We're talking about hardware Physx and this is the list you come up with? You are trying to be deceptive seeing as you don't have much with real substance to back up what you say. But I guess if you want to use console games and non-hardware accelerated physics games, then that would mean that Havok has a much bigger foothold and a huge lead over Physx.
We're talking about hardware Physx and this is the list you come up with? You are trying to be deceptive seeing as you don't have much with real substance to back up what you say. But I guess if you want to use console games and non-hardware accelerated physics games, then that would mean that Havok has a much bigger foothold and a huge lead over Physx.
MegaWorks
Diamond Member
- Jan 26, 2004
- 3,819
- 1
- 0
Look OP PhysX is BS right now ok. I don't know if you remember but a couple of years ago
he had that same BS talk about SM 3.0 vs SM 2.0b and we all know how that turned out. :roll:
You buy a card for it's price and performance plus driver support which is essential. If you
guys are wondering why I have a 9800GT in my rig is because it's an extra card that I
was planning to use for folding but decided not to.
he had that same BS talk about SM 3.0 vs SM 2.0b and we all know how that turned out. :roll:
You buy a card for it's price and performance plus driver support which is essential. If you
guys are wondering why I have a 9800GT in my rig is because it's an extra card that I
was planning to use for folding but decided not to.
Modelworks
Lifer
- Feb 22, 2007
- 16,240
- 7
- 76
Not until 11.0
http://www.bit-tech.net/bits/2...ook-at-what-s-coming/5
All the features for 10.1 are finalized and it isn't there and will not be.
Little birdie told me, but if you ask me its name, I'll have to kill you if I tell you
Spike
Diamond Member
- Aug 27, 2001
- 6,770
- 1
- 81
While I often disagree with your posts simply because they reek of bias I cannot argue with this point. Yes, if all else was equal, and I mean everything else, you would be silly not to get the card with PhysX. It would be throwing away an extra feature that, regardless of whether or not it's really useful, is still there just in case.
Sadly this is not ever the case and there are always other considerations. Personally warranty is more likely to push me to purchase another nvidia card much more than PhysX if the prices where similar. If in, say, a year from now I'm upgrading again and all the hottest new games use PhysX then it would be a much larger consideration but as it is it's more of a "gimmick".
Face it, as PC gamers we are going to be more and more dependent on console ports for our AAA titles. This means that until consoles fully support hardware PhysX I would not expect to see it in many upcoming PC games, at least not those worth buying.
- Sep 13, 2008
- 8,124
- 3,061
- 146
Hmm, well, I don't know a whole lot about physx, but I do know this: It seems to help a lot with Everquest 2. Not a new game mind you, but still a game that benefits from it. My friend who also visits here, really is into it. He has an AMD 4000+ S939 with an HD 2900 pro 1GB. He said he might be interested in buying my 9800 GTX. at first this didnt make that much sense to me. "Isnt your card just fine? Wouldn't that be more of a sidegrade at best?" (Of course I am not sure how they compare exactly, but I would think the extra memory would give the 2900 an advantage at times.)
But here is the thing; EQ2 is incredibly CPU limited. It doesnt have very good multithread support either. So when he installed the game on my secondary rig at myself, with our E5200 @3.2 and the 9800 GTX, he was amazed at the results. the Physx actually lifted a lot of the load off of the CPU. He was amazed at some of the FPS he was getting because of it. Now, of course even a single core of an OCed E5200 should be better than a 4000+, but the big deal was that the CPU wasnt nearly as stressed on Core 0. And he said overall things looked better and played better.
So, perhaps my point is, even if upcoming or current releases don't benefit so much from physx, perhaps it could be used as a tool for backwards compatibility with older games, those more demanding on CPUs. I suppose it could have different attractions depending on the persons specific usage.
But here is the thing; EQ2 is incredibly CPU limited. It doesnt have very good multithread support either. So when he installed the game on my secondary rig at myself, with our E5200 @3.2 and the 9800 GTX, he was amazed at the results. the Physx actually lifted a lot of the load off of the CPU. He was amazed at some of the FPS he was getting because of it. Now, of course even a single core of an OCed E5200 should be better than a 4000+, but the big deal was that the CPU wasnt nearly as stressed on Core 0. And he said overall things looked better and played better.
So, perhaps my point is, even if upcoming or current releases don't benefit so much from physx, perhaps it could be used as a tool for backwards compatibility with older games, those more demanding on CPUs. I suppose it could have different attractions depending on the persons specific usage.
Are you sure EQ2 uses hardware Physx? It's a fairly old game, I looked around and don't see it listed as a title that uses Physx. I could be wrong here, but I don't see it listed. If it doesn't use hardware Physx then the gains had nothing to do with Physx.
GaiaHunter
Diamond Member
- Jul 13, 2008
- 3,697
- 397
- 126
While currently physics isn't that big, I think we are asking the wrong question.
The question we should ask is: "can amd/ati provide hardware physics acceleration with the current hardware if driver enabled?".
The question we should ask is: "can amd/ati provide hardware physics acceleration with the current hardware if driver enabled?".
PhysX has nothing to do with the difference in the game play between the two rigs on that game. A E5200 clocked @ 3.2 and the combination of the newer 9800GTX is a much faster/better gaming setup than the old single core 939 4000+ with a very outdated (and disappointing at it's release) HD 2900. There is no way a HD 2900 will come close to the performance of the 9800GTX no matter how much more memory it has. Hell, my 9600GT gives that card a run for it's money in benchies.
Edit:
A fair comparison to see if PhysX makes a difference is to use two exact same set ups except they each have a comparable AMD and Nvidia GPU installed. It is not a fair match for the 4000+ rig to be compared to the E5200 @ 3.2 in any universe.
We know ATi cards can handle GPU PhysX if they really wanted.
http://www.ngohq.com/images/physxonradeon.jpg
Keysplayr
Elite Member
- Jan 16, 2003
- 21,211
- 50
- 91
Not by AMD. Nor do they have any intention to do so if their actions are indicators. NGOHQ asked AMD for assistance. They refused. Nvidia was asked for assistance. They provided SDK's to them and I'm going to guess here and think they're probably was some support, however limited.
kylebisme
Diamond Member
- Mar 25, 2000
- 9,396
- 0
- 0
Feeling threatened for a company's sake isn't my bag, you can keep that nonsense for yourself.
No one rightly has any need to take my word on the matter, as I'm not the one promoting a feature of one company's produces, or glossing over a feature they lack. You on the other hand are apparently too interested in doing exactly that to even acknowledge that context of rogueshah's question is one of picking between two alternatives which both support features the others lack. If you can step back for a moment and read my comments from that perspective you'll see exactly what they have to do with this discussion.
I know you've had some trouble with your comprehension of the TOS in the past, but this is a riot. Nothing in the rules gives your crew any cover to go uncontested when suggesting that buying your benefactor's products for a particular feature doesn't come at the cost of missing out on features unique to the alternatives.
WelshBloke
Lifer
- Jan 12, 2005
- 32,653
- 10,831
- 136
WelshBloke
Lifer
- Jan 12, 2005
- 32,653
- 10,831
- 136
While that might have sounded like a dig it wasn't.
You are part of the Nv marketing machine.
The Nv marketing machine has been pushing PhysX to all the review sites.
You are pushing PhysX on this forum.
So is Nv still asking you to push PhysX or has the marketing instructions changed?
And OP just buy what suits your budget, there are some new Nv cards coming soon so it might be worth waiting for them but I wouldn't worry about physX support.
WelshBloke
Lifer
- Jan 12, 2005
- 32,653
- 10,831
- 136
Originally posted by: WelshBloke
What's on topic here? Reported.
Originally posted by: nRollo
Originally posted by: WelshBloke
What's on topic here? Reported.
I hope you reported keysplayr as well then.
I don't know what you keep reporting or why, Rollo. So far I have yet to see anything come out of it. Are you just trying to be a bully?
WelshBloke
Lifer
- Jan 12, 2005
- 32,653
- 10,831
- 136
Originally posted by: nRollo
Originally posted by: WelshBloke
What's on topic here? Reported.
Are you talking to me or Keys?TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter