PPU PhysX disabled for ATI too?

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Extrem1st

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Ah, the Demerjian clan.
How can I help?
PhysX has been disabled when ATI cards are present in the system. Why are any of you surprised? What would be the point of disabling only Nvidia GPU's running PhysX alongside an ATI card and still let PhysX PPU's do it? If they had, might as well have never blocked PhsyX in the first place.

A paid NV mouthpiece trying to make a laughably nonsensical excuse?
Color me surprised...


Please dial back your tendency to personally insult those you disagree with or you will earn yourself some time off from here.

Perknose
Senior AT Mod

lol

Yeah, it's nice to see that a Mod, especially an "Nvidia Focus Group"-badged one can start the name calling free at will but I get warned when I throw back at him, completely correctly, as he is what I said (NV Focus Group badge clearly shows it.)

Where? Show me where. If you're telling the truth, I'll apologize.
And why the hell would that be something "nice" to see? Can't you people speak without sarcasm?

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: MrK6

Originally posted by: Extrem1st

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Ah, the Demerjian clan.
How can I help?
PhysX has been disabled when ATI cards are present in the system. Why are any of you surprised? What would be the point of disabling only Nvidia GPU's running PhysX alongside an ATI card and still let PhysX PPU's do it? If they had, might as well have never blocked PhsyX in the first place.

A paid NV mouthpiece trying to make a laughably nonsensical excuse?
Color me surprised...


Please dial back your tendency to personally insult those you disagree with or you will earn yourself some time off from here.

Perknose
Senior AT Mod

lol

The best part is there's no insult in that statement (unless being called part of the NVIDIA focus group is an insult, and hey, I won't argue against that ); did someone go running to a mod for calling it like it is? Hilarious.

It's actually a lot worse than that.
Few days ago I got a creepy private warning from a Mod telling me to get off his back, stop calling him out about his Nvidia stance or posts, without any explanation why doing such things qualify as grave mistakes.

This whole idea of IHV representatives policing a supposedly independent forum is truly beyond anyone's wildest imaginations and are part of Nvidia's wet dreams, that's forsure.
It's a really weird place, this forum, it's obvious especially when you see various Mods jumping immediately as soon as someone calls out the paid astroturf for his hypocrisy - I wonder what kind of vested interests are at work among the Mods here...

 

[WelshBloke]

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Extrem1st

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Ah, the Demerjian clan.
How can I help?
PhysX has been disabled when ATI cards are present in the system. Why are any of you surprised? What would be the point of disabling only Nvidia GPU's running PhysX alongside an ATI card and still let PhysX PPU's do it? If they had, might as well have never blocked PhsyX in the first place.

A paid NV mouthpiece trying to make a laughably nonsensical excuse?
Color me surprised...


Please dial back your tendency to personally insult those you disagree with or you will earn yourself some time off from here.

Perknose
Senior AT Mod

lol

Yeah, it's nice to see that a Mod, especially an "Nvidia Focus Group"-badged one can start the name calling free at will but I get warned when I throw back at him, completely correctly, as he is what I said (NV Focus Group badge clearly shows it.)

Look you need to tone it down.

every other post of yours your calling someone an idiot or some other insult.

Keys is a long time poster here and pretty well respected, he wont insult you, he plays by the rules.

I, however, don't really care.

So ether start using some manners or sod off. Your starting to be an irritating little git.

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Extrem1st

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Ah, the Demerjian clan.
How can I help?
PhysX has been disabled when ATI cards are present in the system. Why are any of you surprised? What would be the point of disabling only Nvidia GPU's running PhysX alongside an ATI card and still let PhysX PPU's do it? If they had, might as well have never blocked PhsyX in the first place.

A paid NV mouthpiece trying to make a laughably nonsensical excuse?
Color me surprised...


Please dial back your tendency to personally insult those you disagree with or you will earn yourself some time off from here.

Perknose
Senior AT Mod

lol

Yeah, it's nice to see that a Mod, especially an "Nvidia Focus Group"-badged one can start the name calling free at will but I get warned when I throw back at him, completely correctly, as he is what I said (NV Focus Group badge clearly shows it.)

Where? Show me where. If you're telling the truth, I'll apologize.
And why the hell would that be something "nice" to see? Can't you people speak without sarcasm?

To answer both of your question at once:

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Ah, the Demerjian clan.
How can I help?

Priceless, that is.

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: T2k
This whole idea of IHV representatives policing a supposedly independent forum is truly beyond anyone's wildest imaginations and are part of Nvidia's wet dreams, that's forsure.

not really. Nvidia is doing a horrible job with the whole focus group thing. Nobody buys it and most people are offended and have dropped nvidia from a "meh" or "i like it" to a "wtf" or "I hate you".

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Extrem1st

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Ah, the Demerjian clan.
How can I help?
PhysX has been disabled when ATI cards are present in the system. Why are any of you surprised? What would be the point of disabling only Nvidia GPU's running PhysX alongside an ATI card and still let PhysX PPU's do it? If they had, might as well have never blocked PhsyX in the first place.

A paid NV mouthpiece trying to make a laughably nonsensical excuse?
Color me surprised...


Please dial back your tendency to personally insult those you disagree with or you will earn yourself some time off from here.

Perknose
Senior AT Mod

lol

Yeah, it's nice to see that a Mod, especially an "Nvidia Focus Group"-badged one can start the name calling free at will but I get warned when I throw back at him, completely correctly, as he is what I said (NV Focus Group badge clearly shows it.)

Where? Show me where. If you're telling the truth, I'll apologize.
And why the hell would that be something "nice" to see? Can't you people speak without sarcasm?

To answer both of your question at once:

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Ah, the Demerjian clan.
How can I help?

Priceless, that is.

Ok, PM the anandtech moderator account with this complaint. This name calling. You seem to be the only member who took it personal. I didn't realize you were more sensitive than most and didn't mean to hurt your feelings this badly. And, it was kind of a 1/2 joke too.
So, please, I admit this guilt and won't hold it against you if you report me for it. I deserve it.

Think we can get back to the thead now?

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: WelshBloke

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Extrem1st

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Ah, the Demerjian clan.
How can I help?
PhysX has been disabled when ATI cards are present in the system. Why are any of you surprised? What would be the point of disabling only Nvidia GPU's running PhysX alongside an ATI card and still let PhysX PPU's do it? If they had, might as well have never blocked PhsyX in the first place.

A paid NV mouthpiece trying to make a laughably nonsensical excuse?
Color me surprised...


Please dial back your tendency to personally insult those you disagree with or you will earn yourself some time off from here.

Perknose
Senior AT Mod

lol

Yeah, it's nice to see that a Mod, especially an "Nvidia Focus Group"-badged one can start the name calling free at will but I get warned when I throw back at him, completely correctly, as he is what I said (NV Focus Group badge clearly shows it.)

Look you need to tone it down.

every other post of yours your calling someone an idiot or some other insult.

Keys is a long time poster here and pretty well respected, he wont insult you, he plays by the rules.

FYI it sometimes helps to read back a little, y'know - I mean reading, not just quickly skimming through posts.

I, however, don't really care.

Ehh? Then why this post...?

So ether start using some manners or sod off. Your starting to be an irritating little git.

Oh I'm so sorry... did I hurt your feelings?

Wait, did you just call me a git?
How classy.



...it's a weird place, as I said, that's for sure.

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Extrem1st

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Ah, the Demerjian clan.
How can I help?
PhysX has been disabled when ATI cards are present in the system. Why are any of you surprised? What would be the point of disabling only Nvidia GPU's running PhysX alongside an ATI card and still let PhysX PPU's do it? If they had, might as well have never blocked PhsyX in the first place.

A paid NV mouthpiece trying to make a laughably nonsensical excuse?
Color me surprised...


Please dial back your tendency to personally insult those you disagree with or you will earn yourself some time off from here.

Perknose
Senior AT Mod

lol

Yeah, it's nice to see that a Mod, especially an "Nvidia Focus Group"-badged one can start the name calling free at will but I get warned when I throw back at him, completely correctly, as he is what I said (NV Focus Group badge clearly shows it.)

Where? Show me where. If you're telling the truth, I'll apologize.
And why the hell would that be something "nice" to see? Can't you people speak without sarcasm?

To answer both of your question at once:

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Ah, the Demerjian clan.
How can I help?

Priceless, that is.

Ok, PM the anandtech moderator account with this complaint. This name calling. You seem to be the only member who took it personal. I didn't realize you were more sensitive than most and didn't mean to hurt your feelings this badly. And, it was kind of a 1/2 joke too.
So, please, I admit this guilt and won't hold it against you if you report me for it. I deserve it.

Nonono, it's your turn now: show me where did I insult you any way.

I want to see the offending words quoted by you. Please.

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Think we can get back to the thead now?

Oh we are, we already are. :beer:

PS: gotta go for now, later.

 

[WelshBloke]

Originally posted by: T2k

Oh I'm so sorry... did I hurt your feelings?

Wait, did you just call me a git?
How classy.



...it's a weird place, as I said, that's for sure.

Hurt my feelings? Your just a troll, how the hell could you hurt my feelings?

I really don't need to stay classy in your eyes, but if your worried about those things you might want to look at your posts.

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The problem with supporting this is that people will try to run it on Vista. Thanks to Vistas driver scheme it won't work. So people will complain. Better to just disable it and avoid the headache.

That's the lamest argument yet. Even worse than "We can't test every configuration with AMD cards, so best to just disable it... even though it worked ok before."

It actually is a pretty good reason. Poor driver support from HW manufacturers is a huge reason Vista leaves a bad taste in most peoples mouths and killed it's sales.

 

[Forumpanda]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The problem with supporting this is that people will try to run it on Vista. Thanks to Vistas driver scheme it won't work. So people will complain. Better to just disable it and avoid the headache.

The best part about this is how many ATI fans say "PhysX is useless" and then cry when they can't get it to work. Priceless. Truly priceless.

So in your world, how does it work when people go out and buy a new DX10 or 11 card for their home computer with windows XP on it?

Originally posted by: Atechie
First the red team declare that PhysX is useless...and then they whine when they can't useit...get real :roll:

You do realize that the first requirement to complain about that move is actually having purchased nVidia graphics cards? (or the 2 people that who bought the PPU).
I'm not sure mocking people for buying nVidia hardware is a good way to create returning customers.

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: WelshBloke

Originally posted by: T2k

Oh I'm so sorry... did I hurt your feelings?

Wait, did you just call me a git?
How classy.



...it's a weird place, as I said, that's for sure.

Hurt my feelings? Your just a troll, how the hell could you hurt my feelings?

You are accusing someone being a troll?

I really don't need to stay classy in your eyes, but if your worried about those things you might want to look at your posts.

You mean "you are" worried... I have nothing to worry about. I stand by my records: compared to your recent posts every few of my posts had either linked files or information or description of how to get something to work etc. OTOH your recent posts so far are, cough-cough, very close to useless...

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: bfdd

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The problem with supporting this is that people will try to run it on Vista. Thanks to Vistas driver scheme it won't work. So people will complain. Better to just disable it and avoid the headache.

That's the lamest argument yet. Even worse than "We can't test every configuration with AMD cards, so best to just disable it... even though it worked ok before."

It actually is a pretty good reason. Poor driver support from HW manufacturers is a huge reason Vista leaves a bad taste in most peoples mouths and killed it's sales.

I disagree. Vista was DoA thanks to its bloated PoS architecture and UI, it was not only not faster but actually SLOWER than its predecessor and yet only offered a more convoluted, clunky UI and some distasteful uber-colored themes.

W7 mostly fixed the architectural problems but still a mess compared to Xp - most things I got in clicks now take 5-10 clicks.
Stupid, idiotic UI upgrade, typical incompetent MS stuff.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: bfdd

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The problem with supporting this is that people will try to run it on Vista. Thanks to Vistas driver scheme it won't work. So people will complain. Better to just disable it and avoid the headache.

That's the lamest argument yet. Even worse than "We can't test every configuration with AMD cards, so best to just disable it... even though it worked ok before."

It actually is a pretty good reason. Poor driver support from HW manufacturers is a huge reason Vista leaves a bad taste in most peoples mouths and killed it's sales.

Not sure if you missed this:

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The problem with supporting this is that people will try to run it on Vista. Thanks to Vistas driver scheme it won't work. So people will complain. Better to just disable it and avoid the headache.

The PhysX PPU works fine under Vista with another video card. I ran it along side an X1900XTX for quite a while until the fan starting giving out (the PPU, not the X1900). The PPU isn't a graphical device, so it doesn't use WDDM drivers and hence Vista's limitations do not come in to play.

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: bfdd

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The problem with supporting this is that people will try to run it on Vista. Thanks to Vistas driver scheme it won't work. So people will complain. Better to just disable it and avoid the headache.

That's the lamest argument yet. Even worse than "We can't test every configuration with AMD cards, so best to just disable it... even though it worked ok before."

It actually is a pretty good reason. Poor driver support from HW manufacturers is a huge reason Vista leaves a bad taste in most peoples mouths and killed it's sales.

I disagree. Vista was DoA thanks to its bloated PoS architecture and UI, it was not only not faster but actually SLOWER than its predecessor and yet only offered a more convoluted, clunky UI and some distasteful uber-colored themes.

W7 mostly fixed the architectural problems but still a mess compared to Xp - most things I got in clicks now take 5-10 clicks.
Stupid, idiotic UI upgrade, typical incompetent MS stuff.

Actually the biggest problem with Vista was drivers by far. It might not of been faster than XP but it wasn't noticeably slower on any of my machines. The biggest problem was being 100% unable to run Vista without drivers crashing within 10 minutes of use. The UI is much better and the architecture was a step in the right direction from XP, could of been better and that's what we're seeing with Windows 7. Vista was a flop no doubt, but the biggest problems with it were 1. hardware requirements(oems selling basically junk PCs with everything Vista turned on) and 2. drivers from hardware vendors being absolutely TERRIBLE for the first 6 months or longer after it came out.

Slowspyder, I did just read that and I retract my statement, but it's a much better excuse than "we just don't l ike AMD" imo.

 

[Forumpanda]

Originally posted by: T2k
You mean "you are" worried... I have nothing to worry about. I stand by my records: compared to your recent posts every few of my posts had either linked files or information or description of how to get something to work etc. OTOH your recent posts so far are, cough-cough, very close to useless...

As much as I am 'with you' in that I also believe it is very dishonest for people to give the impression that they are engaging in a debate when they really are just here to push an agenda.
You are also doing equal harm by being as obnoxious about it as they are.

When I see people make junk posts with no value to it I skip over it, when I see people basically 'camp' a thread and not let any debate happen because they have to get the last word in every time, I get annoyed because I am wasting my time trying to dissect information out of that mess.

That is not just meant as a reply to you, but also to the people who are doing nothing to provide valuable viewpoints or information to the debate but just make up stupid reasonings that obviously are not true about why company this or that does something, or spend 30 seconds creating a 1 line post with no valuable information, with a giant quote and a giant signature making the forum unreadable.

Please for the love of pandas give me an option to turn off signatures and show quotes collapsed, people here are really doing everyone a disservice with the way they use this forum. (edit: I realize I can turn off signatures, yay!)

 

[Blazer7]

I absolutely agree with Forumpanda and since no one here seems eager to let go that makes it about time for some mod to step in and either lock this thread or do some serious b**kicking. I hope for the 2nd as this will give the rest of us a chance to learn something from those that are interested in actually posting facts and opinions rather than attacking others.

 

[HurleyBird]

Agreed with Forumpanda. I'm on the "same side" as T2k, but his bickering totally derailed the thread!

 

[T2k]

This topic is long dead, in case OT posters haven't noticed. NV did the nasty trick and I posted the antidote. Everybody expressed his distaste, few of his support - what else left...?

 

[konakona]

Personally I see nothing more at play here than standard cost-cutting business decisions being made by a company that operates in a competitive market.

I don't see how placing an artificially adding a block that did not exist previously could pass as a cost-cutting measure. From moralistic accusations aside, the least they could have done was maybe discontinue formal support for the non-nvidia gpu, or add a disclaimer to notify their customers of it. Isn't it a bit suspicious to put it nicely, that they had to actively invent a 'feature' to cut the costs? Adding extra lines in the code should have cost the money you know, however little that might have been. Sorry if I come off as being too technical, but I just cant' accept that their true intent was to cut the cost. They could have just left it alone instead of altering it only to harm their reputation.

 

[veri745]

Originally posted by: konakona

Personally I see nothing more at play here than standard cost-cutting business decisions being made by a company that operates in a competitive market.

I don't see how placing an artificially adding a block that did not exist previously could pass as a cost-cutting measure. From moralistic accusations aside, the least they could have done was maybe discontinue formal support for the non-nvidia gpu, or add a disclaimer to notify their customers of it. Isn't it a bit suspicious to put it nicely, that they had to actively invent a 'feature' to cut the costs? Adding extra lines in the code should have cost the money you know, however little that might have been. Sorry if I come off as being too technical, but I just cant' accept that their true intent was to cut the cost. They could have just left it alone instead of altering it only to harm their reputation.

It seems like an awfully questionable decision to me to me, but I could see it as being a cost-cutting measure if support for old Physx hardware was breaking new features.

It works like this: every time they update their drivers, they have to verify that it doesn't break on old hardware. It's possible that they didn't just add lines of code to disable the PPU with ATI hardware, but that they were able to remove LOTS of code that included workarounds for the old hardware. This would also cut lots of time out of validation.

Sometimes supporting forward compatibility is a bitch.

Again, I don't really buy this argument myself, but it's a possibility.

 

[SSChevy2001]

Originally posted by: veri745
It works like this: every time they update their drivers, they have to verify that it doesn't break on old hardware. It's possible that they didn't just add lines of code to disable the PPU with ATI hardware, but that they were able to remove LOTS of code that included workarounds for the old hardware. This would also cut lots of time out of validation.

So what your saying is nVIDIA added lines of code just to make ATi + nVIDIA Hybrid work, only later to disable it and remove those extra lines of code?

Remember that PhysX still works if you have a Nvidia GPU rendering, so no older hardware support has been removed. Also a simple patch was able to restore the ATi + nVIDIA combo, so nothing was removed.

As konakona point out nVIDIA should of just had some disclaimer that hybrid combo are not support by nVIDIA. In the end they would of got some extra hardware sales and increased the GPU PhysX user base.

 

[ClownPuncher]

The way it's meant to be FUBAR'ed.

 

[SRoode]

Does it say on the box of the card that you bought that PhysX will only be enabled if you ONLY have nVidia cards in your system? If you buy a card that is advertised as a PhysX card, it should perform as one. Primary card or secondary card.

BTW, this is a VERY bad move for nVidia IMO. They could sell tons of older 8800 series plus cards as PhysX cards. They instead choose to cripple this feature.

Why so desperate?