Siggraph 2013 is currently under way and Nvidia has showcased some impressive cloud techniques that it is currently working on.
Cloud Based Nvidia Physx please, since PS4 console don't have dedicated Nvidia hardware for Physx.
this opens up plenty of possibilities. My guess is that PhysX Cloud will happen in the near future.
I'm not sure how many applications there would be for a cloud computed physics. The only cloud-based technologies that have will have real-world applications will be the ones that aren't latency sensitive. Physics interactions are usually some of the most latency-sensitive computations in a game engine. They usually have their own sub-routines in the rendering pipeline that updates much more often than the screen actually displays. The LOWEST level of latency you're ever going to want between physics objects in a game is 1/60 seconds. In a lot of cases, engines update their physics at 1/120 seconds or even 1/300 seconds. Anything that has a direct impact on gameplay will always be done on the client's side.
There was already discussion for cloud lighting. It is still very limited to many things and does not look as impressive as one ran in local hardware. Regardless. Partial clouding is limited. the real future is at full clouding. Both Sony and MS are heading for this. In the mean time, we are stuck with local hardware. That means weaker x1 spec wont change
Eventually, when we're all connected with fiber, we'll be able to have in game visuals that are aided by the cloud to create nearly unlimited capabilities. However, for them to still have lag and artifacts even while only running at 30fps and using top of the line hardware on both ends, it's going to be a little while. There is a very noticeable lag when light sources move vs. when they illuminate the environment. There are also some odd artifacts around some light sources.
Notice how huge latencies barely affect the experience if at all. Now who said the cloud is smoke and mirrors? "We[Microsoft] have something over a million servers in our data center infrastructure. Google is bigger than we are. Amazon is a little bit smaller. You get Yahoo! and Facebook, and then everybody else is 100,000 units probably or less." http://www.neowin.net/news/...
The cloud tech for game design for physical games you play with a disc or installed on your hardware is very limited. It can have some tricks here and there, but to take full advantage of it. Bandwidth would have to be pretty high I would believe. Although it could be funny to see a game or two with all cloud lighting have the lights go out when a lag hiccup occurs. In the future when games are all streamable with everyone in the country having access to 50 Mbps or more for cheap then Cloud tech has lots of unlimited possibilities. Right now its just a showcase of what it can do at the moment. Which is basically play with the lights in the background while your looking around. I would like solid games with high fps before cloud lighting takes a place in any game design.
Onlive already proved you dont need the best hardware to play games at max settings. You can play the game elsewhere and your console is just a display device.
@nukeitall... did you notice the KEY difference with this cloud processing?... there is no 'internet' in this example...the 150ms latency is just in the short range network between these devices...the most powerful option requiring a hard line...and still has over double what is generally acceptable latency for real time rendering... and this response latency is completely different than ISP related latency...which has absolutely nothing to do with process latency...its just built in lag that ISP's for request queues... So...until MS...or Sony...or Nvidia...or anyone...is putting the 'cloud' in your house with a purpose built network for it...and you don't have to use Comcast or some other helplessly shatty residential ISP...this reflects nothing for consoles launching this year...
@DeadlyFire In the future? In europe you can get 100mbps anywhere. In my country it costs 16 bucks (converted from local currency) and it's available even in small towns. You guys need to keep up with the internet!
Havok would be better, otherwise you would have to build gpu clouds, way too expensive and energy consuming.
I believe Gaikai is already powered by top of the rage Nvidia GPU's, so this is well possible.
Navida grid on gaikai
There was an article explaining how it can't be used for physics... Apparently, anything that changes in real-time can't be cloud computed because of latency, but things like lighting which changes very slowly over time, can be done on the cloud. Interesting to see that it can be used for some sort of lighting stuff. Hope it works well.
Ever heard of speed of light? Lightning situation can chang very quickly in a game built with those kinds of events. Trees moving in the wind or due to explosions cast shadows. Someone punches a hole in a wall, turns on or off a flashlight, or someone outside sprays your dark hiding place with tiny holes. I do not really think Microsofts intents to put three GPUs and a Titan per blade... but who knows...
it 'can't' be dynamic, which this video doesn't really get in to...at least it can't be dynamic in the sense of reacting to player control...its all scripted, thats the only way it can work... but the significance is that many lighting engines are not a single layer...so the cloud can compute any scripted sequences...while the local hardware will handle anything related to 'real time'... on the flip side though, what many of us have been saying since all this cloud computed gaming stuff became 'cool'...is that those scripted lighting situations take very few cycles to create locally...its a very complex way to offload a marginally small amount of processing...the real time stuff is whats expensive resource wise...but there is no way to have any of that done 'upstairs'...yet...
@need4game HATERS GONNA HATE!
There are other technologies with similar (and even superior) feature sets to PhysX, such as OpenCL. PhysX is just a gimmick on Nvidia cards, they usually pay developers to use PhysX. That being said, I still use an Nvidia card in my PC.
I see the potential with cloud computing, but MS statment that it has 3 times the power of one Xbox One in the cloud for every Xbox One to be released is completly rubbish. Xbox One = 1230 GFLOPS Cloud power allocated per Xbox One = 1230 GFLOP x 3 = 3690 GFLOPS The price per FLOP in 2013 is about 0,2$/GFLOP http://en.wikipedia.org/wik... (Scroll until you see the table) 0,2$/GFLOP x 3690GFLOP = 738$ It means that MS are be spending more than 700$ per Xbox One on server infrustructure. How in hell can the Xbox division be profitable?
Definitely cool to see, although Nvidia makes it sound like this is more a thing of the near-future when they can bring down the cost of maintaining GPU-focused server farms. Currently, the CPU-focused clouds wouldn't be able to do what they're talking about.
Why can't they do this? Why isn't this what Microsoft is offering with the Azure cloud?
He just told you why.
You really need to stop believing Microsoft's Cloud hype. What they are claiming is not possible.
Azure is a "CPU-focused cloud", you need GPU's for graphic data (Like the video displayed above). With Ms cloud, I expect CPU related activity to be offloaded like A.I and matchmaking, but don't expect your games to have Avatar level graphics anytime soon with their "We are going to boost the graphics"...
Sure they can, everything can be done in software, just takes more resources, and thats the nice thing of a cloud, you can hot plugin more resources when needed.
@ people asking "why can't we do this now?" Nvidia in their own video (you know, the video linked at the top of the page) is showing off their upcoming GPU-focused cloud framework. The reason why it's special isn't because it is "yet another cloud". It's special because it is unlike other cloud computing services, which are typically CPU-focused frameworks. Their focus on GPU processing instead of relying on "virtual machines" which is what Azure will offer is why this particular cloud will be able to do what it does. In other words, the Nvidia cloud will assist with graphics because it is DESIGNED from the ground up to assist with graphics. Neither Microsoft nor Sony have announced anything that leads me to believe their cloud framework will assist in graphics. In fact, on the Sony side Cerny has specifically said that cloud will not be used for graphics, and I believe the same has been said on the Microsoft side by Respawn Entertainment.
Well, Nvidia partner with Gaikai.
Would LOVE to see something like this in the form of a Maya perspective viewport renderer. Never again would I deal with the malignant tumor that is VPR rendering >_>
Well played Nvidia... Well played. Can't blame em now can we?
"But cloud processing is just a gimmick" -every pea brained fanboy
No one said it was a gimmick, people didn't start bashing Microsoft until they said "the cloud can make it where there is the power of 30 Xbox Ones on one system in a few years(they said something like that, can't recall exactly what it was)".
Correct me if I'm wrong. I remember Mattrick saying that without the cloud an Xbox One is 4 times more powerful than a 360 and with it, its ten times as powerful. I might have got the numbers wrong but I know he said something similar. Motorola RAZR i