Opinion - Nvidia for PhysX or ATI?

[VtPC83]

In your opinion, which would be a better choice, now AND in the future (no, no one can predict the future, take a guess).

I will be running a single monitor at 1920 x 1080. I will most likely end up with an 2500k OC'd with 8 GB RAM and SSD. I will be expecting to SLI or CF whatever setup to make sure to get the best performance/graphics I can regardless of how stupid you think it is.

Should I:

Go with nVidia for PhysX support in the future? How likely is it that PhysX will be used on many more games coming up?

Go with ATI for better price vs performance and better wattage vs performance. I DO NOT plan on using Eyeinfinity, etc.

Keep in mind the pros for each are obviously only looking at today's tech.

 

[Jacky60]

Hardly any games use physx, if you want the fastest single gpu get a 580, otherwise go ATI-much better value, more ram and they don't make huge greedy profits like Nvidia.

 

[nismotigerwvu]

To be honest, you should make your decision based on price/performance based on the games you want to play (or if applicable, games already released using the same engine as upcoming games you want to play). The price/performance gap between the manufacturers can be quite small at certain price points and any edge in optimizations in particular games can swing the lead.

Also, considering the limited adoption of Physx, 3D and other features of that nature, it is wise to consider them a bonus after the fact rather than place any purchasing power on them. OpenCL is beginning to gain some traction and in time will allow features like these to be device agnostic.

Lastly, this is a less than opportune time to be purchasing any high end card (or most cards for that matter, as we only a short time away from at least the announcement of the next wave of releases. That said, you might be able to find a killer deal on the FS/FT forum of someone dumping a high end current gen card to save up cash for the "next big thing". With a quick glance I've seen 6970's for $~80 below retail with a pair coming a whopping $200 below retail and 580's $~100 below. You might be able to sit on one of these comfortably for the next few months then flip and upgrade at a reasonable cost.

 

[TakeNoPrisoners]

When I played Mafia 2 I wouldve liked to turn on Physx. There isn't many games that support it. Most of the time Nvidia cards perform close to AMD cards so I would get one just for the times you would use physx.

 

[Jionix]

PhysX is non-existant. Game developers are on a divergent path away from it, especially considering AMD will most certainly be powering the next XBox. OpenCL will definitely be a big part of that, which will further push developers away from it as an API.

I would not make a purchase decision based on PhysX.

 

[Jhatfie]

Yeah almost no noteworthy games use PhysX and when they do, the difference is rarely very noticeable, so I would not base your purchase decision on it. Like others have said, base your decision on how the card performs in the games that you play and gives you the best performance in them for your gaming $$.

 

[tweakboy]

ATI cant do phsyx. nVidia does phsyx but no game supports it . It has a chart on nVidia for the games phsyx supports and they were all stupid games except for a few. http://www.nvidia.com/object/physx_new.html No big name games. I think Unreal Engine 4 will use phsyx. Dont base your decision on it. Base it on the card you like the most and the company your trusting. thx gg and gb

 

[DaveSimmons]

I have a GTX 560 ti, but I've never played a game that uses hardware PhysX.

Almost all games use Havok or the software version of PhysX (CPU-based, card does not matter) so I would not choose nvidia over ATI for it, or pay extra for it.

 

[Keysplayr]

You don't HAVE to run PhysX because you have an Nvidia card you know. But, to have the option to use it or not to use it is nice. Doesn't matter how good or bad the PhysX content is. With an ATI card, you can NEVER turn it on.

 

[SirPauly]

There is content, but just not a lot of content -- two titles of substance as of late -- Alice: Madness Returns and Batman: Arkham City.

PhysX may not be an important reason for some but does provide added value for some as well.

 

[Jionix]

You don't HAVE to run PhysX because you have an Nvidia card you know. But, to have the option to use it or not to use it is nice. Doesn't matter how good or bad the PhysX content is. With an ATI card, you can NEVER turn it on.

Ha, ha, is that your arguement? It doesn't matter how good OR bad it is, at least you can turn it on?

"Look, this thing is awful, but hey, at least you CAN turn it on! The other guys won't let you use this awful feature!"

 

[DaveSimmons]

^ no, more like:

"If you can't think of any more important reason to choose between two cards, this feature might be useful someday."

If 2 motherboards cost the same, one supports SLI/crossfire and the other doesn't, you might pick the second motherboard even if you'll probably never run SLI/crossfire.

 

[WelshBloke]

I think physx is fairly irrelevant today and is just going to become even less relevant in the future.

Unless you really want to play a game that has it right now I'd go with the best price/performance card that suits you.

 

[SirPauly]

Personally find it interesting to see what developers can come up with to take advantage of GPU processing.

I thought the enemies that offer the real time fluid simulation effects were really well done and very neat in Alice:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1sI8ovRIFY&feature=player_embedded

 

[SirPauly]

I think physx is fairly irrelevant today and is just going to become even less relevant in the future.

Unless you really want to play a game that has it right now I'd go with the best price/performance card that suits you.

I think Physics is very relevant now and going to be more relevant in the future.

PhysX is not just the GPU Physic aspect but a tool-set, engine, library that is multi-platform and device. It's about trying to innovate Physics now and in the future to me.

 

[Jionix]

Keeping in mind the linear movement of time, multiplied by the addition of open standards as competition, than divided by the current low utilization, if you carry the 2, then I foresee PhysX as being non-existant in the not so distant future.

(imagine a bar graph).

 

[96Firebird]

and they don't make huge greedy profits like Nvidia.

 

[toyota]

I think Physics is very relevant now and going to be more relevant in the future.

PhysX is not just the GPU Physic aspect but a tool-set, engine, library that is multi-platform and device. It's about trying to innovate Physics now and in the future to me.

hardware physx though just looks like it takes effects that we have mostly seen before and tweaks them to only run on gpus. of course that will be Nvidia gpus...

 

[tviceman]

^^^ LOL ^^^

Batman Arkham City has announced that it is again using hardware accelerated physx and that it will have even more uber cool physx effects!

 

[toyota]

^^^ LOL ^^^

Batman Arkham City has announced that it is again using hardware accelerated physx and that it will have even more uber cool physx effects!

maybe that wooden wall will splinter more realistically now while only needing an extra 30 fps to do so.

 

[Madcatatlas]

^ no, more like:

"If you can't think of any more important reason to choose between two cards, this feature might be useful someday."

If 2 motherboards cost the same, one supports SLI/CrossfireX and the other doesn't, you might pick the second motherboard even if you'll probably never run SLI/CrossfireX.

Fixed the bolded parts for you. Mindshare.

 

[Arkadrel]

PhysX is non-existant. Game developers are on a divergent path away from it, especially considering AMD will most certainly be powering the next XBox. OpenCL will definitely be a big part of that, which will further push developers away from it as an API.

I would not make a purchase decision based on PhysX.

My thoughts mirror these.

 

[SirPauly]

Keeping in mind the linear movement of time, multiplied by the addition of open standards as competition, than divided by the current low utilization, if you carry the 2, then I foresee PhysX as being non-existant in the not so distant future.

(imagine a bar graph).

I'm just glad to see a company spend resources where their mouth is and attempt to innovate for the CPU and GPU. It is possible that in some time-line nVidia could port PhysX to OpenCL instead of just Cuda.

 

[Jionix]

I think it would be a good idea for Nvidia, if they want to keep their original investment relevant. Otherwise they might be too stubborn and be late to adopt.

 

[TemjinGold]

OP: Well, you definitely don't want to use ATI for physx...