The audio monster in your video card

[Alexvrb]

Originally posted by bionicfx.com

Announcing a technical revolution in PC programming, part deux. BionicFX announces Audio Video EXchange (AVEX), a technology which transforms real-time audio into video and performs effect processing on the GPU of your 3D card.

More at BionixFX, including a press release in PDF format.

 

[Curtis]

That sounds interesting - audio shaders. I saw a slashdot post about the general idea of using GPUs for something more useful, but this is about the first practical appplication I've heard of. Can't wait for the beta.

 

[Alexvrb]

He went ahead with an Nvidia-only solution because at the time ATI was having FP issues. But he'll work on an ATI compatible version when the time comes, I'm sure. Also he says that he isn't currently harnassing nearly as much power as he can, because he was working with AGP cards. Games don't currently need PCI Express, but since he's going to be shoving large amounts of data BOTH ways, it will seriously benefit this sort of thing.

 

[ExCyber]

Games don't currently need PCI Express, but since he's going to be shoving large amounts of data BOTH ways, it will seriously benefit this sort of thing.

My memory on this is quite fuzzy; what keeps a card from mastering the AGP bus and writing gobs of data to system RAM, and why would it be different on PCI Express?

 

[antime]

The AGP upstream bandwidth isn't too great.

 

[Alexvrb]

Originally posted by antime@Sep 5, 2004 @ 06:14 AM

The AGP upstream bandwidth isn't too great.

^ understatement above ^

 

[ExCyber]

I was under the impression that the "upstream" limit only applied when upstream transfers were being closely interleaved with downstream ones in a northbridge-initiated transfer; in a bus mastering mode the card should be the initiator, so it should be able to swap "upstream" and "downstream" at will, unless I've really got my protocols mixed up. Sadly Intel seems to have nuked all of their AGP resources in favor of PCI Express, so I'm having trouble finding out what the deal is for sure.

 

[antime]

No, AGP is inherently asymmetric. Even the fastest versions have only 133MB/s of upstream bandwidth (ie. normal PCI speeds). You might enjoy reading this paper on Stony Brook University's GPU cluster.

 

[ExCyber]

Ah, so AGP is even more of a dirty hack than I thought...

 

[Alexvrb]

Originally posted by ExCyber@Sep 5, 2004 @ 04:02 PM

Ah, so AGP is even more of a dirty hack than I thought...

Hey, it was a fabulous dirty hack for 3D gaming. But that's why PCI Express is actually replacing the PCI bus, whereas AGP was only used for graphics cards, hence the existence of 64-bit, 66Mhz PCI and PCI-X. What is really interesting now is the possibility of using TWO GPUs together via Nvidia's SLI for crunching audio or whatever other than video. They're outrageously expensive, but still a whole hell of a lot cheaper than dedicated units for processing the audio.

Of course, with current implementations you still might run into bandwidth limitations, because the only dual PCI Express 16X slot boards I've seen only deliver 8X to each slot. They're just bigger so you can plug a pair of graphics cards into them. But that should start changing with next-gen chipsets, and besides 8X PCI Express is still MUCH better than AGP upstream.

 

[ExCyber]

Hey, it was a fabulous dirty hack for 3D gaming.

I suppose it's not that bad; I expect nothing will top VLB in the "dirty hack" department. "ISA's bandwidth limits got you down? Fret not, just plug everything straight into the CPU! What could possibly go wrong?"

They're outrageously expensive, but still a whole hell of a lot cheaper than dedicated units for processing the audio.

Well, all they have to do is use stuff one or two generations behind the latest and it'll be dirt-cheap. You can get a Radeon 9550 for about $50 nowadays, and I have no doubt that in a couple years (if that) X800 or an equivalent will be about the same.

 

[Alexvrb]

Originally posted by ExCyber@Sep 5, 2004 @ 08:44 PM

Well, all they have to do is use stuff one or two generations behind the latest and it'll be dirt-cheap. You can get a Radeon 9550 for about $50 nowadays, and I have no doubt that in a couple years (if that) X800 or an equivalent will be about the same.

I'm just saying that a pair of the cutting edge GPUs is expensive from my perspective. It's still the cheap solution, and is so much much less than dedicated hardware. If you are THAT broke, then you probably don't pirated the software too.

 

[antime]

Originally posted by Alexvrb@Sep 5, 2004 @ 11:14 PM

But that's why PCI Express is actually replacing the PCI bus, whereas AGP was only used for graphics cards, hence the existence of 64-bit, 66Mhz PCI and PCI-X.

The only reason AGP exists in the first place is because PC manufacturers were too cheap to implement the 66MHz PCI bus.

 

[Des-ROW]

Avex!?

Some people will get sued for this.

 

[Alexvrb]

Originally posted by antime@Sep 6, 2004 @ 07:06 AM

The only reason AGP exists in the first place is because PC manufacturers were too cheap to implement the 66MHz PCI bus.

Maybe... but what I was getting at was that they weren't looking to replace PCI for non-graphics purposes, so that's why they have AGP instead. Now they see a need for and want to replace PCI entirely, and AGP with it. Besides, I'm not sure they could have ramped PCI up to the speeds they did with AGP so easily and affordably. For downstream at least.

AVEX? Does someone else hold that name copyright in the states? God I'm tired. I should do chemistry tomorrow before class...

Edit: I spelled tomorrow wrong, and I don't really remember writing the above. But it looks good.