引用:
Originally posted by qcmadness at 2010-3-8 23:37:
As AMD announced the next step of its Open Physics Initiative today, the company also hit out at Nvidia’s PhysX technology, saying that most game developers only use it for the money.
Speaking to THINQ, AMD’s senior manager of developer relations, Richard Huddy, said: “What I’ve seen with physics, or PhysX rather, is that Nvidia create a marketing deal with a title, and then as part of that marketing deal, they have the right to go in and implement PhysX in the game.”
There’s nothing wrong with this, you might think. However, Huddy spends a lot of time talking with game developers in his role, and he reckons that most devs would much rather Nvidia kept its hands off. “The problem with that is obviously that the game developer doesn’t actually want it,” he says.
“They’re not doing it because they want it; they’re doing it because they’re paid to do it. So we have a rather artificial situation at the moment where you see PhysX in games, but it isn’t because the game developer wants it in there.”
Originally posted by Richteralan at 2010-3-9 08:35:
And PhysX is NOT ONLY FOR GAMES. Look at how many scientific applications supports it?
Originally posted by qcmadness at 2010-3-8 23:37:
Originally posted by Richteralan at 2010-3-9 12:56:
ah.........got CUDA and PhysX mixed up....
Originally posted by qcmadness at 2010-3-9 00:04:
CUDA is a different story, with much tougher competition from DirectX Compute and OpenCL.
PhysX... I think this is a popular and most viable solution for game physics.
But over-symphasizing i ...
Originally posted by Richteralan at 2010-3-9 13:13:
I think NVIDIA never intended to compete against DXC and OCL. That\'s why NVIDIA puts out first OpenCL driver for devs.
And if you goto this site
[url]http://www.nvidia.com/object/what_is_cuda ...
| 歡迎光臨 HKSpot (https://bbs.hk-spot.com/) | Powered by Discuz! 6.0 Lite |