Is it worth keeping a card for Phsyx anymore?

[Insomniator]

I currently have 9600GSO 768's in SLI and will possibly upgrade to a GTX 460/470 in the near future. Is it even worth keeping one of the 9600's in my comp as a physx card or are they so old that it doesn't make a difference?

 

[happy medium]

As long as it has 96 sp's . I think it should be fine.

 

[jvroig]

As long as it has 96 sp's . I think it should be fine.

I suppose that means my old 8600GTS has no hope of being useful as a PhysX card? (32 stream processors only)

 

[Skurge]

Wasn't the minimum like 16 or 32? I remember a friend had an 8400GS and it would'nt work with Physx as it didn't have enough SPs

 

[thilanliyan]

The minimum is a 8600 I think but performance can actually go down I believe if it becomes a bottleneck. Keysplayr I think did some testing on that. Don't remember the link though.

 

[jvroig]

The minimum is a 8600 I think but performance can actually go down I believe if it becomes a bottleneck.

Ah, not good news. I have an 8600GTS and an HD4770. I was contemplating upgrading the 4770 to a GTX 460 when I move to a higher-res monitor, and I was thinking I could swap the 4770 with the 8600GTS so I could then use the 8600GTS as a PhysX card along with the 460, while the 4770 takes the place of the 8600GTS on the older PC. This way, both machines will be upgraded, and the oldest card (8600GTS) won't just be thrown away.

Alas, I suppose it is not meant to be.

 

[Skurge]

Ah, not good news. I have an 8600GTS and an HD4770. I was contemplating upgrading the 4770 to a GTX 460 when I move to a higher-res monitor, and I was thinking I could swap the 4770 with the 8600GTS so I could then use the 8600GTS as a PhysX card along with the 460, while the 4770 takes the place of the 8600GTS on the older PC. This way, both machines will be upgraded, and the oldest card (8600GTS) won't just be thrown away.

Alas, I suppose it is not meant to be.

He did say the minimum was an 8600, which is what you have.

 

[dualsmp]

From Nvidia:

Which NVIDIA GeForce GPUs support PhysX?
The minimum requirement to support GPU-accelerated PhysX is a GeForce 8-series or later GPU with a minimum of 32 cores and a minimum of 256MB dedicated graphics memory. However, each PhysX application has its own GPU and memory recommendations. In general, 512MB of graphics memory is recommended unless you have a GPU that is dedicated to PhysX.

 

[MJinZ]

GTX 260 is a minimum for PhysX when paired with a high end card.

 

[happy medium]

I remember reading an article about this and they said 96 sp's was the sweet spot , but that was a long time ago ( mabe 15 months). Looking at the Mafia 2 specs tells me 128 sp's looks like the minimum for medium physx and a gtx285 for high physx.

http://www.firingsquad.com/news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=22911

I guess with a 8600gts and 32 sp's , its beter then nothing.

 

[mfenn]

I guess with a 8600gts and 32 sp's , its beter then nothing.

Actually, with a slow PhysX card and a fast primary, it can be worse than nothing.

 

[SHAQ]

I wouldn't use less than a 9600GT/8800GT/9800GT for PhysX. I hope single slot cards will be enough for awhile.

 

[dualsmp]

Here's an older Tom's article with Batman AA with a dedicated Phsyx card. They use a GTX 260 paired with different cards. I'd like to see a newer article though with GTX 460, 470 and 480 with a dedicated Phsyx card to see what is the sweetspot.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/batman-arkham-asylum,2465-8.html

 

[Insomniator]

Well my 9600's are 96sp's but its interesting that games are requesting higher. How come I haven't seen or heard anything about it actually doing anything? With a freakin GTX 260 just for Physx I better see some crazy shit. I mean... half life 2 from a million years ago seemed to have some pretty good physics effects... on any single card.

 

[toyota]

Well my 9600's are 96sp's but its interesting that games are requesting higher. How come I haven't seen or heard anything about it actually doing anything? With a freakin GTX 260 just for Physx I better see some crazy shit. I mean... half life 2 from a million years ago seemed to have some pretty good physics effects... on any single card.

well the point is that if you have a very strong card then it can handle the graphics and physx as well or better than having a lower end dedicated card. in other words with a gtx480 having a 9600gso wont be much of a help but if your main graphics card was a gtx260 then sure the 9600gso would be a great addition for a dedicated physx card.

 

[bryanW1995]

nvidia could probably help their sales if they would go back to allowing amd cards to use a 2nd nvidia card for physix. Physix by itself isn't much, but having the option to run it in a year or two on your old hardware certainly is at least worth considering. kind of like having a crossfire mobo, you might still buy nvidia but if all things are equal you would probably lean towards amd.

 

[Grooveriding]

Well my 9600's are 96sp's but its interesting that games are requesting higher. How come I haven't seen or heard anything about it actually doing anything? With a freakin GTX 260 just for Physx I better see some crazy shit. I mean... half life 2 from a million years ago seemed to have some pretty good physics effects... on any single card.

A 260 for PhysX alone is ridiculous, let alone anything higher. Especially considering the small in-game offerings I've seen it give in games that use it on the gpu.

 

[happy medium]

A 260 for PhysX alone is ridiculous, let alone anything higher. Especially considering the small in-game offerings I've seen it give in games that use it on the gpu.

Sounds like alot, but a used gtx 260 goes for about 115$ now.
SHit, you can get a 9800gtx+ for 80$.

 

[Grooveriding]

Sounds like alot, but a used gtx 260 goes for about 115$ now.
SHit, you can get a 9800gtx+ for 80$.

I don't like to buy used stuff, I like a warranty. And PhysX is worth about $20, not $100.

 

[Phynaz]

I don't like to buy used stuff, I like a warranty. And PhysX is worth about $20, not $100.

This.

Only an utter moron would spend $100 on Physx.

 

[wbynum]

Would a 9800gtx+ 512meg card be a good fit to use as a phsyx card with a GTX470? Also, any issues with using both nvidia cards on a AMD motherboard?

 

[happy medium]

Would a 9800gtx+ 512meg card be a good fit to use as a phsyx card with a GTX470? Also, any issues with using both nvidia cards on a AMD motherboard?

It would be perfect.

 

[mingsoup]

This.

Only an utter moron would spend $100 on Physx.

I hope you are right! I just paid an extra premium for a 3x PCIE mobo, so I might supplement with a PhysX card someday to my Crossfire. Hopefully I never will have to as PhysX will die. I hope I never have to support such a closed, biased, useless technology. Amazing things have been done with Havok, PhysX is just marketing money maker.

 

[edplayer]

And PhysX is worth about $20, not $100.

Exactly. From the little I have seen of it, $20 is being generous. I like stuff on sale so $8 sounds even better.

Maybe if it ever came to be where PhysX enabled games were a big improvement so most people were thinking "I've got to have that!"...

then it would be worth $50 or so.

 

[Scali]

I wouldn't use a separate card for PhysX alone, especially not an old/slow one.
It will consume a lot of power, generate a lot of heat and noise, and probably doesn't really improve that much over just having a GTX460/470 doing physics alongside the rest.
Fermi is supposed to be quite a bit better at running multiple kernels concurrently than the older generation, which should translate in better mixed PhysX/graphics performance.
I guess I'll find out how well my GTX460 1GB does soon enough.