Last I heard they where making a GPU specific hardware acceleration function but that was shelved when intel bought them as they have (had?) more of an incentive to make it multi-core CPU accelerated. I've never heard of them pushing OpenCL or anything like that.
Conversely nvidia has more incentive to push something more GPU oriented and I've read it's possible for them to make better more multi-core aware code for PhysX but haven't. They've even written code into their drivers to disable PhysX if an ATI card is present which a third party has made a patch to work around.
Much of this is a game of politics and what a certain vendor wants to push. Sometimes a solution may sound like a good one and makes sense for the consumer but isn't in the best interest of the companies owning the middleware in question. Which is why in a way it's not such a good idea for hardware vendors to own physics middleware.
It seems ATI is now trying to push a more open standard
however. But one may note they are like the odd man out as they don't own a physics middle-ware package of their own.
is a good read about the PhysX situation:
Anyway, this is treading much if the ground that has been covered elsewhere here when it comes to PhysX. But to me it seems the situation with Havok\Intel is the inverse of the situation with PhysX\Nvidia.
BTW, I wouldn't want to play LA Noire without some kind of proper physical controls be it keyboard and mouse or gamepad. Plus I'm too used to playing it on bigger screens.. 27 inches and above (I have my PC hooked up to a 32 inch HDTV and that's where I played it).
Alex Delarg, A Clockwork Orange said:
It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.
the Battle Cat said:
Slower and faster? I'm sorry to hear such good news?
Late '09 27 inch iMac, Core i5 Quad 2.6Ghz, 12GB RAM, ATI Radeon HD4850 512MB, 1TB Hard Drive