Considering almost no games use GPU PhysX and it can harm frame rates if you're doing it on the same card you're gaming on I'll stick with CPU PhysX.Guys I think its more of a choice of, Do you want a AMD card or a nVidia card that can do phsyx as well.
They both obviously perform same,, your not gonna see a difference in real world play.
Nice graphs,, wow looks like 690 GTX pownz the world right now, imagine SLIing that thing. LOL gl
GTX680 4gb would be nice, but still lacks the compute abilities I need--I use my card for more than gaming.blastingcap, at your resolution, the 3g Vram makes perfect sense. I see that EVGA makes a 4g Vram GTX 670 and Palit, I think has a 4g Vram GTX 680. It would be very interesting to see the comparison of those cards with a 3g Vram that the 7970 uses. I looked at your specs and my Surround system is a little older (2500K vs 3570K) but close overall. I LOVE the Logitech G35s. I have two sets for 2 of the computers.
On a game like Batman: AC Physics is gone unless you use Nvidia's Physx and without a GPU doing the work it's horribly slow.Considering almost no games use GPU PhysX and it can harm frame rates if you're doing it on the same card you're gaming on I'll stick with CPU PhysX.
Flight sims and driving games benefit from triple monitor as much as FPS. You can see where you are turning into (and if a plane or car is already there), etc. Plus it's just prettier. But you already know this, haha.Actually the impetus for a tri-monitor setup was the flight sim "Rise of Flight" (ROF). I have BF3 but actually prefer COD MW3.
The 3 monitor setup with a flying game like this is great! Rise of Flight is based on WWI planes and, though I'm truly a novice, it's a lot of fun flying it.