

You come across as a presumptuous know-it-all prick. How about dropping the ad hominem and attack my arguments instead. I'm waiting to hear your counter arguments...or something about how my mama is a fat b*tch. You lost the argument way before it began.

Can I interest you in tweezer for the beetle up your arse?
calm down children

He started it.
 
Mar 19, 2003
18,289
2
71
This actually sounds very cool...maybe it could remove some of the CPU bottlenecks at times. In any case, one of the problems standing in the way of current games becoming more "realistic" is that they're basically still just polygons with textures on them...some shaders these days too. For example, the foliage in FarCry was impressive for its time (still is, really) - but even so, there's no real "grass" on the ground, no real detail in the plants...if they could pull this off (down to the single blade of grass level like the article says), that would be unbelieveably impressive. I'd definitely buy one of these if the price is reasonable and there's software support.
 

MrControversial

Senior member
Jan 25, 2005
848
0
0
Originally posted by: Cat
I've been using Novodex for about a year now. A single CPU cannot come close to what this chip is promising, so I don't think it's useless. It's very exciting, actually. I am concerned about reading back thousands of 4x4 or 3x4 single or double precision float matrices 60 times a second.
Single core processors will be dinosaurs until some revolutionary nanotech comes along. Industry and academia saw multiprocessing coming a long time ago. Five years ago, I would have been excited about this, because unloading hefty FP processing off of a single-threaded CPU would have been a godsend. However, with CPU's that process six, eight or more threads on the horizon it seems like it's a bit too late. With consoles like Xbox already ditching components (APU) to be handled by a powerful mult-core CPU and the PS3 using the multi-core Cell as a broadband/media processor as well what's stopping the next wave of desktop processors to implement something like the PPU on chip?

When I made my "useless" comment, I did not have a Pentium 4 and an Athlon64 in mind.
 

DanDaMan315

Golden Member
Oct 25, 2004
1,366
0
0
This PPU seems like it would be a much better idea as a chip on the video card instead of its own card. Would make the video processing easier and would most likely keep the cost down. This could just be another feature like Pixel Shading and stuff like that, doesn't seem all too revolutionary IMHO.
 

Cat

Golden Member
Oct 10, 1999
1,059
0
0
Originally posted by: MrControversial
Originally posted by: Cat
I've been using Novodex for about a year now. A single CPU cannot come close to what this chip is promising, so I don't think it's useless. It's very exciting, actually. I am concerned about reading back thousands of 4x4 or 3x4 single or double precision float matrices 60 times a second.
Single core processors will be dinosaurs until some revolutionary nanotech comes along. Industry and academia saw multiprocessing coming a long time ago. Five years ago, I would have been excited about this, because unloading hefty FP processing off of a single-threaded CPU would have been a godsend. However, with CPU's that process six, eight or more threads on the horizon it seems like it's a bit too late. With consoles like Xbox already ditching components (APU) to be handled by a powerful mult-core CPU and the PS3 using the multi-core Cell as a broadband/media processor as well what's stopping the next wave of desktop processors to implement something like the PPU on chip?

When I made my "useless" comment, I did not have a Pentium 4 and an Athlon64 in mind.


When do you see a general-purpose processor being capable of performing like this one supposedly does? I don't see it happening soon.
 

Lonyo

Lifer
Aug 10, 2002
21,938
6
81
Originally posted by: Vernor

The PC gaming market isn't big enough for this.

What about the console market? The workstation market? Animation markets?
Don't be so focused on PC games as the be all and end all of physics processing.



On an unrelated note:
Big guys like Gabe Novell, the developer of Half Life 2, asked for more physics and Jon Carmak of Doom 3 wanted the same.
Really badly written, or is it just me?
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |