• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

GT640 for PhysX - passive operation possible?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Keysplayr

Elite Member
Jan 16, 2003
21,209
50
91
I can try as well. Single 680, 680+680PhysX, 680SLI. I guess we're using BL2 or BatmanAC?
Batman AC has the built in bench for repeatability's sake. BL2 is tougher to bench accurately.
 

boxleitnerb

Platinum Member
Nov 1, 2011
2,597
1
81
Done. Look in the other thread that deals with the techreport benchmarks.

I didn't really focus on complete repeatability, I don't think that is possible here if you want to get all the effects and really see some action. But I did the same as best I could.
 

ViRGE

Elite Member, Moderator Emeritus
Oct 9, 1999
31,516
165
106
I can try as well. Single 680, 680+680PhysX, 680SLI. I guess we're using BL2 or BatmanAC?
Batman AC has the built in bench for repeatability's sake. BL2 is tougher to bench accurately.
Batman would make much more sense for that reason. Running it once with the 680, 680 w/PhysX, 680 SLI, and 680 SLI w/PhysX would make it pretty easy to measure the performance impact of PhysX on SLI versus a single card.

As far as I can recall the last time anyone tested this was over 2 years ago when AnandTech did it on the GTX 480. At the time the performance hit of PhysX was 47% on a single GPU, and 63% on SLI.

 

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
746
126
You can not run PhysX high with just a Radeon, it will tank FPS the moment you get any liquid on screen.
You can, unless you need > 60 fps minimum frames. Also, that drop from 60.1 fps to 30.1 in the first 2-picture comparison, is that with Vsync ON? It sounds odd that the framerates halved perfectly like that.

Also, in your 2nd picture comparison, the GPU drops to 43.6 fps minimum. That's often adequate for many gamers who strive for 60 fps average in a FPS. If you want 60 fps minimums, your statement would be correct. However, if you are Ok with 60 fps average with occassional dips to 30-44 fps with the CPU handling the PhysX High, it appears you just saved yourself $100-120 from not wasting it on a 140W power consuming GTX460/560 card, right?
 
Last edited:

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
746
126
Thanks for the explanation with the PLX chips!
Ya, hope that clears it up since there appears to be a lot of confusion regarding the way the PLX chip works. Of course, you'd get the full performance if you get 32 native PCIe 3.0 lanes but it means being stuck on X79 platform which itself will have a slower CPU than Haswell for at least 3-4 quarters.

If Ivy-E were to be released with Haswell, that would be a no brainer. But I don't like the wait until Q3. But I also don't like to buy an "outdated" CPU/plattform (Ivy/Sandy vs. Haswell; and there supposedly will be a second revision of X79 boards) or lose 5% performance either.
Even when IVB-E launches next year, Haswell should be about 10% faster in IPC from what I read. Since Intel is also going back to the more expensive solder/TIM of SB, you can expect better overclocking on HW than with IVB. I can see 5.0ghz Haswell i7 overclocks (or higher?) and 10% IPC on top would give you a much faster CPU for games than losing 4-5% via PCIe 2.0 x8 on Z87 platform.

Looking at where IVB-E is expected, my guess is Haswell 6-core won't come for a while after Haswell on Socket 1150.



Not to mention if you get IVB-E on X79, chances are you'll not only get a slower CPU for games, but it'll use more power too with probably little to not benefits in games. An overclocked X79 CPU platform eats power like no tomorrow. Normally I don't care much for extra power consumption, but in this case IVB-E overclocked will probably use way more power than Haswell overclocked and not be faster in games, i.e., wasting electricity for no reason, and almost requiring a Corsair H100/ Noctua NH-D14 style cooling system to keep it reasonably cool and quiet. Of course, Haswell on Socket 1150 vs. IVB-E will be different, but you get an idea that you do pay a power consumption penalty by going with the X79 platform.

 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY