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

Page 15 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Physx - rate the importance if you care or not

  • 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! (Diehard fan)


Results are only viewable after voting.

Zanovar

Diamond Member
Jan 21, 2011
3,446
232
106
You will not get an answer. It's viral marketing.

Funny fact: Alice has TressFX like hair and yet you need TressFX for the same kind of effect in Tomb Raider. I guess AMD took the "Alice" hair out of the game, too...

Oh cmon i dont think its viral marketing.(coming from you fucking hilarious)the guy should just stop rubbing his crystal ball too much*winks*
 

Zanovar

Diamond Member
Jan 21, 2011
3,446
232
106
Not my cup of tea,i dont understand the fuss about it tbh.as for the effects been removed from games to add the fizz thats just bollocks imo.
 
Last edited:

bystander36

Diamond Member
Apr 1, 2013
5,154
132
106
PhysX is used in a number of ways. It is not always used for special effects, like in BL2 or Sacred 2. In some games it is used for accurate real time physics calculations, like in Metro 2033. The difference between it on and off in Metro 2033 is only a matter of using real time physics versus prerecorded physics.

I personally wouldn't go out of my way for PhysX, but if I have a choice between two equal cards, I'll get the one with PhysX.
 

3DVagabond

Lifer
Aug 10, 2009
11,951
204
106
You will not get an answer. It's viral marketing.

Funny fact: Alice has TressFX like hair and yet you need TressFX for the same kind of effect in Tomb Raider. I guess AMD took the "Alice" hair out of the game, too...

Alice doesn't have TressFX type hair, not even close, but I understand and agree with the rest of the post. They aren't going to do the effect twice. Of course the difference being is it will run on any hardware and it doesn't effect anyone because of brand preference.
 

MrK6

Diamond Member
Aug 9, 2004
4,458
4
81
Proof of this? ist been asked many times im still waiting...
It's been answered in this thread at least a couple of times. Take any physx game, a Batman game for example. Specifically, look at the marketing for said game, e.g.: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fypZcdcdy0 . The comparisons aren't between a standard implementation of an effect (pre-rendered for example) and the GPU physx version, just no effect, or GPU physx.

The thing is "real-time physics" is an absolute waste of precious computing power. Physics are predictable, think back to high school and why there are so many laws. Why would you waste limited cycles retracing a predictable event in real-time? It makes little sense.
 

SirPauly

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2009
5,187
1
0
imho.

What is a waste is having the hardware and not offering content for gamers to choose and decide!
 

Carfax83

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2010
6,841
1,536
136
Proof of this or are you using an opinion and guesses as facts?

Feel free to present your opinion but keep it clearly noted as your opinion, not trying to pass it off as fact.;)

My proof is the console version. In multiplatform games, the base gameplay remains the same regardless of whether you're playing on PC, Xbox 360 or PS3.

However the gaming experience can differ among the platforms. For example, Xbox 360 version may have slightly higher frame rates with less lag and dips than the PS3, and the PC version typically has far higher frame rates than both consoles, as well as higher IQ..

Also, developers can implement PC specific technology which doesn't alter gameplay, but impacts subjective qualities like immersion, enjoyment etcetera...

Examples include EyeFinity, TressFX, GPU PhysX, 3D Vision etcetera..

So these technologies aren't obviously included in the base version of the game, and support has to be implemented. So if there is interactive fog or smoke in a certain location in Batman Arkham City with GPU PhysX enabled, yet no fog or smoke was present in the console or base version, then it was implemented by the NVidia software engineers working in concert with the game developers.

But with PhysX becoming more and more flexible with different levels of PhysX and greater CPU optimization, we are starting to see less of these problems. Modern PhysX games will run the advanced PhysX on the CPU if the switch is enabled and no CUDA GPU is present.

So AMD users are not technically getting left out anymore. They can still run these effects, it will just be much slower...and probably not worth the effort unless they have a hybrid setup.
 

blackened23

Diamond Member
Jul 26, 2011
8,548
2
0
You have some wrong ideas there. There is no console game now or ever that has GPU effects for GPU physx. Physx is MORE than GPU phsyx, it is also a base physics engine that has been used in a wide variety of games similar to Dragon Age origins. (I could name tons of other examples such as DA:O that did not have any physx graphical effects) There is no console game nor will there ever be a console game that uses GPU physics for graphical effects. Going back to my example of Dragon Age: Origins, every version of this game used physx but only as a base physics engine - for collision detection. If you think GPU physics will occur on any console you have some grave mis-ideas.

To summarize: there are two versions of "PHSYX"

One is merely an actual physics engine
The second is for actual GPU accelerated effects as seen in borderlands 2.

Going back to Dragon Age: Origins, even on AMD cards the game will not run unless nvidia physx is installed. Obviously, the game looks 100% identical on all GPU hardware. It is only using the engine for physics with no gpu accelerated effects.

The xbox 360 has tons of phyx games. The PS3 has tons of physx games. So will the XB1 and PS4. They are not will not be using GPU physx for GPU accelerated effects. Nor will they use the CPU for such effects. They are using the base physics engine for collision detection and other such things, similar to how havox is used with a lot of engines.

Just because you see the physx moniker supported on well, everything, that doesn't really mean anything. It's just the actual physics engine with no GPU accelerated effects. Every platform supports this including stupid ones like Android and iOS. Only nvidia GPUs will support the GPU accelerated effects. Again, you have some WRONG ideas there if you think any console will ever be using those graphical effects.

So in the end? Does physx matter? Probably to a few PC only gamers. It doesn't matter to anyone outside that crowd and certainly will never matter to console gamers.
 
Last edited: