Jump to content

What do you Think About it??


wsoul2k
 Share

Recommended Posts

Interview with AEGIA staff ( on SimHQ ) Whath do you guys think about this ...it is very far away..it will be in ED next projetc ??

 

Question:

How could a flight simulation developer really take advantage of the AGEIA PhysX processor? Improved complexity for flight and damage models come to mind, but could a developer add the impact to an aircraft's flight model that variable weather and air conditions might have? Could damage models include complex ballistics properties for ammunitions and the effect they would have on various in-game materials?

 

Answer:

Some of our far-future exploratory research involves substance-based modeling — assigning a "wood" property to a crate, or a "steel" property to a door. Not only would "steel" have its usual physical properties (lightness relative to tensile strength), but those properties would be available across all senses — light reflection, the clank the door makes when closed, the dent in the door from a projectile. All these have relevance in the flight simulation space. It will be very interesting to see how game developers will use PhysX effects to further evolve the flight simulation experience. Truly, the sky's the limit.

Rodrigo Monteiro

LOCKON 1.12

AMD 3.8 X2 64 2G DDR ATI X1800XT 512

SAITEK X-36

AND VERY SOON TRACKIR-4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

doent make much sense to model different materials when your shot at, and theres alot margin for improvments everywhere else.

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But ...i really dont know if this card can be used to calcule WINDS,ADFM,COLISION....and all the other phisics things.....

 

 

This kind of calculation is very CPU dependant.....and if the CPU dont have any more to do it.....it can be used to other kind of improvements like RADAR, ECM,AI etc

 

well i really dont Know...but i will apreciate if we can have it in a not so long future

 

 

just my 2 cents

Rodrigo Monteiro

LOCKON 1.12

AMD 3.8 X2 64 2G DDR ATI X1800XT 512

SAITEK X-36

AND VERY SOON TRACKIR-4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a flight sim could make very good use of it, but not for different materials and such. The atmosphere and flight models of weapons as well as planes could be greatly enhanced. We could see what would really happen if a Mk-84 hit 20m from an Igla. Damage modelling could be very detailed. All it takes is a dev willing to invest the time. The question is, would the end result be worth the extra dev time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it could be really helpful to offload bullets balistics and collision detection to hardware. It could help in situation when there is a lot of bullets in the air and also offload some processing used for radar modelling.

 

The card physics probably won't be good enough for Advanced Flight Model - but should be good enough to improve land & sea vehicles physics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that "PhysX" = "physics"

 

I think it's only "special effects". i.e., it reacts to events in the program and produces a graphical or audio effect. But those effects do not then have any further influence on what is happening in the game - the effects go directly to the video card and sound card, not back into the CPU. So it could paint bullet holes on your airplane as a result of detected object collisions, but the actual damage should still be computed by the CPU. It would probably work better to model the "flexing" suspension of tanks or racing cards, which is mostly a graphical effect, rather than a 6-DOF flight model.

 

Maybe it could be used to model flexing and vibration of wings in a high-G turn? Or, the tumbling of pieces of your airplane through the sky after it has been destroyed. But that would also just be an "effect". Lock On has lots of effects, it needs more "meat". ;)

 

-SK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The card physics probably won't be good enough for Advanced Flight Model - but should be good enough to improve land & sea vehicles physics.

 

It will have power enough ..remember it is a specific processor doing an EXLUSIVE job....just take a look in detailed statisc in LOMAC....how much CPU power used to mirros etc...

 

 

 

I don't think that "PhysX" = "physics"

 

I think it's only "special effects". i.e., it reacts to events in the program and produces a graphical or audio effect. But those effects do not then have any further influence on what is happening in the game - the effects go directly to the video card and sound card, not back into the CPU. So it could paint bullet holes on your airplane as a result of detected object collisions, but the actual damage should still be computed by the CPU. It would probably work better to model the "flexing" suspension of tanks or racing cards, which is mostly a graphical effect, rather than a 6-DOF flight model.

 

Maybe it could be used to model flexing and vibration of wings in a high-G turn? Or, the tumbling of pieces of your airplane through the sky after it has been destroyed. But that would also just be an "effect". Lock On has lots of effects, it needs more "meat". ;)

 

-SK

 

I dont think so Sk....i have download the demo from AEGIA some time ago..and read some interviews...it really do all the math necessary to "manipulate" an object in the game....and alll colision detection is calculated in the AEGIA card

 

i just read some post on the AEGIA forum...and the developer can atribute diferent weigth and mass ,deformation to any objects.....in a short explanation

 

in an 3d shooter when you fire a rocket in a wall...the briks will EXPLODE and fly away rebaunding in any near object based in

REAL phisics = ROCKTS+DETONATION > BRIKS RESISTANCE = BRIKS FLYING AWAY

 

I can see a vary ways to use this kind of hardware.....im from the old times anda i still remenber the big jump when the 3dfx just arrive...i can be wrong but im seeing this again :D

Rodrigo Monteiro

LOCKON 1.12

AMD 3.8 X2 64 2G DDR ATI X1800XT 512

SAITEK X-36

AND VERY SOON TRACKIR-4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is actually real physics, but in a very limited way. The system is limited to relatively simple rigid body dynamics and as such not very useful in flight simulators. Again I just have to wonder how the communication with the CPU works through PCIe bus. Add a two core CPU into the mix and you'll have to run at least three threads to get the maximum capacity out of the system.

 

I'm sceptical about the usefullness of the physics accelerator, although I do hope they succeed. CPU power hasn't been increasing at a good enough a rate lately, we could certainly use a lot more.

My blog full of incoherent ramblings on random subjects: https://anttiilomaki.wordpress.com/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't give a damn thing if I'm blowing up a wooden crate or steel crate.. They'll be both vaporated from existence.

AEGIA's answer to what they can do for flight sims is very poor.

51PVO Founding member (DEC2007-)

100KIAP Founding member (DEC2018-)

 

:: Shaman aka [100☭] Shamansky

tail# 44 or 444

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 100KIAP Regiment Early Warning & Control officer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...its probably aimed at first person shooters like verything else in the gaming indutry...makes me puke.

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is actually real physics, but in a very limited way. The system is limited to relatively simple rigid body dynamics and as such not very useful in flight simulators. Again I just have to wonder how the communication with the CPU works through PCIe bus. Add a two core CPU into the mix and you'll have to run at least three threads to get the maximum capacity out of the system.

 

I'm sceptical about the usefullness of the physics accelerator, although I do hope they succeed. CPU power hasn't been increasing at a good enough a rate lately, we could certainly use a lot more.

 

Sorry i have to desagree with you...the CPU workload to calculate AFM, Colision, Missile FM, Ground Veicles Behavior will be done in the PP (Phisics Processor )

 

and With this the processor can be used to ather more important tasks ...like RADAR,ECM ,AI :D

and the pp can work withother kind of objetcts also see the list below:

 

AGEIA 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 ( Humm maybe we can have the STORN on water :icon_wink, and some WINDS here )

* Hair simulation

* Clothing simulation

Rodrigo Monteiro

LOCKON 1.12

AMD 3.8 X2 64 2G DDR ATI X1800XT 512

SAITEK X-36

AND VERY SOON TRACKIR-4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the latest on what slot will be used for the physics processor? I've heard it will be PCI-E 4x, but that may very well be propaganda.

 

I have readthat also...butcant find the page any more...whel...they already have an contrac with ASUS...maybe we can have an ONBORD chip :cool:

Rodrigo Monteiro

LOCKON 1.12

AMD 3.8 X2 64 2G DDR ATI X1800XT 512

SAITEK X-36

AND VERY SOON TRACKIR-4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have readthat also...butcant find the page any more...whel...they already have an contrac with ASUS...maybe we can have an ONBORD chip :cool:

 

One thing is certain...I will NOT getting it when its frst released. First generation of a chip quickly gets surpased by an improved version thats not merely a technology demonstrator.

 

I will wait untill theres hard evidence of its adoption by the industry.

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont think so Sk....i have download the demo from AEGIA some time ago..and read some interviews...it really do all the math necessary to "manipulate" an object in the game....and alll colision detection is calculated in the AEGIA card

 

i just read some post on the AEGIA forum...and the developer can atribute diferent weigth and mass ,deformation to any objects.....in a short explanation

 

in an 3d shooter when you fire a rocket in a wall...the briks will EXPLODE and fly away rebaunding in any near object based in

REAL phisics = ROCKTS+DETONATION > BRIKS RESISTANCE = BRIKS FLYING AWAY

 

Ok, let's say that there is a multiplayer match where one player has the PhysX card and the other player doesn't.

 

Who sees the flying bricks? Only the player with the PhysX card? Or both?

 

If only the player with the PhysX card, then those flying bricks would cause a conflict between the results recorded by player 1 and player 2. The only way to avoid this conflict, is to make sure that the flying bricks are purely "cosmetic" and optional. That is, they can fly around, look pretty and make a lot of noise, but they can't change the outcome of the mission from success to failure.

 

If the flying bricks CAN affect the mission result, then the information about the flying bricks needs to be transmitted somehow to the player 2, who doesn't have the PhysX card. In that case, you need a second, separate internet connection for the PhysX card, as for the CPU. Or, the data from the PhysX card needs to go back through the CPU, before going out over the internet. Why not keep that data in the CPU in the first place? It's not faster than moving it around all over the place, from one processor to another, maintaining synchronicity between so many different parts?

 

I am not an expert, but that is how graphics accelerators work. They are optional "effects" processors that don't affect the mission result in any way, they only help fps. If the PhysX is not also an effects processor, then I don't see how it will avoid causing serious compatibility problems between players who do and don't use it. It becomes necessary equipment, not an optional help.

 

-SK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing is certain...I will NOT getting it when its frst released. First generation of a chip quickly gets surpased by an improved version thats not merely a technology demonstrator.

 

I will wait untill theres hard evidence of its adoption by the industry.

 

Exactly, I'm waiting to see if this catches on first (although I really hope it does).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not an expert, but that is how graphics accelerators work. They are optional "effects" processors that don't affect the mission result in any way, they only help fps. If the PhysX is not also an effects processor, then I don't see how it will avoid causing serious compatibility problems between players who do and don't use it. It becomes necessary equipment, not an optional help.

 

-SK

 

I got your point SK...but i see this PP being used to calculate AFM,COLISION,WEATHER....and from the first versions.....IF you dont have one PP unit...this job wil be perfomed buy the CPU as it was on the firstdays of GPU

 

Your game will run slower of course

and in the future ...IF you dont have an PP unit you will not RUN the game any more ....you can run Lockon without graphics Card ??

 

But i really dont know how long it takes to became obrigatory

 

it wil depend o Indutry/market utilization....

 

 

But i still keeping my ayes in future :cool:

 

EDITED: Sorry for my poor english

Rodrigo Monteiro

LOCKON 1.12

AMD 3.8 X2 64 2G DDR ATI X1800XT 512

SAITEK X-36

AND VERY SOON TRACKIR-4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any comments of what ED think about this ??

 

hey Devs..just download the demo...have a very nice airplane crash there on the end of the movie

Rodrigo Monteiro

LOCKON 1.12

AMD 3.8 X2 64 2G DDR ATI X1800XT 512

SAITEK X-36

AND VERY SOON TRACKIR-4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

It is too early to say something on the subj as it is not avaliable for most customers yet. The support with the level of DirectX or even higher is needed for starting of development of something based on this technology. I mean a transparent chip support when your code may work even when the chip is not installed on your computer.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

К чему стадам дары свободы?

Их должно резать или стричь.

Наследство их из рода в роды

Ярмо с гремушками да бич.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, the (first generation) PPU will not be used for flight model calculations AFAIK. There are no such features in the SDK from what I've heard. For the same reasons it will not be used for radar or other calculations either. I had never heard of fluid dynamics before in this context, does this mean actual fluid dynamics (as in masses of air for example) or is it just another way to say "neat water effect"?

 

What it could be used for is hit calculations and it might be possible to have for example real shrapnel (like for example Sturmovik does, I don't know about Lock on) from explosions etc. IF it could be utilized for all collision detection there might be notable benefits in flight simulations, but at the moment I don't think it's much use otherwise. The big problem is, of course, that few people have the device so it's not really that beneficial to design for example special effects for those who have it. It would be very interesting to see the results if all collision detection was offloaded to the PPU however.

 

AFAIK you have to use the AGEIA physics engine to get benefit from the PPU features and it's probably not designed for flight sims. You also get all the problems of multi-processor systems; you have to be careful with latency and synchronization even when the CPU cores are on the same chip, I'm afraid sunning another CPU via the PCIe bus might pose some problems. Most likely it will only work well in very specific applications, I don't know if flight simulator collision detection is one of them.

My blog full of incoherent ramblings on random subjects: https://anttiilomaki.wordpress.com/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will have power enough ..remember it is a specific processor doing an EXLUSIVE job....just take a look in detailed statisc in LOMAC....how much CPU power used to mirros etc...

 

It is not question of processing power but question whether that hardware power will support particular physics needed for AFM, plus support it by SDK API and drivers.

 

... even if GeForce 7800 GTX has plenty of calculating power you still cant use almost any of it for voice recognition because it is just not built for that task ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...