Pure PsyX performance

[Lepton87]

Do you know of any test where cards are tested as psyX cards only with other card(s) rendering graphics. I'd like to know how fermi copare to kepler as is known kepler is often slower then fermi for compute, as PsyX computations are more like compute and less like rendering graphics I'd like to know how they compare. There are some compute scenarios where kepler is significantly faster then Fermi I'd like to know where PsyX performance land.
Unfortunately my single card can't handle both graphics and PsyX.
I'm especially interested in PsyX performance of relatively cheap cards such as
GTX460
GTX460/192bit
GTX650
and other cards in this price range. A test with a Titan/780 would be the most useful to me as I could easily see if a given cards increases performance or just slows my card down.

 

[toyota]

if your 780 cant handle it then its only in unoptimized spots that will dip for everyone. BL2 has the most demanding physx and even my gtx660ti does not drop below 60fps but a handful of times in just two places for the 70 hours of playing. fooling with running a dedicated physx card for maybe 1 game a year is silly.

 

[tential]

Nvidia had some stuff on their website under their guides section for the batman game. That was testing the GTX 580 cards with other supporting cards for physx I think. Or something like that. I haven't seen anything else.

 

[Lepton87]

I don't play many games anymore just a few a year and I like the wither series very much, I played the Witcher 2 both in English and Polish version and it's the only game I played where the polish line and jokes were better then English. The witcher 3 is supposed to use PsyX and Metro Last Light which is the game I play right now that also uses Psyx and I need to turn down details quite heavily to make it playable at 2560x1440 the good thing is that I don't really notice much of a difference, but I leave PsyX enabled. I'm wondering if GTX460 would be enough to do PsyX computations fast enough to both unburden my titan and not slow it down. It's 40nm tech but for it's price I can only buy much, slower 28nm card and it's not like my PSU will even feel it, but one thing that bothers me is that AFAIK it does not support Deep Sleep mode when in not in use. But on my platform it's not worth it, 8x PCI-E 2.0 will surely be a bottle-neck for my card. I forgot about that. it only does 8x/16x/16x with 3 cards.

 

[toyota]

well I would go with nothing less than a 650 ti. 650 ti may not be much faster than a 460 with graphics but should be a noticeably better physx card than the 460. if I could justify a Titan and felt that physx was important and played at 2560x1440 then I would personally go with a 660 or 660 ti for physx. I just think with card like the Titan you need something faster than a 460 or even 650 ti if you want to get the best use out of a dedicated physx card.

 

[Carfax83]

well I would go with nothing less than a 650 ti. 650 ti may not be much faster than a 460 with graphics but should be a noticeably better physx card than the 460. if I could justify a Titan and felt that physx was important and played at 2560x1440 then I would personally go with a 660 or 660 ti for physx. I just think with card like the Titan you need something faster than a 460 or even 650 ti if you want to get the best use out of a dedicated physx card.

Price aside, unless you play Hawken or something, a 660 or 660 Ti would be absolute overkill. A 650 Ti would be my recommendation..

 

[Lepton87]

The thing is those card are quite expensive, especially 660, it's absurdly expensive where I live. 650Ti is over 40% cheaper. The other hassle is that I would have to measure how much performance I lose when going from PCI-E 2.0 16X to PCI-E 2.0 8X. That NF200 bridge that my mobo has only works with 3 cards installed. The lost in performance from PCI-E alone might make it not worth it regardless of how fast a card I'd have for PsyX. If I had PCI 3.0 it wouldn't be a problem.

ps. It's a shame that NV does not officially allow PsyX accelerator card with a Radeon as a main card, they only shrink their market. Now that Intel is slowly but steadily entering into games psyx might become even more nieche. One node shrink or two and Intel iGPU will actually play games acceptably but at what cost? Their CPU will have more transistor budget for GPU then CPU. but the fact that we have been at 4 core for mainstream for 6 years is terrible.

 

[toyota]

Price aside, unless you play Hawken or something, a 660 or 660 Ti would be absolute overkill. A 650 Ti would be my recommendation..

its NOT overkill when your main gpu is a Titan.

 

[Carfax83]

The thing is those card are quite expensive, especially 660, it's absurdly expensive where I live. 650Ti is over 40% cheaper. The other hassle is that I would have to measure how much performance I lose when going from PCI-E 2.0 16X to PCI-E 2.0 8X. That NF200 bridge that my mobo has only works with 3 cards installed. The lost in performance from PCI-E alone might make it not worth it regardless of how fast a card I'd have for PsyX. If I had PCI 3.0 it wouldn't be a problem.

I had a look at your motherboard specs, and it says it supports 2x 16x PCI-E slots so I don't see your problem. Just put the Titan in the 16x slot, and the PhysX card and whatever else you have in the x8 slots.

It's a shame that NV does not officially allow PsyX accelerator card with a Radeon as a main card, they only shrink their market. Now that Intel is slowly but steadily entering into games psyx might become even more nieche. One node shrink or two and Intel iGPU will actually play games acceptably but at what cost? Their CPU will have more transistor budget for GPU then CPU. but the fact that we have been at 4 core for mainstream for 6 years is terrible.

People keep saying that PhysX is going to die out, or that it's a niche product, but big games still continue to support it. Borderlands 2, Batman Arkham Asylum, Batman Arkham City, Mafia 2 (and possibly Mafia 3), Metro 2033, Metro Last Light, Batman Arkham Origins, and now Witcher 3.

These games aren't indicative of a niche product. Devs like to use PhysX because it's the most advanced Physics API out there, and the only one that supports hardware acceleration as far as I know.

 

[Rvenger]

its NOT overkill when your main gpu is a Titan.

Hawken even brings a Titan to it's knees on full PhysX.

 

[Carfax83]

its NOT overkill when your main gpu is a Titan.

The PhysX card only does physics calculations, so as long as it can handle the PhysX workload, it shouldn't matter.

I used a GTS 250 for years alongside my 580 SLI with no issues. Only with Metro Last Light, did I finally see a need to get a faster PhysX card because the massive amount of particle effects in large gun fights would overwhelm the GTS 250 at times.

 

[wand3r3r]

BL2 four player physx will bring anything to its knees. See my benchmarking etc thread with a 690. It was funny to hear all the bogus claims on how great physx ran on everyone else's cards until none would benchmark it. In 4 player it was predictable and using auto (physx however NV deemed fit) or dedicating a 680 to physx didn't stop the fps from single digits with the four player intense in your face fighting. Talk about a joke, the top card stuttering due to one setting physx high while otherwise running at extremely high fps. 100+

 

[Carfax83]

BL2 four player physx will bring anything to its knees. See my benchmarking etc thread with a 690. It was funny to hear all the bogus claims on how great physx ran on everyone else's cards until none would benchmark it. In 4 player it was predictable and using auto (physx however NV deemed fit) or dedicating a 680 to physx didn't stop the fps from single digits with the four player intense in your face fighting. Talk about a joke, the top card stuttering due to one setting physx high while otherwise running at extremely high fps. 100+

In that scenario, you have hundreds of thousands of physically active particles being generated; similar to the full scale destruction effects seen in Hawken.

That's a lot to ask for hardware to do right now I think..

 

[Irishwhitey]

Metro Last Light ? Any other new games even have Physx ?

 

[Carfax83]

Hawken even brings a Titan to it's knees on full PhysX.

I don't think the PhysX in Hawken is fully complete or optimized yet, which is why it runs so poorly.

 

[Makaveli]

if your 780 cant handle it then its only in unoptimized spots that will dip for everyone. BL2 has the most demanding physx and even my gtx660ti does not drop below 60fps but a handful of times in just two places for the 70 hours of playing. fooling with running a dedicated physx card for maybe 1 game a year is silly.

That is with Physx set to High in borderlands2 ?

Cause there are others on this forum with higher end NV cards and physx set to high was not playable when in 4 player mode with alot on screen.

This is what were talking about right not single player with low load?

I was in the same boat as OP and picked up a 650 superclocked from EVGA just for physx the price point was good. I didn't want to spend $200 on a physx card but $120 was acceptable to me.

Also the amount of power it was pulling and heat out was also important another reason why the 650 won out over the 660 or Ti cards in my setup.

 

[toyota]

The PhysX card only does physics calculations, so as long as it can handle the PhysX workload, it shouldn't matter.

I used a GTS 250 for years alongside my 580 SLI with no issues. Only with Metro Last Light, did I finally see a need to get a faster PhysX card because the massive amount of particle effects in large gun fights would overwhelm the GTS 250 at times.

that is incorrect. the faster your main gpu is then the faster your physx card has to be. an 8600gt could offload physx with a gts250 for the main card but if you used the 8600gt for physx with a gtx480 then it would way slower than letting the 480 do both graphics and physx.

 

[toyota]

That is with Physx set to High in borderlands2 ?

Cause there are others on this forum with higher end NV cards and physx set to high was not playable when in 4 player mode with alot on screen.

This is what were talking about right not single player with low load?

I was in the same boat as OP and picked up a 650 superclocked from EVGA just for physx the price point was good. I didn't want to spend $200 on a physx card but $120 was acceptable to me.

Also the amount of power it was pulling and heat out was also important another reason why the 650 won out over the 660 or Ti cards in my setup.

I am only talking about single player. there have been TWO locations in the whole 70 hours that I have played where it will dip below 60. in those spots everyone seems to have dips. I can run benchmarks and show screenshots if you like. my exact settings are very high with physx on high and black outline disabled with SMAA injector running at 1920x1080.

 

[Makaveli]

I am only talking about single player. there have been TWO locations in the whole 70 hours that I have played where it will dip below 60. in those spots everyone seems to have dips. I can run benchmarks and show screenshots if you like. my exact settings are very high with physx on high and black outline disabled with SMAA injector running at 1920x1080.

I knew this

No benchmarks are needed as others have already tested it.

Go into a 4 player game and spend a solid hour playing with physx set to high then come back and let us know.

I've done alot of testing with this game myself as I bought my physx card just for BL2 and now i'm enjoying it in Batman AC.

 

[Irishwhitey]

that is incorrect. the faster your main gpu is then the faster your physx card has to be. an 8600gt could offload physx with a gts250 for the main card but if you used the 8600gt for physx with a gtx480 then it would way slower than letting the 480 do both graphics and physx.

Would still like to see more Physx games I mean one new game with Physx come on LOL.

 

[toyota]

I play games to get away from people so no co op for me.

 

[sxr7171]

So apparently nVidia has a GPU farm where they test games and cards in different configurations to provide users with a playable setting on their machines. Given that why would they not offer some guidance on which cards are sufficient for Physx acceleration.

I'm going to be using a 780GTX with a 460 1GB as physx card. I run a high settings so I generally am at or around 60fps and with V-sync on. So I wonder if my physx card needs to be very fast.

Also will putting a 460gtx ultimately cause the pci-e 3.0 bus to run at pci-e 2.0 speeds?

 

[toyota]

So apparently nVidia has a GPU farm where they test games and cards in different configurations to provide users with a playable setting on their machines. Given that why would they not offer some guidance on which cards are sufficient for Physx acceleration.

I'm going to be using a 780GTX with a 460 1GB as physx card. I run a high settings so I generally am at or around 60fps and with V-sync on. So I wonder if my physx card needs to be very fast.

Also will putting a 460gtx ultimately cause the pci-e 3.0 bus to run at pci-e 2.0 speeds?

because its a never ending moving target.

 

[Irishwhitey]

why would they not offer some guidance on which cards are sufficient for Physx acceleration.

Um because naturally nvidia will tell you to buy a 780, 690 or Titan.

 

[SirPauly]

Would still like to see more Physx games I mean one new game with Physx come on LOL.

Borderlands 2, Hawken, PlanetSide 2, Metro: Last Light, WarFrame

My constructive nit-pick was content and starting to pick up!