• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Got a 980Ti on the way. Question about using a 680 for dedicated Physx

2

2is

Diamond Member
Per the subject line, I should be receiving a 980Ti in the next few days and I figure, might as well keep one of my 680's as a dedicated PhysX card. Question is, do I need the SLI bridge?
 
Actually, one more question. Would the 980Ti have to go in the first PCIe slot or can it go in the 2nd? With two cards occupied they'll both be running at 8x, but the second slot would have much better ventilation so I'd rather have the 980Ti there if it's possible and no ill effects.
 
Sell that GTX 680 (both - since according to your signature you now have two GTX 680 in SLI). Your new GTX 980 Ti will do fine by itself.
 
I'm running a Dell S2716DG 144hz/1440p/gsync monitor. I'm definitely keeping one 680 for PhysX, particularly after what I saw here
 
Congrats on the 980TI. Its a sexy beast. Let us know how it does. Personally, I wouldn't bother with the PhysX card. I'd rather get the money from the 680's and buy something else (like another 980ti or SSD).
How is your sound set up? Maybe you can get a sound card and nice headphones. That adds a lot to the gaming experience that people often underestimate.
 
Sound setup is pretty basic. Using onboard with a 2.1 speaker setup. I've been thinking about a set of nice headphones. What would you recommend?
 
2is said:
Sound setup is pretty basic. Using onboard with a 2.1 speaker setup. I've been thinking about a set of nice headphones. What would you recommend?
Click to expand...

You should first decide the budget and then open vs. closed headphones.

www.amazon.com/Philips-X2-27-Fideli...TF8&qid=1449859252&sr=1-2&keywords=Fidelio+X1
Some other competitors are AKG 712 Pro and Sennheiser HD650. 650 can often be found for $299-325.

Review:
http://www.headfonia.com/philips-fidelio-x2-evolution-sound/3/

For closed, I read good things about the V-MODA Crossfade M-100.

Under $200 there are still good cans like these.
 
Last edited:
I already have a set of $300 Monster headphones I can use, wasn't sure if there was anything in particular that made "gaming" headphones special though.
 
2is said:
I already have a set of $300 Monster headphones I can use, wasn't sure if there was anything in particular that made "gaming" headphones special though.
Click to expand...

You should not correlate the price of Monster, especially Beats line, headphones with their quality. Most of that price is pure marketing and brand mark-up. The actual components inside are budget.

Here is my suggestion then. If you have an audiophile store in your state or happen to ever stumble into one, try out various headphones to see if this sort of thing matters to you.
 
Last edited:
I have the Philips Fidelio X2 with sound blaster ZxR, and I can tell you it adds a lot to the experience to have a good set of phones with simulated surround. The key is to use the virtual surround from a good sound card. That's how you get the rich, full sound with directional cues. If nothing else, I'd try your current headphones and see if your onboard audio has a virtual surround feature. Use it and plug the phones into your audio port and in your games, select surround sound or 5.1 as the audio option.
 
RussianSensation said:
You should not correlate the price of Monster, especially Beats line, headphones with their quality. Most of that price is pure marketing and brand mark-up. The actual components inside are budget.

Here is my suggestion then. If you have an audiophile store in your state or happen to ever stumble into one, try out various headphones to see if this sort of thing matters to you.
Click to expand...

Monster != Beats though. I listed to both before buying, the beats were crap by comparison.

But enough of that, got my 980Ti today, so far so good. Playing Black Ops 3 maxed out @ 1440p smooth as silk.
 
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487160

I also remembered I have a 650Ti in another box so I pulled both 680's from my box and i'm using the 650Ti as the dedicated PhysX card which works quite nicely. More then capable for PhysX, and it's quite a bit shorter than the 680 so the 980 is running cooler.

Idle power consumption with this configuration is down about 80 watts thanks to me having to set my power profile on my previous SLI setup to "prefer maximum performance" for both cards to properly ramp up to speed when gaming. Otherwise they either wouldn't boost even when power and temps were well within the boost range, or they would operate at drastically different speeds.

Pretty disappointed in NVidia with their SLI support. Especially since the first year of owning my 680's it was great. I thought "I wonder why so many dislike it, seems to be working great for me" then after the first year I started seeing more and more issues, this was especially true after Kepler was no longer the leading platform. JC3 not supporting SLI/CF at all was the last straw for me. Just like many others who have tried it, I don't see myself going back to multi-GPU.

Time to updated the sig!
 
Seba said:
Sell that GTX 680 (both - since according to your signature you now have two GTX 680 in SLI). Your new GTX 980 Ti will do fine by itself.
Click to expand...

While generally true since most physx games aren't that intensive, there's a definite benefit to using a second card for physx.
 
2is said:
I also remembered I have a 650Ti in another box so I pulled both 680's from my box and i'm using the 650Ti as the dedicated PhysX card which works quite nicely. More then capable for PhysX, and it's quite a bit shorter than the 680 so the 980 is running cooler.
Click to expand...

There are almost no modern games that have PhysX while for older games like Mafia II or Borderlands 2, 650Ti should be more than enough. I'd sell those 680s while they still have some value.

I am surprised you decided to go for the 980Ti at this point since it's ~7 months old and the price on it hasn't fallen much. I thought for sure you'd wait it out until 16nm cards.

2is said:
Pretty disappointed in NVidia with their SLI support. .... JC3 not supporting SLI/CF at all was the last straw for me.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's NV's fault for most games that don't have working SLI. JC3 is 100% the developer's fault for their game engine choice. Batman AK is 100% the port's problem, not NV. AC Syndicate issues = Ubifail. UE4 game engines don't support multi-gpu (ARK Survival, Kholat, Vanishing of Ethan Carter). I am with you though that whether it's NV's/AMD's or the developer's fault is almost irrelevant when you have a 2nd GPU that sits idle. I do think though sometimes dual-GPU is a no brainer like R9 290X CF/GTX970 SLI vs. a single 980/Fury.
 
RussianSensation said:
There are almost no modern games that have PhysX while for older games like Mafia II or Borderlands 2, 650Ti should be more than enough. I'd sell those 680s while they still have some value.

I am surprised you decided to go for the 980Ti at this point since it's ~7 months old and the price on it hasn't fallen much. I thought for sure you'd wait it out until 16nm cards.
Click to expand...

That was my plan, but a monitor upgrade accelerated my upgrade timeline and I don't like playing below native resolution. Maybe if I'm lucky new cards will come out within 90 days and I can take advantage of eVGA step up, but I'm not holding my breath.
 
2is said:
got my 980Ti today, so far so good. Playing Black Ops 3 maxed out @ 1440p smooth as silk.
Click to expand...

😱 Wish i could play BO3 on my 980TI smooth as silk, in MP it was fine but in SP my god what a mess. This was at launch tough, no idea how it is today. I completed it already with a buddy and dont really play MP.
 
2is said:
I'm running a Dell S2716DG 144hz/1440p/gsync monitor. I'm definitely keeping one 680 for PhysX, particularly after what I saw here
Click to expand...

based on that review. if you are running NVidia sli and playing PhysX heavy game. for sure you want a dedicated PhysX gpu.

what happens if you are running quad-sli. would adding the 5th gpu still work for PhysX? (obviously via pciex16 extension cable).
 
From what I've seen when running PhysX with SLI, I'd have to agree. It's not even so much if it's a PhysX intensive game, but if it's GPU intensive too, performance ends up being very inconsistent with lots of FPS fluctuation. My guess is with PhysX only running on a single GPU it's causing a mismatch in performance. If the game/settings you're running are only pushing your GPU's to say 80% utilization, then enabling PhysX is typically not a problem.

I'm not sure about the quad SLI question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top