Ageia PhysX?

***Zardon*** · May 9, 2006, 05:00 AM

Vote and discuss !

Bart1987 · May 9, 2006, 05:22 AM

Im not interested in it. Unless they drastically lower the price of it.
It might be interesting for people who have a lot of cash.

bug77 · May 9, 2006, 05:39 AM

Wouldn't buy one ATM. Or anytime soon.
Sorry Ageia, that's not how you enter/create a market.

IvanV · May 9, 2006, 05:53 AM

Not interested. I've seen the comparison screenshots from GRAW and I really don't think think that it was something unseen. In my opinion they could have done it without the card, but they wanted it this way to promote it. I don't think it will become a necessity unless someone really decides to force it upon us. It's an expensive product that there is no need for, especially with CPUs going multicore soon.

mkk · May 9, 2006, 06:12 AM

Games need better physics programming rather than more raw calculating power. I also have a feeling that with physics cards or especially when offloading physics calculations onto the GPU it will be more about "eye candy physics", than physics affecting the gameplay.

Sandok · May 9, 2006, 09:30 AM

Not interested.... With dual core and all becoming of norm, this can be introduced in current PCs.

The_Neon_Cowboy · May 9, 2006, 02:27 PM

@ $299 dallors retail I don't think thier will be many takers. Surely kills the early rumors the cards would be about $149 this is is 200% of what was said. It's not cost effective considering ATI and nvidia both have thier own soultions. Both are better when u figure in for example spending that extra $300 on crossfire or SLI would benfit all games and get you thier PPU support. Even in non ppu suported games gain makes more since....

Agia's soultion no longer makes since unless you have $300 to burn

Dark Lord · May 9, 2006, 02:38 PM

so far im not impressed by whats been shown.

now down the road some day when more developers start useing it, and start getting really serious about physics, then maybe the card will become useful.

nicnik · May 9, 2006, 03:31 PM

after reading all the reviews i will not be getting one unless a big title shows up and demands the need of the card. (unreal 2k7??)

Zelig · May 9, 2006, 03:37 PM

I'm not interested. I don't play enough games to justify it, and currently do fine with a $200 video card every couple of years.

Erroneus · May 9, 2006, 03:57 PM

ALOT more games are needed and these games need to use effects like i cellfactor, the ones in GRAW wasn't that impressive. Also it's quite dissapointing to se fps loss when using the PhysX card.

Yeah I'm waiting to see what Nvidia an ATI delivers.

~~Alien1~~ · May 9, 2006, 04:59 PM

I am waiting to see what Nvidia and Ati has to offer

I am not really interested right now especially with the current PPI sollutions
I am not impressed

Lowfat · May 9, 2006, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IvanV

Not interested. I've seen the comparison screenshots from GRAW and I really don't think think that it was something unseen. In my opinion they could have done it without the card, but they wanted it this way to promote it. I don't think it will become a necessity unless someone really decides to force it upon us. It's an expensive product that there is no need for, especially with CPUs going multicore soon.

couldn't say it better myself.

CDsDontBurn · May 9, 2006, 05:56 PM

i'm with the bandwagon

Richie-b · May 9, 2006, 06:32 PM

Not interested in this by a long shot. Another excuse to to add more clutter to the inside of a case when current solutions can more than manage the job.