SEGA, Capcom join NVIDIA PhysX cause

By Robert Purchese Published 28 April, 2009

Physics engine gains momentum.

NVIDIA PhysX has announced serious support from big-name publishers Capcom and SEGA.

The latter has licensed the engine as the development platform for all SEGA studios, while Capcom will feature the technology in Dark Void, the upcoming third-person jetpack-based shooter (more on that later today).

NVIDIA PhysX tools work across iPhone, PC, PS3, Wii and Xbox 360 platforms.

PhysX was a low-key venture for a number of years, comprising of a novel and separate physics card for PC and associated physics engine. But things soon changed when graphics giant NVIDIA bought PhysX owner Ageia in February 2008. So we went to see an optimistic NVIDIA presentation about the future of PhysX last summer.

Unsurprisingly, NVIDIA cards with CUDA support can accelerate PhysX processing. NVIDIA released drivers for GeForce series eight cards last year to the same effect.

That, interestingly, may give PlayStation 3 the upper-hand going forward, as the system uses an NVIDIA-based graphics card.

Xbox 360, of course, uses a graphics card by rival ATI. AMD owns ATI, incidentally, and posted significant losses for the first quarter of Q1 2009. But AMD plans to launch its flashy six-core processor chip next month, so the tides could turn.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (13) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • JohnnyWashnGo #1 3 years ago

    Feel the power of PhysX
    Edited by 1 at 28/04/09 @ 11:28

  • Eraysor #2 3 years ago

    I'm glad Nvidia cards can now use PhysX rather than it being necessary to have a separate physics processor, because PC components are expensive enough already.

  • des #3 3 years ago

    Nvidia vaporware

  • Darren #4 3 years ago

    I'd be very surprised if the PS3 supports PhysX as its GPU is, as far as I'm aware, based on the ancient GeForce 7800 chipset and PhysX is not compatible with that on the PC, only the later GeForce 8, 9 and 200 series.

    I have a GeForce GTX 280 graphics card in my new PC and the PhysX effects I've seen in Mirror's Edge, Unreal Tournament 3 and Cryostatis are neat to see but they don't really add anything to the games IMO. The best demo I've seen of PhysX was in the Cryostatis tech demo but the effects used in the actual game are, ironically, far less noticeable and a lot less impressive.

  • Wastelander #5 3 years ago

    All well and good, but it's been available for a while now and no-one is doing anything interesting with it.

  • Quint2020 #6 3 years ago

    The only game I've seen any sort of before and after PhysX footage for is Sacred 2 on PC, I must say it does make some of the spells look pretty damn cool like leaves and debris swirling round a vortex spell but I'd hardly call it game changing, of course this is only one example of it's use so this may well change.

  • Rirekon #7 3 years ago

    The main problem with these things is that it can only be used it for graphical niceties, you can't base gameplay off it without making an Nvidia card a requirement - something that won't go down well.

  • Dan234 #8 3 years ago

    The main problem with these things is that it can only be used it for graphical niceties, you can't base gameplay off it without making an Nvidia card a requirement - something that won't go down well.

    The Wii and 360 both have ATI cards.

  • Darren #9 3 years ago

    My understanding is that newer ATI/AMD cards can run CUDA and, therefore, PhysX but AMD choose not to because they're behind Havok and see PhysX as a direct competitor. Personally I think it would make more sense for AMD to back PhysX because NVIDIA graphics cards supposedly outsell ATI/AMD ones by a significant number so it makes more sense to back the majority format. They won't though.

  • BillyBrush #10 3 years ago

    Rob...re your 'this could give PS some advantage' surely this is pretty much a yes or no thing, as in can/does it run CUDA? or not...surely there's an answer for that.

    Also, i think such a statement really doesn't seem to be that on the money as Physx can and has been run by 360 no probs, it's in games like Beowulf for christs sake just not in 'hardware physics accelleration' form (which i have to admit i barely understand) and many games seem to have it such as Prince of Persia but still use Havok which must still be the nr 1 by a long way (it must be hundreds of gamesvs thousands)..

    So console wise, i can't see how this possibly elevates one up at all...significant for PC's perhaps but i think you should explain more clearly exactly why this has any effect for PS3, i'm not convinced by that and it'd be good if you could in some way...back up the statement.

  • oreillymj #11 3 years ago

    @Darren, I'd say that AMD are less enthusiastic about Havok since Intel bought them last year.

  • oreillymj #12 3 years ago

    Sony are unlikely to license something that won't actually run on the PS3 as it does involve handing money over to nVidia. They're not just putting another logo on the back of the box.

    nVidia might say that the 7800 can't run CUDA, but that that doesn't mean that the RSX isn't capable of running CUDA with help from an SPU or 2.
    Edited by 1 at 28/04/09 @ 13:34

  • Darren #13 3 years ago

    @oreillymj - How powerful is the Cell processor though? Despite being hailed as revolutionary back in 2005 when it was unveiled, to date only the PS3 has used it. I always imagined it would surface in desktop and laptop PCs but that never happened. That made me think that it's really not that fast or powerful, something that was only reinforced when I head the Cell was going to appear in HDTVs, etc. Is the newer quad core Core i7 CPU faster for example?

    You can run PhysX in software through the CPU but it's a hell of a lot slower than using a GPU, or so it appears from the demos I've seen. For example, try running the Cryostatis tech demo in software mode. On my Core i7 920, which has 8 threads (4 physical, 4 virtual) it runs at around 8-11 fps on max. settings at 1680x1050 and is a slidedown. With PhysX running through the GPU, it runs at 45-50 fps on the same settings. Whether the PS3 RSX plus Cell could run PhysX as well remains to be seen but I'd be surprised if it does unless the Cell really is a powerhouse.

    At the moment Havok runs on the consoles using the CPU but its physics are nowhere near as advanced or demanding as those used in PhysX games and demos on the PC, or that's my assumption anyway. That said Red Faction Guerilla uses a very advanced physics engine that simulations environmental destruction and that is presumably using the CPU rather than the GPU? Whatever it uses, it seems to be the best use of physics yet in a game and it is running on consoles with three year old GPUs and CPUs. Kind of ironic really.