• 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.

"Mafia II: Perfection for NVidia's Graphics Plus Technologies?"

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Say what you want about CryTek, but they are using the physics as leverage to push their own product, just like nVidia.
You cannot buy or use CryPhysics separately. If you want to use it, you need to license their whole engine.
 
Scali said:
Say what you want about CryTek, but they are using the physics as leverage to push their own product, just like nVidia.
You cannot buy or use CryPhysics separately. If you want to use it, you need to license their whole engine.
Click to expand...
Well, why shouldn't they get paid for their hard work? Here's how CryTek stands out from nVidia though - their engine runs on any and all modern hardware and it actually shows a noticeable difference in gameplay. And yes, I'll agree that that video completely blows away anything PhysX has ever produced; I'm excited for Crysis 2.
 
MrK6 said:
Here's how CryTek stands out from nVidia though - their engine runs on any and all modern hardware and it actually shows a noticeable difference in gameplay.
Click to expand...

Well, CryTek doesn't only make the physics middleware, but also the engine and the game itself. As I said, that's also an important factor.
I think if CryTek were to integrate PhysX, Havok or Bullet into their engine, they could still achieve the same as what they do now... they integrate their physics workload seamlessly in the engine and game in a very scalable way, and that's what makes the difference.
 
It's not "physics" if it's nothing more than fancier eyecandy.

When we get actual, realistic physics working in games that affect game play, then I will be excited.
 
Scali said:
Say what you want about CryTek, but they are using the physics as leverage to push their own product, just like nVidia.
You cannot buy or use CryPhysics separately. If you want to use it, you need to license their whole engine.
Click to expand...

They should port it to CUDA, maybe Crysis would run better.
 
for the love of god, ban wreckage.

I have him on ignore and just seeing his ignored posts enrages me to the extreme.

Why do the forum mods let blatant focus group members troll the forums day in day out?

These accusations in the threads are really distracting and derailing from real, intelligent conversations. Please stick to the subject material. If there's a problem with other posters, use the report post button, else make a thread in the moderator discussions forum. -Admin DrPizza
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Acanthus said:
for the love of god, ban wreckage.

I have him on ignore and just seeing his ignored posts enrages me to the extreme.
Why do the forum mods let blatant focus group members troll the forums day in day out?
Click to expand...

Wow.....you have issues.

Calling out mods to ban someone whose posts you cant even see? Because it enrages you?

Go outside. Maybe talk to a female.
 
Last edited:
OCGuy said:
Wow.....you have issues.

Calling out mods to ban someone whos posts you cant even see? Because it enrages you?

Go outside. Maybe talk to a female.
Click to expand...

Not to mention it's obvious he is not a focus member considering the amount backlash he generates. Heck If I was AMD I would hire him and have him post everywhere.
 
I run this game at max settings @ 5970x1080 on SLI 480s and get 60+FPS almost always with the occasional drop to 50. Oddly enough though I have to direct PhysX to my CPU, my FPS drops quite a bit otherwise.. CPU gets used heavily but does not go past 90% much. i7 930 @ 4GHz.
 
TheUnk said:
I run this game at max settings @ 5970x1080 on SLI 480s and get 60+FPS almost always with the occasional drop to 50. Oddly enough though I have to direct PhysX to my CPU, my FPS drops quite a bit otherwise.. CPU gets used heavily but does not go past 90% much. i7 930 @ 4GHz.
Click to expand...

bullshit

I get the same frames at 2560x1600, and my system has no issues. Of course if I turn physx off, I get double the framerate.

Ah physx, what a bloated pig piece of shit feature you are. Just looking at the Crysis physics links in this thread makes physx look like all the more what it is, a garbage bloatware feature to sell suckers more nvidia cards.
 
Wreckage said:
So ATI needs 2 chips? Funny.
Click to expand...

Well, AFAIK, a single HD 5870 usually matches and outperforms the GTX 480 in Crysis, a single HD 5970 crushes the GTX 480.

OCGuy said:
Wow.....you have issues.

Calling out mods to ban someone whose posts you cant even see? Because it enrages you?

Go outside. Maybe talk to a female.
Click to expand...

You should do the same, you are always defending him, I wonder who's the female between you and him.... 🙄
 
Last edited:
OCGuy said:
Wow.....you have issues.

Calling out mods to ban someone whose posts you cant even see? Because it enrages you?

Go outside. Maybe talk to a female.
Click to expand...

You still see all the quotes of people responding to the obvious troll.

It is annoying.
 
Scali said:
Looks more like the 5870 has trouble matching the GTX470, and the GTX480 is well out of reach:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3809/nvidias-geforce-gtx-460-the-200-king/6
Click to expand...

Interesting the 5870 is actually closer in performance to the 460 than it is to the 480

1680x1050
480 - 60.3
5870 - 47.6
460 - 41.1

1920x1200
480 - 49.8
5870 - 39.8
460 - 33.8

2560x1600
480 - 32
5870 - 25.9
460 - 19.2

A pair of 460s is as good or better than a 5970 while costing significantly less.
 
Wreckage said:
Interesting the 5870 is actually closer in performance to the 460 than it is to the 480

1680x1050
480 - 60.3
5870 - 47.6
460 - 41.1

1920x1200
480 - 49.8
5870 - 39.8
460 - 33.8

2560x1600
480 - 32
5870 - 25.9
460 - 19.2

A pair of 460s is as good or better than a 5970 while costing significantly less.
Click to expand...

Interesting how you only mention one test, when 3 are presented to you. Ah, ignorance is bliss.
 
I'm not sure but the graphics look similar to games released 2 to 3 years ago.

But hey maybe the gameplay makes up for the average visuals?
 
Wreckage said:
They should port it to CUDA, maybe Crysis would run better.
Click to expand...

Considering the performance drop for a few extra stones/debris in Mafia 2 and clothes physics, with the efficiency of CUDA, you will need GTX780 SLI to run Crysis physics at anything that would be deemed playable.

Since you had a 5900XT over a 9800Pro, and 7950GT over X1950XT, I presume even if an ATI card was 2x faster than Nvidia's and cost 2x less, you still wouldn't buy it? It's funny you talk about supporting a company that innovates, yet 5900XT was far inferior in almost everything to 9800 series and X1950 had superior image quality to 7900 series. As far as I remember, NV was slower for GeForce 4, 5, 6 and 7 to ATI's derivatives, yet you didn't buy any of them. I suppose you also had GeForce 4xxx over 9700Pro?

BTW, 5870 is almost 50% faster than a GTX460 in Crysis with all settings maxed at 1920x1200 4AA/16AF: http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/..._geforce_gtx_460/12/#abschnitt_crysis_warhead
 
Last edited:
Cookie Monster said:
Im going to play the devil's advocate here.

The word "innovation" can mean differently to different people. Your definition of innovation sounds more along the lines of charity. While we are at it, lets have intel open source x86 so they can truly "innovate" the current CPU market.
Click to expand...

I understand what you mean. But it's not like nV created physx, they aquired it and are now trying to squeeze every dollar they can from it as an exclusive feature. It's a free and open tool, but they're still controlling who can use it by cirippling CPU performance and completely disabling it for ATI users.

Posts before mine shelled physx as an innovation. As long as nV stays the course it will be nothing more than a gimmicky feature.
 
Grooveriding said:
bullshit

I get the same frames at 2560x1600, and my system has no issues. Of course if I turn physx off, I get double the framerate.

Ah physx, what a bloated pig piece of shit feature you are. Just looking at the Crysis physics links in this thread makes physx look like all the more what it is, a garbage bloatware feature to sell suckers more nvidia cards.
Click to expand...

What do you want me to do? Take some crappy camcorder footage with fraps running? lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top