Physx - Are you interested in it? Have your say! VOTE!

[wand3r3r]

Physx - what's that?
Physx - no thanks! (Unimpressed)
Physx - neutral
Physx - nice extra if price / performance lines up.
Physx - factors in the decision...
Physx - must have!

 

[Tempered81]

I think it looks cool, the effects are pretty sweet. Too bad it's proprietary

 

[wand3r3r]

Shoot that would have been a good option.

I share that sentiment thus I'm going neutral.

I like the effects somewhat, they're a little cheesy and are generally kind of baked on top of a game. If they weren't proprietary they'd probably advance quickly.

 

[Jaydip]

I do, voted for "Physx - factors in the decision"

 

[Zanovar]

it never sways me when buying or planning to buy a card,but a nice extra i guess which is what i voted for.

 

[Granseth]

I am all for physics that impact the game like Red Faction, but that can't happen with GPU accelerated PhysX and therefore I don't care.
Also I find most of the effects I see with PhysX too flamboyant and they reduce my immersion into games.

But I think PhysX has potential if things change and PhysX can be accelerated by all GPUs

 

[spat55]

I don't think it is anything to be that excited about, if it had more games supporting it then I would be interested but it would need at least 30+ games a year to even get me slightly intrigued. Not a AMD fanboy either, just that the HD 7850 at the time was the best thing for me to get, next time it will be 50/50 again.

 

[DooKey]

It's a nice extra regardless of price since it's available thru the entire NV line. I'd drop the price/performance caveat of that selection in the poll.

 

[wand3r3r]

It's a nice extra regardless of price since it's available thru the entire NV line. I'd drop the price/performance caveat of that selection in the poll.

The intent was if the NV card is the same price/performance as an AMD card, then it's a nice to have feature.

 

[stahlhart]

A more objective and less leading thread title would have been nice.
-- stahlhart

 

[ams23]

To me this poll makes no sense. PhysX can be turned on or off as desired. It is always better to at least have this option than to have no option at all for games that support it. The fact that ATI/AMD users (including the thread starter) cannot get GPU-accelerated PhysX but can vote makes this poll even more irrelevant.

 

[Zanovar]

A more objective and less leading thread title would have been nice.
-- stahlhart

haha pretty much

 

[SirPauly]

My view based on what is available is a combination of these:

nice extra if price / performance lines up.

Physx - factors in the decision...

Nice extra if price performance is some-what close and PhysX, to some degree factors in the decision.

I also think the feature has potential and neat based on how many different abilities that can be improved from rigid and soft bodies, fluids, particles, turbulence, destruction, force field, cloth, hair, fur and many more prospective dynamic possibilities.

 

[Zanovar]

My view based on what is available is a combination of these:

nice extra if price / performance lines up.

Physx - factors in the decision...

Nice extra if price performance is some-what close and PhysX, to some degree factors in the decision.

I also think the feature has potential and neat based on how many different abilities that can be improved from rigid and soft bodies, fluids, particles, turbulence, destruction, force field, cloth, hair, fur and many more prospective dynamic possibilities.

you cant vote for all six sirpauly*laughs*

 

[wand3r3r]

To me this poll makes no sense. PhysX can be turned on or off as desired. It is always better to at least have this option than to have no option at all for games that support it. The fact that ATI/AMD users (including the thread starter) cannot get GPU-accelerated PhysX but can vote makes this poll even more irrelevant.

So are you pretending to know which cards I have/use/buy?

It's a legitimate question, who cares about it and how much/why? Keep the thread out of the gutter please.

 

[SirPauly]

you cant vote for all six sirpauly*laughs*

Indeed! I did vote for one but shared, expanded, try to define more my subjective view!

 

[Zanovar]

Indeed! I did vote for one but shared, expanded, try to define more my subjective view!

I know mate im only kidding around

 

[wand3r3r]

A more objective and less leading thread title would have been nice.
-- stahlhart

It was actually meant as in who (specifically) factors it in decisions, not the meaning I see it mistaken as.

 

[amenx]

I'm neutral, after having seen great 'physx effects' in a non-physx title: Flatout 2 - Ultimate Carnage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClrFIcbt6N0

 

[Red Squirrel]

PhysX is neat, but it would not be the deciding factor if I buy a card or not. I still think coders should just code that stuff directly as to not make the game experience dependent on a very specific feature. Just have the physics in the code and make it happen on the server. Games should not depend on client side physics for anything. The server should simply be telling the client what to animate and how to animate it. So something like a glass breaking could have an algorithm that takes a 8 bit number to make certain crack patterns and shards and a random number is generated at the server and those pieces are generated server side, then this same number is sent to the client so it just matches what the server has. So ex: one piece might land a certain way and be too big to walk over, this should match on the server and client no matter what kind of video card the gamer has.

 

[Carfax83]

I voted must have..

While the implementation quality can vary from game to game, when it's done correctly, PhysX can make a huge impact in the overall feel and immersion of a game.

Case in point, the top three PhysX games in my opinion are:

1) Batman Arkham City

2) Mafia 2

3) Borderlands 2

After playing these games with PhysX turned on, the very thought of playing them with PhysX turned off becomes almost unimaginable as the games seem utterly bland and incomplete without it.

But, at the same time I also understand that GPU accelerated PhysX will never reach it's true potential as long as it remains specific to one manufacturer, regardless of who's to blame.

Anyway, I think NVidia's strategy is to continue optimizing and refining PhysX, especially software PhysX. That's where the success or failure of PhysX will be determined, and the line between hardware and software PhysX has already been blurred as "hardware PhysX" will run in software mode in the latest games..

It's absolutely crucial that NVidia puts some pressure on developers to stop them from using the older PhysX SDKs. Developers should use the latest PhysX SDKs which run significantly faster on CPUs than the older versions.

Batman Arkham Origins and Call of Duty Ghosts BETTER be using PhysX 3.0 or better..

I think PhysX on medium should be attainable for fast hyperthreaded quad cores, provided the developer uses the version 3.0 or better. Above medium will probably require either spare cycles from the rendering GPU, or a dedicated GPU.

 

[sandorski]

Neutral

I would have bought an Nvidia card years ago as a PhysX dedicated card, if it would work in tandem with my ATI/AMD card. I wasn't, nor will I in the future, switch to Nvidia for PhysX.

Since it was brought up, when I got Borderlands 2, I expected disappointment playing it on my 5870. There was none. Game looks great, runs great, is fun. PhysX doesn't matter to my enjoyment.

 

[cmdrdredd]

The games that use it well are great. The games that don't...meh. I don't know what else to say.

 

[Erenhardt]

While some iterations look good, I have to vote for 'NO'(not an option in the pool). Locking features to specific hardware is not the way to go.
This is how to get manipulated:

I voted must have..

After playing these games with PhysX turned on, the very thought of playing them with PhysX turned off becomes almost unimaginable as the games seem utterly bland and incomplete without it.

Why would anyone accept that?
Imagine intel getting deal with Microsoft, so they are changing things around to not work on AMD CPU at all... Or event better: Imagine AMD getting deal with Microsoft, so they are chenging things around to not work on intel CPU.
Suddenly you can't use 'sum' formula in excel, or the formatting in word is not available if you don't have specific brand CPU.

 

[cmdrdredd]

While some iterations look good, I have to vote for 'NO'(not an option in the pool). Locking features to specific hardware is not the way to go.
This is how to get manipulated:


Why would anyone accept that?
Imagine intel getting deal with Microsoft, so they are changing things around to not work on AMD CPU at all... Or event better: Imagine AMD getting deal with Microsoft, so they are chenging things around to not work on intel CPU.
Suddenly you can't use 'sum' formula in excel, or the formatting in word is not available if you don't have specific brand CPU.

AMD is free to come up with their own GPU physics. They advertised that feature on old cards, I believe the 2900xt or something. Never materialized. Someone else, a 3rd party can also come up with their own GPU physics API for developers that uses OpenCL or something. Hasn't happened.

Until then we have Nvidia trying to bring extra value to their customers and no real competition for it.