I wanna try physx with a gts240 gddr5 version

[happy medium]

Since I have a Asus p5q deluxe crossfire board, I wanna try physx with my gtx260. I take it my board will be fine?

I was thinking of buying this new Palit gt240 gddr5 card ,because of the temps and low power requirements.

As per review.....here
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/palit_gt240/4.htm

•Cool running
•Decent overclock
•Quiet operation
•Video encoding ability
•CUDA/PhysX capable
•Low power consumption
•Capable PhysX accelerator

This review shows a 85% performance boost in framerates with a gtx275 and and gt240 in physx with the Batman game.

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=822

115$ shipped
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814261056

It seems this card is on par with a hd4830. Will it have enough preformance to give me a good physx experience, or should I be looking at something with better preformance?

Thanks,

 

[Zap]

PhysX only requires 32 CUDA cores and 256MB dedicated video RAM, so even a GT 220 will work. If you want to overkill a bit, go for it! Otherwise save a few bucks and go for a cheaper GT 220. Note that the 210 will NOT work because it only has 16 CUDA cores.

 

[happy medium]

So a 50$ 32sp 9500gt is the minimum. Thanks for the info.

Do you think a fermi based direct x11 card will play nice with a direct x10.1 240gt card with physx?
Is there possible conflicts?

 

[Keysplayr]

Zap, you are 100% correct with those items, but I have found that the "Happy Place" seems to be with a 96 shader or greater GPU dedicated to PhysX. The 32sp 8600GT or 9500GT for example, offers a little help in some games, almost none in others. The 9600GSO I use (96 shader just like the GT240) was a very nice enhancement in framerates across the board. Falls just a smidge under a 8800GTS 512 for running PhysX.

http://jkamassociates.com:8880/PhysX/index.htm

 

[AzN]

Why not just get a used GSO on the forums? You could get one for like $40. I've seen them for around that price.

 

[happy medium]

Why not just get a used GSO on the forums? You could get one for like $40. I've seen them for around that price.

That might push my psu to much.:\

 

[adairusmc]

Zap, you are 100% correct with those items, but I have found that the "Happy Place" seems to be with a 96 shader or greater GPU dedicated to PhysX. The 32sp 8600GT or 9500GT for example, offers a little help in some games, almost none in others. The 9600GSO I use (96 shader just like the GT240) was a very nice enhancement in framerates across the board. Falls just a smidge under a 8800GTS 512 for running PhysX.

http://jkamassociates.com:8880/PhysX/index.htm

So you don't think a 48 shader GT220 would do a good job with physx only? Been kicking around the idea of picking up one we have at work to play with.

 

[Keysplayr]

Look at my benches. Figure out where you think a 48 shader card would fall in comparison to the cards there. My guess is that it would offer a little better performance than say a 8600GT, but a lot less than a 96 shader 9600GSO.

 

[tviceman]

Look at my benches. Figure out where you think a 48 shader card would fall in comparison to the cards there. My guess is that it would offer a little better performance than say a 8600GT, but a lot less than a 96 shader 9600GSO.

Speaking of the 96 shader GSO... Because of your benchmarks I purchased an open-boxed one from new egg last week to go along side my gtx260 216 OC. I got pretty substantial increases in the Batman benchmark maxed out with 4X AA and 16x AF (minimum frame rate going from 25 to 34) and I also got an absolutely massive performance boost with the full version of Cryostasis (before I was playing with most settings on medium @ 1440x900, now I can play with all settings on high @ 1680x1050 AND at higher frame rates).

Darkest of Days, however, has actually given me either 0% increase with maxed settings AA 4X AF 16x (under Windows 7 x64) to a 7 FPS LOSS (going from 37 to 30) in Windows XP. I was pretty disappointed to see that much of a performance hit in that game. I honestly think it's a driver issue - the game performs substantially better in XP x32 than Win 7 x64, so I think the issue is an extension of this performance discrepancy.