Couple of additions: PhysX is still used currently - Unity uses it as the physics engine and UE4 did as well. Majority of the video was focusing on GPU accelerated PhysX. The feedback and info is overwhelming and super helpful, much appreciated! keep em coming!!!
PhysX was never slow, I was using it since 9600 GT without issues. Tanking frame-rate was a result of constant changes in libraries versions which often resulted in game not recognizing that hardware physX is available and using CPU for it.
@@stefo214 Not exactly. PhysX was an on/off setting. If you didnt have a PhysX card youd have shit performance so you didnt turn it on, simple as that really..
@@pelvist so the game would recognize that you don't have the hardware for physx if you had it on in your settings and use the cpu for it instead then... aren't we just back to what the OP was saying?
@@Rill-2b Ashwinn is right. but I think you should get a better sound hardware. this is the only thing that breaks illusion. and keep that Half-Life color palette, it looks amazing!
@@bpavuk appreciate the feedback, def working on the audio side of things! Glad you like the color pallet!! Is it me that’s hard to hear, is the music too loud? What is the main thing that jumped out at you
@@Rill-2b you sound too quiet. a good microphone pin would benefit greatly. also, your current microphone makes your voice not only quieter, but more muffled.
I think one problem with physX is that it was actually not able to be significant part of the gameplay, as the game had to work even without it for radeon graphics users, thus was compromised as just as graphical effect, not significant part of the gameplay. Edit:Typo twice
Yes, making it locked to a single vendor and a very slow cpu fallback version made it not worth to bother with CPU and GPU back and forth to make it meaningful for anything outside of visual effects.
Developer simply have no interest with gpu accelerated physx. AMD try to promote bullet as an open source alternative to physx (accelerated by opencl) and back then AMD said game using bullet will appear within a year. About 1.5 year later there is still no a single game use bullet. Some tech outlet ask AMD about what happen to bullet in games and AMD respond saying that game developer are not interested with this feature in their game. In general developer don't like excessive physics simulation in their game. Even when multi threaded (CPU) support being common in physics engine developer most often only dedicate small portion of cpu processing towards physics calculation. For example in project cars Slightly mad studios said they only dedicate 1 cpu core at 600mhz for physics processing in their game.
Its also a nightmare to implement stuff like this into gameplay. Only game i can think with hypercomplex physics is star wars the force unleashed. If it wasnt for suffering of devs to implement multiple physics systems and forcing them to work together game wouldnt hit as hard.
Also, Nvidia had really messy naming with this. PhysX isn't just for GPU accelerated physics (like what games listed here used it for). It is also a fully-fledged physics engine that many games have used and are using. It was for example what powered Unreal Engine's physics until Unreal Engine 5 where they switched to their own engine (which unironically performs around 3x slower than PhysX). Physics engine PhysX works really well, comparable to Havok and works cross platform (amd, android whatnot). Honestly Nvidia should have used different names for physics engine vs gpu physics versions to avoid confusion. As in for GPU physics, thanks to compute shaders it isn't had to make custom implementations nowadays, so no one relies on vendor locked API in GPU physics I think this video suffers from this confusion. PhysX in gaming is not dead. It is very actively used even nowadays as it is one of the fastest and most stable physics engines. It still powers Unity's physics which by itself accounts for like more than half of the mobile releases. There are even people that integrated PhysX back to UE5.
I wonder how well it compares to Jolt Physics! As it is much easier for indie devs to get their hands on, and is actually fully FOSS (which I found out when I went to look for comparisons, I just found debates about PhysX's open-source status, and not actual comparisons :P).
What were the last games that used this engine for fluid or smoke simulations? I feel like Killing floor 2 was the last game where physX did anything meaningful.
Do you have any information on that claim about the UE5 physics engine? I'm curious about UE5's performance and its general negative perception and I'd be interested to see any information you might have about how UE5 works on a technical level.
@@sleeplessindefatigable6385on youtube you can just type in physx vs chaos. Some UE developer make comparison between the physics engine. But in general nvidia PhysX is much more stable. I once saw a comparison where using physx able to run the simulation at 120fps but when using Chaos (UE5 and latest UE4 physic engine) the FSP drop down to 70FPS.
PhysX is PhysX. It is the name of the engine. It has CPU and gpu accelerated part. Most often it is consumer that confuse PhysX as GPU accelerated physics only when in fact PhysX as a whole is much bigger than that. Even havok have some sort of gpu accelerated part (demoed during PS4 reveal).
Physx never disappeared. It's still here. It's installed automatically. It's not a hassle to make it work anymore. Same will happen to Ray Tracing in the future
It is found in Remedy's northlight engine as well. That explains why all 3 games using it have so many dynamic props and why control has such excellent destruction physics.
@@SPrince-t9u it's CPU physX on UE5 & runs like crap compared to GPU physX since ue5 need massive amounts of cpu to push the GPU. All they did by integrating CPU physX is make the game engine run like crap. My 2080 ti is like 4 to 5 times faster than any cpu out there currently even still beats Thread ripper doing CPU physX.
@@kevinerbs2778 Doesnt matter, my point is Physx technology has been adopted by most modern engines in a way or another, that's the whole point of my comment.
One cool detail is that even after the Nvidia acquisition you could still have a card dedicated to PhysX. If you had 2 Nvidia GPUs, one could be used specifically as a PhysX processor.
I LOVE this more than I’d like to admit. “We have it for the most part working on 1… buuuuuut with 2 you can get another 12% output” ngl I’m the target market for this.
You could also do this with having an AMD card and using some old Nvidia card for Physx but Nvidia tried to block this with driver updates. But originally it did work, AMD rendering the actual game and the Nvidia card doing the fancy GPU Physx calculations.
Half-life 2 did eye movement and physics correct and made a huge leap in realism. Today developers still don't get animation, eye movement, reflection and physics is much more impressive than some 4k textures and 100gb game size. Physx really had something going, that's unfortunately not used in games today
[These days] When playing older games, if you have anything faster than a GTX 1050, you can enable PhysX with no perf cost.. It's still impressive to me, like the paper in Arkham Asylum.
First thing I thought of when I saw the video, that first hall in the 2nd or 3rd level with the glass hallway literally murdered my pc Everytime with phsyx enabled 😂 very good game though
PhysX was basically early to mid 2000's raytracing tech marketing of today. I remember how after it was bought by NVidia they incorporated it with their GAMEWORKS tech which was highly demanding on entry level gpus and most people preferred keeping them turned off for better fps anyway like me :D
GPU market was not as monopolized as it is today. Proprietary nvidia ray tracing and deep-learning image processing are not going anywhere anytime soon, unfortunately.
@@r.d.6290ray tracing is not proprietary. With PhysX you need CUDA. With RT the needed stuff already being integrated into 3D API like DX12 and Vulkan. It did not need proprietary API to work like PhysX. right now RT simply faster on nvidia hardware because nvidia dedicate more stuff related to RT in their hardware. AMD in the past did not want to dedicated many die space for RT functionality in their gpu so their RT performance are much weaker in general. They hope to change that with RDNA 4.
I remember when I came across that multiplayer PhysX game. It was pretty dang mindblowing seeing cloth simulations and a bunch of physics objects react to explosions and what not hah
PhysX was amazing. I wish it was still around. I still remember playing Borderlands 2 with my GTX 660 and loved how the water ran and how cool the black hole grenade was. I have yet to find a game that has cool physics like that.
I'm a contributor of NVIDIA Isaac Lab and I wonder why this video pops up in my recommendation lol. One core advantage of PhysX right now is that, it is inherently vectorized thanks to CUDA, meaning it is extremely good in handling massive parallel computations. This is exactly what we need when training robots on cloud architectures. On the gamer's side, PhysX can be used with AMD cards (because it has a CPU mode), so it's not exclusive to NV GPUs, just the CUDA accelerated mode is.
Yeah, I mean I think the key thing is this. If the GPU part is locked to Nvidia cards well then you need to fall back to CPU as the lowest dominator.. and for games that invalidates it a lot.
@@TheJoeFaulkner Sorry that was not what I asked you. I asked you about how the CPU toll that software based PhysX creates compared to other software based Physic solutions / SDKs? Hope its a bit clearer I get my questions could seem vague sorry.
Right‽ I only ever played it on console so i had no idea this game could do that. I picked up the collection on PC during a sale so I might install them and give them a replay.
@@AhuizotlXiuh you need good hardware to run physx on high in bl2, and i would suggest to use dxvk when playing bl2 since without it it runs much worse and can crash sometimes when you use physx.
It’s was the coolest thing when the PhysX PPU came out. I was convinced it was the most meaningful next gen upgrade we could see before ray tracing tech. I didn’t get one only because I was a broke high school student when it came out.
Good job man, a short and sweet video with some really good editing i was shocked when i saw the view and sub count after the video you definitely have the skill!
What a really well produced video you made my friend, can't wait to see what else you got, you earned my subscription. Also its funny to think about how PhysX got put into games as late as Fallout 4, i could never get it to work with even my RTX 2080 super.
Arkham City has a whole speedrun challenge using PhysX called Carpet%, where, in a very specific place in a ruined and flooded area of Wonder City, there's a room with a wall broken open and a bunch of carpets using PhysX that you can completely displace by jumping around, and the whole goal is to get those carpets out of the hole in the wall as quickly as possible. It's very fun.
I remember messing around with the Physx in Borderands 2 quite a bit back in the day. On just my GTX 970 with physx on max, I'd get like 40 fps in the Bloodshot Stronghold. I also had a GTX 750 TI laying around I decided to put in along side the GTX 970 for shits and giggles, since you can change which card handles Physx in Nvidia Control Panel. With the 750 TI processing Physx separate from the 970, I got a whopping 45 fps.
You don't even need NVIDIA anymore. Physx now runs better on modern cpus. You don't take a fps hit at all, it just adds some load to the cpu. I tested this on Metro Exodus while maxing everything else out including RT on my 7800x3d and 7900xt system.
Thats not true, physx was not slow and it is still the most popular physics engine used in games to this day, most, 95%+ games in unity and ue4 are using physx, not the latest version, but it is physx as it it the default build into those engines And many custom engines use it, Remedy Control is using old physx version and is prised for physics interactions As fun fack, MS is now the owner of Havok
PhysX in Batman Arkham Asylum is actually amazing. It makes the game look so much better in some areas with the interactive smoke and debris flying around.
PhysX actually started as a software library that came out of European research. Ageia bought it to use as the API for its "PPU" chip, which was pretty impressive for its time from an architectural point of view, but overall was severely hobbled in performance by being stuck on the PCI bus with its limited bandwidth. It came on the scene at the time that GPUs were advancing at an absolutely phenomenal rate in both performance and capability and so didn't stand a chance as GPUs quickly gained the ability to the same thing, hence why nVidia picked it up.
Only real legends had a Phys X accelerator card in their PC this indeed improved performance in games like Metro 2033 etc. But only if the accelerator was powerfull enough. For instance pairing a GTX 1070 with a GTX 970 accelerator (should) work in most cases
Neither are gimmicks lol, physx gave life like physics, ray tracing gives life like lighting, they're just the next step in innovation, obviously you're gonna need new tech as games evolve. I guess every new games are "hardware locked" too since you cant run them on GPU's from 2004
We are in very unfortunate times where the premier feature released as card prices soared so it’s just a matter of time imo then we’ll move on to the next thing idk
@@TGP482 I have a GPU from 2020. Its not allowed to run physx on the gpu because its quite literally a hardware locked feature. Something your peanut brain can't comprehend. I love that you take offense to that term as if its up to your delusional feelings. Enjoy waiting till your 40's to see path tracing become mainstream though. Or fork up 2500$ for a 4090 so you too can play cyberpunk path tracing at framerates that would bore the 2004 me.
@@opticalsalt2306 Idk what the next thing will be however ray tracing will not become mainstream till the consoles are capable of running it. Physx got its open source alternatives that are preferred for obvious reasons (no walled garden approach, nobody wants to deal with Nvidia's aspirations to become Apple unless they're paid to do so).
@@TGP482 physx libraries, optimised ones were patented and are now not used, but lock out competitors. they are trying to do the same with raytracing but software solutions are WAY faster cause programmers put work in, rtx is junk
My first automatic sub, I mean quality gaming hystory stuff, technologies, games that was a turn point. OT physx was a nieche, but when I played Batman in it's full glory (esp arkam knight) that shit in my mind looks better then todays AAA games. Automatic sub is for Group B madness. Didn't expect that one when checked your vids. =)
I remember you could put your old nvidia gpu in the 2nd slot to dedicate to physx. It worked ok until gpus became strong enough to do both. There was a workaround that let you use ati/amd as the main gpu and nvidia for physx.
As an ATI/AMD GPU user back then i used Physx with the AMD GPU, the thing needed to do was to get the nvidia card that supported physx, install it as primary card then drivers with physx libraries then install AMD GPU as secondary, there was a special driver version of Nvidia which worked, special version because when Nvidia found out that AMD users were able to utilize Physx they fixed it in later driver versions which broke the use of it on Non-nvidia GPU.
Most underrated, hardest to use but currently the powerful physics engine for the public is the Bulletengine. There's a reason Rockstar exclusively uses that library and even Rocket League, competitive physics based game runs on it's calculations.
Great video sir!!! I really thing we need a return of something like this. AAA games should be pushing the envelope in new ways, not just graphics, because realistic next level graphics dont make interesting experiences by themselves, they just make experiences that *look* convincing. Even Crysis, one example people might have of a game that is merely a graphical showcase, still tried to push some very advanced physics as well. We need next level physics, games like teardown for example are a great step in this direction. Gabe Newell recently said a similar thing in the hl2 20 anniversary documentary, how the industry is lacking in new experiences... Judging from the rumors and leaks floating around, about destruction physics and temperature simuations, I'm hoping valve is trying to give us a taste of something like this with Half-Life 3 ;D
Exactly. I wish we had realistic highly-detailed collision maps and animations instead of 100500 millions of polygons. Computer graphics took a wrong turn after 2000s. We have photorealistic faces, landscapes, and interiors, but with hair clipping through clothes, feet not resting properly on surfaces, and metal armor stretching as if it were t-shirts.
It is hard for PPU to take off when gaming world back then was dominated by havok. Plus HavokFX was about to make PhysX and their PPU even less practical.
This is so weird. I attempted to play Mirror's Edge on my RX 6750 XT yesterday and couldn't even get past the first chapter because of the PhysX effects. Literally unplayable due to having less than 10 FPS! Then this video pops up in my recommended a day later, lol. Anyway, good video man, very informative.
@@lol-ih4wy Yeah, it sucks because even turning PhysX off in the menu does nothing. Deleting the PhysX files in the game folder means the game won't start either. Oh well. If my next GPU is from Nvidia I'll maybe give it another shot whenever that is, lol.
@@VereorNox-v9v you can update the physx folder to a newer version and that may solve performance isssues. there where reports on how to replace the files back in 2013
Subscribed, good luck with your channel, great video
Месяц назад+5
Call me old fashioned, but I love the concept of modular PC. Where the motherboard was the mother of smaller boards. Where the sound card was actually a card. Where even your floppy and hard drives needed a control board. So a dedicated, specialized physics accelerator board (besides a 2D, a 3D and a sound card) totally makes sense in my I eyes and I miss that hardware option.
I will call you manhattan, get it? Old fashioned.. manhattan. Anyways I totally agree I love hardware based modular builds. Also helps with troubleshooting quite a bit!
As others have said, PhysX runs on CPU as well. Nvidia not only ported Ageia PhysX to CUDA platform, they also introduced a CPU variant for PC and consoles. Havok did not dominate the market, PhysX was used just as much, if not more.
I really wish physics will be a big part of gaming one day. Dynamic real-world simulation and animation of liquids, smoke, cloth, and hair in games would be impressive and noticeable. I keep going back to those old Nvidia tech demos from the 2000's watching those stunning physics simulation and imagining them in games. But alas, that day never came. Not at the levels of those demos. Other than that, I would like to see AI generation in games where NPCs won't seem as robotic in their responses and actions as they traditionally are. Maybe having intelligent tutorials where games won't ask you to 'look up. Good. Now look down' as if most of us are playing games for the very first time.
Back in the day PhysX felt like a huge curiosity for me and a Holy Grail, so to speak. Some games I played had PhysX support and only some effects or even entire levels were accessible if you had a PhysX card. However, years later once I had the hardware to unlock all this stuff I was rather disappointed. I was like "is that it?", as after seeing what Half-Life 2 was doing with physics baked in with no limitations or need for separate hardware/capability, it felt like I was cheated. The games that implemented PhysX often did so at the bare minimum and often left me wondering why they even bothered... or on the other hand the physics effects were so over the top that it actually detracted from the realism.
As you already mentioned, PhysX is a physics middleware for real time physics simulation, which had an option to also run simulations on the GPU. So (almost) all Unreal Engine 3 and 4 games, Unity and many others actually use nvidia physX to this day. In UE5 PhysX has been swapped to so far inferior Chaos and UNity offers a Unity Physics package for DOTS and Havok integration. Today, many unified GPU accelerated physics simulaton run in pretty much all modern games, mostly for gpu based particle effects. A pity that physics simulation didn't evolve much past the peak of times in the ps3/x360 era games (red faction guerilla, star wars force unleashed, fracture etc) cool vid!
thanks for the video, I remember many years ago as a kid I installed Mafia 2 which didn't run unless I install Physx software on my pc. took me hours to figure it out that I almost gave up lol
I still remember when i activated it for the first time in Warframe and Hawken and the turbulence effects where cool AF 🤯 It was a night and day of a difference. From dull and boring explotions and smoke effects, to a interactive and bouncy particle show 😍 Look at the Warframe and Hawken Physx trailer, they look so cool, that i wish more games used those effects 😭
The old PhysX effects were the fuckin bomb. I remember bein blown away by all the particle effects in Warframe, Borderlands and Planetside 2, really felt like the future of gaming.
I had a dedicated Physx Card next to my last AGP 8X RADEON HD3850 Pro on my AsRock mobo with a Core2Duo Quad Core CPU and an X-Fi Sound Blaster. Oh boy oh boy did I maxed out this generation hardware while PCIe was already in the early state of new standards. Makes me happy to think back of that time!
Good video with nice production value. Like it. There was Mage Multiplayer Demo/Game only running with Physics cards. It looked awesome throwing metalballs, fireballs, .... Sadly the game was dead without any cards sold.
the idea of dedicated physics cards is gold and i truly wish it was not abandoned. you can see today games coming out have terrible gameplay and completly unoptimized graphics and the industry has shifted wayyy too much focus into graphics card being the main thing- yea some games can look nice graphically and impressive but i just keep coming back to older games constantly because of either gameplay or physics being more fun. really, i would kill for a PPU - i'd pay 800$ for one and keep my cheaper rtx 2060 and i'd be happy. that to me is the perfect recipe for a game.
what's the actual difference between PhysX and compute shaders? What makes it only optimzed for physic simulations? because if the answer is just conccurency, compute shaders are also based around that edit: apparently PhysX is an all-in-one physics engine that runs on cuda cores, and not a separated chip on the graphics card that developpers can exploit to run any program they want on it
I feel it was a serious misstep to redesign it to be non-interactive. You can only go so far with making the environment react to stuff without feedback instead of actually making physics part of the gameplay by design.
It was due to that it is handling thing on the GPU, so its a mess to send all that data back to the CPU and then use that for feedback. Its a case driven solution
Thing is, as computers became more and more powerful, having the need for dedicated physx hardware (whether physx cards or nvidia cards) became less and less needed, as CPU simulations have reached a point that's as good if not even better than the physx of old.
Physics modelling was a real benefit to game graphics. People just take it for granted now that the player can destruct environments and push objects around. Before that, everything in the game world was bolted down unless it was individually animated.
I had a PhysX card. It was good hardware. Unfortunately, few games supported it. Cutting edge tech, though. The water simulation and soft cloth physics were ahead of their time. The weakness of PhysX on the PC was that it was just superficial graphical effects, for the most part. The underlying gameplay physics had to be calculated the old fashioned way, on CPU, for the most part. Havok's physics, on the other hand, could actually affect gameplay, because it was integrated with the gameplay directly. For PhysX, this resulted in a two-tier physics simulation, one physics for gameplay mechanics, another for graphical effects.
I was there when Nvidia aquired Ageia and future was promising! Oh my sweet combo as GTX 280 was my main graphics card and some old GeForce 7 card in other PCiE slot was set in nvidia control panel for PhysX work and YES it had noticing 8-15fps uplift in games with no fps drops in intense physx scenes when only relying on your one main even hi-end GPU to do all the work. Mirrors edge was something WOW with physX! No game, even today is even close to those realistic standards. B2 also was such a fun, easy and realistic game because of PhysX.
Couple of additions:
PhysX is still used currently - Unity uses it as the physics engine and UE4 did as well. Majority of the video was focusing on GPU accelerated PhysX.
The feedback and info is overwhelming and super helpful, much appreciated! keep em coming!!!
next video Nvidia Hair-Works?!^^
Unity does use it, but it also has the Havok physics engine which is much better, but unfortunately is a paid only feature.
@@ericschulze1337 🤔 adding another one to the research pile!! Thanks
So true. Unity and Unreal Engine use PhysX, and it works on everything, including AMD and Intel Arc.
the ROG Aurora Light function (High on Life)
PhysX was never slow, I was using it since 9600 GT without issues. Tanking frame-rate was a result of constant changes in libraries versions which often resulted in game not recognizing that hardware physX is available and using CPU for it.
exactly..
@@stefo214 Not exactly. PhysX was an on/off setting. If you didnt have a PhysX card youd have shit performance so you didnt turn it on, simple as that really..
Yeah, it ran fine on an 8600GTS for me back in the day, which is considerably slower than a 9600GT.
i use it to play borderlands 2 with my rtx 2060, it gets kinda slow, so i turn it off
@@pelvist so the game would recognize that you don't have the hardware for physx if you had it on in your settings and use the cpu for it instead then... aren't we just back to what the OP was saying?
Only 52 subs?! I thought I was watching a channel with 100k+ subs, the quality is off the charts!
oh stop that, my ego is too large as is. (don't stop, keep going)
@@Rill-2b That's what she said.
@@Rill-2b Ashwinn is right. but I think you should get a better sound hardware. this is the only thing that breaks illusion. and keep that Half-Life color palette, it looks amazing!
@@bpavuk appreciate the feedback, def working on the audio side of things! Glad you like the color pallet!! Is it me that’s hard to hear, is the music too loud? What is the main thing that jumped out at you
@@Rill-2b you sound too quiet. a good microphone pin would benefit greatly. also, your current microphone makes your voice not only quieter, but more muffled.
I think one problem with physX is that it was actually not able to be significant part of the gameplay, as the game had to work even without it for radeon graphics users, thus was compromised as just as graphical effect, not significant part of the gameplay. Edit:Typo twice
Yes, making it locked to a single vendor and a very slow cpu fallback version made it not worth to bother with CPU and GPU back and forth to make it meaningful for anything outside of visual effects.
Developer simply have no interest with gpu accelerated physx. AMD try to promote bullet as an open source alternative to physx (accelerated by opencl) and back then AMD said game using bullet will appear within a year. About 1.5 year later there is still no a single game use bullet. Some tech outlet ask AMD about what happen to bullet in games and AMD respond saying that game developer are not interested with this feature in their game. In general developer don't like excessive physics simulation in their game. Even when multi threaded (CPU) support being common in physics engine developer most often only dedicate small portion of cpu processing towards physics calculation. For example in project cars Slightly mad studios said they only dedicate 1 cpu core at 600mhz for physics processing in their game.
Its also a nightmare to implement stuff like this into gameplay. Only game i can think with hypercomplex physics is star wars the force unleashed. If it wasnt for suffering of devs to implement multiple physics systems and forcing them to work together game wouldnt hit as hard.
Imagine using AMD GPU.
@@IAMNOTRANA i cant' imagine i've been using them for past 20 years with only single Nvidia romance for 7 years
Also, Nvidia had really messy naming with this. PhysX isn't just for GPU accelerated physics (like what games listed here used it for). It is also a fully-fledged physics engine that many games have used and are using. It was for example what powered Unreal Engine's physics until Unreal Engine 5 where they switched to their own engine (which unironically performs around 3x slower than PhysX). Physics engine PhysX works really well, comparable to Havok and works cross platform (amd, android whatnot).
Honestly Nvidia should have used different names for physics engine vs gpu physics versions to avoid confusion. As in for GPU physics, thanks to compute shaders it isn't had to make custom implementations nowadays, so no one relies on vendor locked API in GPU physics
I think this video suffers from this confusion. PhysX in gaming is not dead. It is very actively used even nowadays as it is one of the fastest and most stable physics engines. It still powers Unity's physics which by itself accounts for like more than half of the mobile releases. There are even people that integrated PhysX back to UE5.
I wonder how well it compares to Jolt Physics!
As it is much easier for indie devs to get their hands on, and is actually fully FOSS (which I found out when I went to look for comparisons, I just found debates about PhysX's open-source status, and not actual comparisons :P).
What were the last games that used this engine for fluid or smoke simulations? I feel like Killing floor 2 was the last game where physX did anything meaningful.
Do you have any information on that claim about the UE5 physics engine? I'm curious about UE5's performance and its general negative perception and I'd be interested to see any information you might have about how UE5 works on a technical level.
@@sleeplessindefatigable6385on youtube you can just type in physx vs chaos. Some UE developer make comparison between the physics engine. But in general nvidia PhysX is much more stable. I once saw a comparison where using physx able to run the simulation at 120fps but when using Chaos (UE5 and latest UE4 physic engine) the FSP drop down to 70FPS.
PhysX is PhysX. It is the name of the engine. It has CPU and gpu accelerated part. Most often it is consumer that confuse PhysX as GPU accelerated physics only when in fact PhysX as a whole is much bigger than that. Even havok have some sort of gpu accelerated part (demoed during PS4 reveal).
Physx never disappeared. It's still here. It's installed automatically. It's not a hassle to make it work anymore. Same will happen to Ray Tracing in the future
Indeed, its integrated by default in UE5, and the quality of the simulation depends on the developers.
It is found in Remedy's northlight engine as well. That explains why all 3 games using it have so many dynamic props and why control has such excellent destruction physics.
@@SPrince-t9u it's CPU physX on UE5 & runs like crap compared to GPU physX since ue5 need massive amounts of cpu to push the GPU. All they did by integrating CPU physX is make the game engine run like crap. My 2080 ti is like 4 to 5 times faster than any cpu out there currently even still beats Thread ripper doing CPU physX.
@@kevinerbs2778 Doesnt matter, my point is Physx technology has been adopted by most modern engines in a way or another, that's the whole point of my comment.
@@SPrince-t9u the game engine is a p.o.s because of it. That was my point it's Terrible P.O.S engine.
One cool detail is that even after the Nvidia acquisition you could still have a card dedicated to PhysX. If you had 2 Nvidia GPUs, one could be used specifically as a PhysX processor.
I LOVE this more than I’d like to admit. “We have it for the most part working on 1… buuuuuut with 2 you can get another 12% output” ngl I’m the target market for this.
You could also do this with having an AMD card and using some old Nvidia card for Physx but Nvidia tried to block this with driver updates. But originally it did work, AMD rendering the actual game and the Nvidia card doing the fancy GPU Physx calculations.
@@MaaZeusit still works, i do it with a 6800xt and a 1050
except top gaming CPUs probably have a pair of free cores that'll do it better...
@@planestrangerbut then you're not getting the proprietary PhysX effects that were restricted to Nvidia GPUs / PhysX cards back in the day, do you?
Half-life 2 did eye movement and physics correct and made a huge leap in realism. Today developers still don't get animation, eye movement, reflection and physics is much more impressive than some 4k textures and 100gb game size. Physx really had something going, that's unfortunately not used in games today
Throwing toilets and radiators at each other is fun. Been doing it for 20 years in HL2DM
[These days] When playing older games, if you have anything faster than a GTX 1050, you can enable PhysX with no perf cost.. It's still impressive to me, like the paper in Arkham Asylum.
Not in Arkham Knight. Dear God the PhysX in that game is still heavy.
Cough cough Nascar 15, you need to disable PhysX to have a playable experience
@@IMX383same for Assassin's Creed IV Black Flag. It's a stuttery mess with PhysX enabled, even on a 4080.
Which is kinda hilarious.
Batman was the first game that came to mind😂
@@meisterwu8922 played it this year on gtx 1080 without any fps loss
I’d forgotten about Mirrors Edge. Younger me loved it. Fantastic video, keep up the good work.
much appreciated! Glad was able to jog your memory!
First thing I thought of when I saw the video, that first hall in the 2nd or 3rd level with the glass hallway literally murdered my pc Everytime with phsyx enabled 😂 very good game though
PhysX was basically early to mid 2000's raytracing tech marketing of today. I remember how after it was bought by NVidia they incorporated it with their GAMEWORKS tech which was highly demanding on entry level gpus and most people preferred keeping them turned off for better fps anyway like me :D
*NVIDIA
Unlike PhysX, raytracing is more or less here to stay considering UE5 exists.
GPU market was not as monopolized as it is today. Proprietary nvidia ray tracing and deep-learning image processing are not going anywhere anytime soon, unfortunately.
@@r.d.6290ray tracing is not proprietary. With PhysX you need CUDA. With RT the needed stuff already being integrated into 3D API like DX12 and Vulkan. It did not need proprietary API to work like PhysX. right now RT simply faster on nvidia hardware because nvidia dedicate more stuff related to RT in their hardware. AMD in the past did not want to dedicated many die space for RT functionality in their gpu so their RT performance are much weaker in general. They hope to change that with RDNA 4.
while xbox360 ran more smooth with havok...now everyone have a reason buy high end gpu when xbox360 came out.....
I remember when I came across that multiplayer PhysX game. It was pretty dang mindblowing seeing cloth simulations and a bunch of physics objects react to explosions and what not hah
What game
@@MyEarsHurts Cellfactor Revolution
[edit] ruclips.net/video/PfvWzVA1d7o/видео.html is a good example of the stuff they were showing off back then :)
@@MyEarsHurts wild guess, planetside 2. the one that doesn't have them anymore.
@@daninogilin planetside 2 those that cannot use gpu physx end up having advantage lol
Warmonger
PhysX was amazing. I wish it was still around. I still remember playing Borderlands 2 with my GTX 660 and loved how the water ran and how cool the black hole grenade was. I have yet to find a game that has cool physics like that.
0:49 Valve was really ahead of their time with the Source engine. Half Life 2 was great with physical reactivity.
I'm a contributor of NVIDIA Isaac Lab and I wonder why this video pops up in my recommendation lol. One core advantage of PhysX right now is that, it is inherently vectorized thanks to CUDA, meaning it is extremely good in handling massive parallel computations. This is exactly what we need when training robots on cloud architectures. On the gamer's side, PhysX can be used with AMD cards (because it has a CPU mode), so it's not exclusive to NV GPUs, just the CUDA accelerated mode is.
Yeah, I mean I think the key thing is this. If the GPU part is locked to Nvidia cards well then you need to fall back to CPU as the lowest dominator.. and for games that invalidates it a lot.
true but it has such a heavy toll when used on CPU
@ so how is this toll compared to other physic solution?
@@litjellyfish because if there is hardware responsible for the calculation it stops taking up CPU cycles
@@TheJoeFaulkner Sorry that was not what I asked you. I asked you about how the CPU toll that software based PhysX creates compared to other software based Physic solutions / SDKs? Hope its a bit clearer I get my questions could seem vague sorry.
that grenade in bl2 was cool asf
Right‽ I only ever played it on console so i had no idea this game could do that. I picked up the collection on PC during a sale so I might install them and give them a replay.
@@AhuizotlXiuh you need good hardware to run physx on high in bl2, and i would suggest to use dxvk when playing bl2 since without it it runs much worse and can crash sometimes when you use physx.
Randomly stumbled upon this video, gotta say the video/production quality is amazing for smaller channel, great work.
Subbed. Loved the video. Wishing you the best!
I miss physX in my games..
No, you don’t.
@@igormarcos687 Yes, I do.. Assassins Creed IV, Borderlands and my favorire Batman's Arkham series.
@@igormarcos687whats your problem?
Same, I loved it in Killing Floor 2 and Planetside 2. Was so disappointed when they removed it.
So do i, friend...
in borderlands 2 enabling physx made cloth tearable and non-collidable which made some niche platforming impossible
Good
@@SoulbentAnime fantastic
only 842 subs? i thought you were a bigger channel. you gained my sub bro. your explanation was simple yet detailed and i understood it all
It’s was the coolest thing when the PhysX PPU came out. I was convinced it was the most meaningful next gen upgrade we could see before ray tracing tech. I didn’t get one only because I was a broke high school student when it came out.
dude i love the style of your videos, the camera quality and the editings are so nostalgic... it's like watching 2015 all over again. keep it up man!
Eyyy! Appreciate you friend 🤝
Good job man, a short and sweet video with some really good editing i was shocked when i saw the view and sub count after the video you definitely have the skill!
Oh man this is why I do it! Appreciate you!
This is the kind of content I am looking for! Subscribed! Great work!
great video, enjoyed the trip down memory lane, subbed!
The production quality of this video was amazing!!!! I swear i thought this was a channel with at least 20k subs. Wow
What a really well produced video you made my friend, can't wait to see what else you got, you earned my subscription.
Also its funny to think about how PhysX got put into games as late as Fallout 4, i could never get it to work with even my RTX 2080 super.
Arkham City has a whole speedrun challenge using PhysX called Carpet%, where, in a very specific place in a ruined and flooded area of Wonder City, there's a room with a wall broken open and a bunch of carpets using PhysX that you can completely displace by jumping around, and the whole goal is to get those carpets out of the hole in the wall as quickly as possible. It's very fun.
That’s amazing! I gotta look into that, sounds very very fun!
I remember messing around with the Physx in Borderands 2 quite a bit back in the day. On just my GTX 970 with physx on max, I'd get like 40 fps in the Bloodshot Stronghold.
I also had a GTX 750 TI laying around I decided to put in along side the GTX 970 for shits and giggles, since you can change which card handles Physx in Nvidia Control Panel.
With the 750 TI processing Physx separate from the 970, I got a whopping 45 fps.
You don't even need NVIDIA anymore. Physx now runs better on modern cpus. You don't take a fps hit at all, it just adds some load to the cpu. I tested this on Metro Exodus while maxing everything else out including RT on my 7800x3d and 7900xt system.
Thats not true, physx was not slow and it is still the most popular physics engine used in games to this day, most, 95%+ games in unity and ue4 are using physx, not the latest version, but it is physx as it it the default build into those engines
And many custom engines use it, Remedy Control is using old physx version and is prised for physics interactions
As fun fack, MS is now the owner of Havok
PhysX particle effects looked absolutely incredible. I wish developers still made particle effects like that.
PhysX in Batman Arkham Asylum is actually amazing. It makes the game look so much better in some areas with the interactive smoke and debris flying around.
Just subbed, besides audio this channel has impressive production quality
much appreciated, tried a new mic setup for the new video and mixed it differently hope its better!
I remember being so amused by the Ageia cloth demo lol
This video is incredibly well produced!! Good luck with ur future videos ^_^
@@ImGlassy that’s awfully nice thank you!!
PhysX actually started as a software library that came out of European research. Ageia bought it to use as the API for its "PPU" chip, which was pretty impressive for its time from an architectural point of view, but overall was severely hobbled in performance by being stuck on the PCI bus with its limited bandwidth. It came on the scene at the time that GPUs were advancing at an absolutely phenomenal rate in both performance and capability and so didn't stand a chance as GPUs quickly gained the ability to the same thing, hence why nVidia picked it up.
I actually really want a 300$ physics card
I had a PhysX card, I was so excited for the technology. Remember playing the demo for cellfactor for hours.
Only real legends had a Phys X accelerator card in their PC
this indeed improved performance in games like Metro 2033 etc.
But only if the accelerator was powerfull enough. For instance pairing a GTX 1070 with a GTX 970 accelerator (should) work in most cases
underrated. i subbed
Just subscribed. Very great explanation and montage. Thanks!
Thanks friend!!
Really nice video, i was wondering were the PhysX ended up but never search for it, and there it is, good job youtube's algorithm
Your videos are amazing man if you keep making ones as good as this you're goin places.
Just wanted to say love the videos and I appreciate the effort. Subscribed for the good work.
Nvidia moved onto the next hardware locked gimmick.
Neither are gimmicks lol, physx gave life like physics, ray tracing gives life like lighting, they're just the next step in innovation, obviously you're gonna need new tech as games evolve. I guess every new games are "hardware locked" too since you cant run them on GPU's from 2004
We are in very unfortunate times where the premier feature released as card prices soared so it’s just a matter of time imo then we’ll move on to the next thing idk
@@TGP482 I have a GPU from 2020. Its not allowed to run physx on the gpu because its quite literally a hardware locked feature. Something your peanut brain can't comprehend. I love that you take offense to that term as if its up to your delusional feelings.
Enjoy waiting till your 40's to see path tracing become mainstream though. Or fork up 2500$ for a 4090 so you too can play cyberpunk path tracing at framerates that would bore the 2004 me.
@@opticalsalt2306 Idk what the next thing will be however ray tracing will not become mainstream till the consoles are capable of running it.
Physx got its open source alternatives that are preferred for obvious reasons (no walled garden approach, nobody wants to deal with Nvidia's aspirations to become Apple unless they're paid to do so).
@@TGP482 physx libraries, optimised ones were patented and are now not used, but lock out competitors. they are trying to do the same with raytracing but software solutions are WAY faster cause programmers put work in, rtx is junk
Great stuff here Rill; here's to the future :)
Appreciate you!
Something about 2000s physics man is something else 😅
Great video too dude!!
My first automatic sub, I mean quality gaming hystory stuff, technologies, games that was a turn point. OT physx was a nieche, but when I played Batman in it's full glory (esp arkam knight) that shit in my mind looks better then todays AAA games. Automatic sub is for Group B madness. Didn't expect that one when checked your vids. =)
I remember you could put your old nvidia gpu in the 2nd slot to dedicate to physx. It worked ok until gpus became strong enough to do both. There was a workaround that let you use ati/amd as the main gpu and nvidia for physx.
As an ATI/AMD GPU user back then i used Physx with the AMD GPU, the thing needed to do was to get the nvidia card that supported physx, install it as primary card then drivers with physx libraries then install AMD GPU as secondary, there was a special driver version of Nvidia which worked, special version because when Nvidia found out that AMD users were able to utilize Physx they fixed it in later driver versions which broke the use of it on Non-nvidia GPU.
Most underrated, hardest to use but currently the powerful physics engine for the public is the Bulletengine. There's a reason Rockstar exclusively uses that library and even Rocket League, competitive physics based game runs on it's calculations.
wow 200 subs? good video, you gonna get far!
Great video sir!!! I really thing we need a return of something like this. AAA games should be pushing the envelope in new ways, not just graphics, because realistic next level graphics dont make interesting experiences by themselves, they just make experiences that *look* convincing. Even Crysis, one example people might have of a game that is merely a graphical showcase, still tried to push some very advanced physics as well. We need next level physics, games like teardown for example are a great step in this direction.
Gabe Newell recently said a similar thing in the hl2 20 anniversary documentary, how the industry is lacking in new experiences... Judging from the rumors and leaks floating around, about destruction physics and temperature simuations, I'm hoping valve is trying to give us a taste of something like this with Half-Life 3 ;D
Great video, Kind of fun to imagine an alternate world where the PPU did take off and we'd have realtime fluid simulations running in games by now.
Exactly. I wish we had realistic highly-detailed collision maps and animations instead of 100500 millions of polygons. Computer graphics took a wrong turn after 2000s. We have photorealistic faces, landscapes, and interiors, but with hair clipping through clothes, feet not resting properly on surfaces, and metal armor stretching as if it were t-shirts.
It is hard for PPU to take off when gaming world back then was dominated by havok. Plus HavokFX was about to make PhysX and their PPU even less practical.
Dude, this channel is brutally underrated
This is so weird. I attempted to play Mirror's Edge on my RX 6750 XT yesterday and couldn't even get past the first chapter because of the PhysX effects. Literally unplayable due to having less than 10 FPS! Then this video pops up in my recommended a day later, lol.
Anyway, good video man, very informative.
Yeah same for me, i could not play past an orange office level because the glass breaking would slow my game to 5 fps
@@lol-ih4wy Yeah, it sucks because even turning PhysX off in the menu does nothing. Deleting the PhysX files in the game folder means the game won't start either. Oh well. If my next GPU is from Nvidia I'll maybe give it another shot whenever that is, lol.
little do you know, i live inside of your hard drive, like to call it - 6th sense! Thank you for the support my friend!
@@VereorNox-v9v i think its running on your cpu if you dont have physx card
@@VereorNox-v9v you can update the physx folder to a newer version and that may solve performance isssues. there where reports on how to replace the files back in 2013
Subscribed, good luck with your channel, great video
Call me old fashioned, but I love the concept of modular PC. Where the motherboard was the mother of smaller boards. Where the sound card was actually a card. Where even your floppy and hard drives needed a control board. So a dedicated, specialized physics accelerator board (besides a 2D, a 3D and a sound card) totally makes sense in my I eyes and I miss that hardware option.
I will call you manhattan, get it? Old fashioned.. manhattan. Anyways I totally agree I love hardware based modular builds. Also helps with troubleshooting quite a bit!
Congratulations on growing quickly!
Much appreciated!! 🙏
@Rill-2b you're welcome! ☺️
this video was great dude, keep it up just sub
I've wondered about PhysX for years!
They exist in many games even today.
I haven't tested it. But I think my old and beloved 9800 GT still works. I bought it 'cause of PhysX tecnology.
As others have said, PhysX runs on CPU as well. Nvidia not only ported Ageia PhysX to CUDA platform, they also introduced a CPU variant for PC and consoles. Havok did not dominate the market, PhysX was used just as much, if not more.
I really wish physics will be a big part of gaming one day. Dynamic real-world simulation and animation of liquids, smoke, cloth, and hair in games would be impressive and noticeable. I keep going back to those old Nvidia tech demos from the 2000's watching those stunning physics simulation and imagining them in games. But alas, that day never came. Not at the levels of those demos.
Other than that, I would like to see AI generation in games where NPCs won't seem as robotic in their responses and actions as they traditionally are. Maybe having intelligent tutorials where games won't ask you to 'look up. Good. Now look down' as if most of us are playing games for the very first time.
Back in the day PhysX felt like a huge curiosity for me and a Holy Grail, so to speak. Some games I played had PhysX support and only some effects or even entire levels were accessible if you had a PhysX card. However, years later once I had the hardware to unlock all this stuff I was rather disappointed. I was like "is that it?", as after seeing what Half-Life 2 was doing with physics baked in with no limitations or need for separate hardware/capability, it felt like I was cheated. The games that implemented PhysX often did so at the bare minimum and often left me wondering why they even bothered... or on the other hand the physics effects were so over the top that it actually detracted from the realism.
As you already mentioned, PhysX is a physics middleware for real time physics simulation, which had an option to also run simulations on the GPU. So (almost) all Unreal Engine 3 and 4 games, Unity and many others actually use nvidia physX to this day. In UE5 PhysX has been swapped to so far inferior Chaos and UNity offers a Unity Physics package for DOTS and Havok integration. Today, many unified GPU accelerated physics simulaton run in pretty much all modern games, mostly for gpu based particle effects. A pity that physics simulation didn't evolve much past the peak of times in the ps3/x360 era games (red faction guerilla, star wars force unleashed, fracture etc) cool vid!
I remember this. A dedicated Physx card to show more particles in G.R.A.W. and better textures in Stalker.
thanks for the video, I remember many years ago as a kid I installed Mafia 2 which didn't run unless I install Physx software on my pc. took me hours to figure it out that I almost gave up lol
Bro hit the algorithm jackpot
Seriously I thought you'd have at least 100k subs
Trust just been trying to 🏄♂️
Great video man
I still remember when i activated it for the first time in Warframe and Hawken and the turbulence effects where cool AF 🤯 It was a night and day of a difference. From dull and boring explotions and smoke effects, to a interactive and bouncy particle show 😍 Look at the Warframe and Hawken Physx trailer, they look so cool, that i wish more games used those effects 😭
Amazing video! New suscriber!
Such a nice channel. Great content.
Congrats, 1k
Eyyyy! Thank you friend!
Good content, Subbed
Just subscribed! You should have more subs mate.
5:34 "PhysX isn't making games look cool anymore" - That's simply not true. Unity is using PhysX as their physics engine.
you are correct, adding a pinned comment to correct the inaccuracy thank you!
The old PhysX effects were the fuckin bomb. I remember bein blown away by all the particle effects in Warframe, Borderlands and Planetside 2, really felt like the future of gaming.
What a great explanation dude. I thought you are big youtuber because of your videos heh 😏
@@Rezi59450 listen, just because I’m short doesn’t mean anything 😬 appreciate the comment 🍺
I had a dedicated Physx Card next to my last AGP 8X RADEON HD3850 Pro on my AsRock mobo with a Core2Duo Quad Core CPU and an X-Fi Sound Blaster. Oh boy oh boy did I maxed out this generation hardware while PCIe was already in the early state of new standards. Makes me happy to think back of that time!
Good video with nice production value. Like it.
There was Mage Multiplayer Demo/Game only running with Physics cards.
It looked awesome throwing metalballs, fireballs, ....
Sadly the game was dead without any cards sold.
Phyx is still in a lot of games like Metaphor Refantazio, Black Myth Wukong, Alan Wake 2
the idea of dedicated physics cards is gold and i truly wish it was not abandoned. you can see today games coming out have terrible gameplay and completly unoptimized graphics and the industry has shifted wayyy too much focus into graphics card being the main thing- yea some games can look nice graphically and impressive but i just keep coming back to older games constantly because of either gameplay or physics being more fun. really, i would kill for a PPU - i'd pay 800$ for one and keep my cheaper rtx 2060 and i'd be happy. that to me is the perfect recipe for a game.
This was a fantastic video.
Great video. Subscribed.
Thanks friend!! Much appreciated
I still find that when a game have unexpected good physics blows more my mind than lighting.
what's the actual difference between PhysX and compute shaders? What makes it only optimzed for physic simulations? because if the answer is just conccurency, compute shaders are also based around that
edit: apparently PhysX is an all-in-one physics engine that runs on cuda cores, and not a separated chip on the graphics card that developpers can exploit to run any program they want on it
I feel it was a serious misstep to redesign it to be non-interactive. You can only go so far with making the environment react to stuff without feedback instead of actually making physics part of the gameplay by design.
It was due to that it is handling thing on the GPU, so its a mess to send all that data back to the CPU and then use that for feedback. Its a case driven solution
Thing is, as computers became more and more powerful, having the need for dedicated physx hardware (whether physx cards or nvidia cards) became less and less needed, as CPU simulations have reached a point that's as good if not even better than the physx of old.
Was curious about this because of Planetside 2 on launch that used PhysX, great video and overview!
They still use PhysX. just not the gpu accelerated one.
I love sandbox games with really indepth physics and most of the games I play actually use physX quite a lot !
This videos are good, please consider not interrupting the flow with a pointless meme.
That’s great feedback thank you!
@@Rill-2b Just subbed, your channel it's onto something keep up the good work
Physics modelling was a real benefit to game graphics. People just take it for granted now that the player can destruct environments and push objects around. Before that, everything in the game world was bolted down unless it was individually animated.
lol both the intro and outro be like gotta go fast
@@haikaIhalim No time! borderlands was paused. 😅
Got yourself a sub
I seem some parallels with how nvidia marketed ray tracing...
Dis channel finna blow up
I had a PhysX card. It was good hardware. Unfortunately, few games supported it. Cutting edge tech, though. The water simulation and soft cloth physics were ahead of their time.
The weakness of PhysX on the PC was that it was just superficial graphical effects, for the most part. The underlying gameplay physics had to be calculated the old fashioned way, on CPU, for the most part. Havok's physics, on the other hand, could actually affect gameplay, because it was integrated with the gameplay directly. For PhysX, this resulted in a two-tier physics simulation, one physics for gameplay mechanics, another for graphical effects.
I was there when Nvidia aquired Ageia and future was promising! Oh my sweet combo as GTX 280 was my main graphics card and some old GeForce 7 card in other PCiE slot was set in nvidia control panel for PhysX work and YES it had noticing 8-15fps uplift in games with no fps drops in intense physx scenes when only relying on your one main even hi-end GPU to do all the work.
Mirrors edge was something WOW with physX! No game, even today is even close to those realistic standards. B2 also was such a fun, easy and realistic game because of PhysX.