Terrible Framerates with PhysX

[3MDR]

I was playing mirror's edge, and I can run the game at the highest settings at 1900X1200. My framerate is pretty good throughout running and jumping around. However, once any of the physics comes into the screen, (like plastic flaps over doors) and I start to use the PhysX, the framerate drops considerably.

I thought the intergrated PhysX was supposed to eliminate this. I have a GTX 280.

 

[error8]

Did you installed the patch , latest PhysX drivers and latest Forceware?

 

[krnmastersgt]

I thought PhysX only worked really well without affecting performance when you used a card dedicated to just PhysX (like an 8600 gt).

 

[3MDR]

I have the latest drivers for the GTX 280, but why would I need separate PhysX drivers? Shouldn't it all be integrated?

 

[taltamir]

it is, but running physx and regular video on the same card at the same time is taxing. There might be some tweaking needed, or maybe a patch is coming.

Oh, do you have PCIe v1 or v2? (i don't know if that is an issue, i am just taking a guess here)

 

[Keysplayr]

PhysX is all integrated in the latest drivers and has been for quite a few driver revisions now.

Give us some idea about your rig.

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: krnmastersgt
I thought PhysX only worked really well without affecting performance when you used a card dedicated to just PhysX (like an 8600 gt).

it can actually be slower on an 8600gt in some cases than just using a gtx260 or gtx280 to do both graphics and physx.

 

[Zenoth]

Well, if PhysX is calculated by the GPU which is also computing the rest of the effects on-screen shouldn't it be logical that the frame-rate drops? The card needs not only to process the usual visual effects but also PhysX. No? It's not like you had a dedicated PhysX hardware which would normally alleviate the whole thing for your GTX 280, for example having a PhysX card or another GeForce (G8, G9 or GT200) card and dedicate that hardware for PhysX computing and leaving your GTX 280 at the "usual" work.

 

[Gutcheck2009]

Dude with my 280 I had very similar issues, and I could never figure it out. If I ran Vantage, when it got to the physx test it would just freeze up and die. I should have tried another driver before I sold it, but I think the Vista / driver combo is what is causing this problem. Use some kind of driver cleaner (drivercleanerpro etc) and kill everything and then try it out.

 

[Raider1284]

Originally posted by: Zenoth
Well, if PhysX is calculated by the GPU which is also computing the rest of the effects on-screen shouldn't it be logical that the frame-rate drops? The card needs not only to process the usual visual effects but also PhysX. No? It's not like you had a dedicated PhysX hardware which would normally alleviate the whole thing for your GTX 280, for example having a PhysX card or another GeForce (G8, G9 or GT200) card and dedicate that hardware for PhysX computing and leaving your GTX 280 at the "usual" work.

This thinking is going to be wrong 90% of the time. Yes the physics operations are being done on the same card as the gpu, but he gpu can perform them much much faster then the cpu would. So yes it takes a little hit runing on the same gpu but it should also gain alot of fps by having the cpu NOT run the calculations. Physics calculations through the cpu is a much bigger bottleneck.

If its coded correctly this phsyx should almost always increase fps, not decrease it

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: Raider1284
If its coded correctly this phsyx should almost always increase fps, not decrease it

I don't know about "coded correctly" but it has been shown that enabling PhysX can negatively impact FPS. This was shown even BITD with an actual PhysX card, and the reason was that games tried to do more stuff on-screen, thus taxing the GPU more.

These days a too-low end GPU can also negatively impact FPS, such as using the IGP on an NVIDIA 750a/8200/etc chipset for PhysX. Sure, the drivers will enable it, but the GPU has so few processing cores that it isn't able to keep up.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: 3MDR
I was playing mirror's edge, and I can run the game at the highest settings at 1900X1200. My framerate is pretty good throughout running and jumping around. However, once any of the physics comes into the screen, (like plastic flaps over doors) and I start to use the PhysX, the framerate drops considerably.

I thought the intergrated PhysX was supposed to eliminate this. I have a GTX 280.

Same here. I can play the game fine 1920x1080 4xAA without physx. With it on I get graphic anomalies and my frame rates stuttering to a whopping 10fps.

 

[lavaheadache]

Got a good deal on a gtx280 OC, I'm gonna try this out when I get it and see if it is all that some peeps have cracked it up to be

 

[3MDR]

My system:

e8400 @ 3.6 ghz
BFG GTX 280OC2
4 gig ddr2 800 mhz
Corsair TX750


I still can't believe that PhysX drops my framerates. I thought it was supposed to integrate smoothly into games, not be a hindrance.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: 3MDR
I have the latest drivers for the GTX 280, but why would I need separate PhysX drivers? Shouldn't it all be integrated?

Originally posted by: 3MDR
My system:

e8400 @ 3.6 ghz
BFG GTX 280OC2
4 gig ddr2 800 mhz
Corsair TX750


I still can't believe that PhysX drops my framerates. I thought it was supposed to integrate smoothly into games, not be a hindrance.

As others have asked numerous times already, have you fully updated your game and drivers? PhysX is integrated, but like any hardware solution, it requires a driver for the HAL translation from software to hardware....its not just going to happen magically. Although Nvidia does bundle the PhysX drivers with their video driver, you need to make sure to get the latest video driver to ensure you have the latest PhysX driver. Mirror's Edge had both a patch and PhysX driver update the day of launch, so you'll most likely need both if you're having problems.

Here's the steps you need to take:

1) Download 181.22 WHQL with the updated PhysX driver version included.
2) Download the patch/title update for Mirror's Edge. Was released the same day the game launched.
3) Open PhysX properties in NV Control panel and make sure GPU acceleration is on.
4) If you still see slowdowns with PhysX, you may need to delete the PhysX related .dlls from the game directory, as they will have precedence over .dlls in the system folders.

A single GTX 280 shouldn't have any problems running max settings at 1920x1200 with PhysX going by reviews. Your experience seems similar to what a Radeon user would see without PhysX acceleration, which tells me your software/drivers aren't properly configured.

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: Zenoth
Well, if PhysX is calculated by the GPU which is also computing the rest of the effects on-screen shouldn't it be logical that the frame-rate drops? The card needs not only to process the usual visual effects but also PhysX. No? It's not like you had a dedicated PhysX hardware which would normally alleviate the whole thing for your GTX 280, for example having a PhysX card or another GeForce (G8, G9 or GT200) card and dedicate that hardware for PhysX computing and leaving your GTX 280 at the "usual" work.

This thinking is going to be wrong 90% of the time. Yes the physics operations are being done on the same card as the gpu, but he gpu can perform them much much faster then the cpu would. So yes it takes a little hit runing on the same gpu but it should also gain alot of fps by having the cpu NOT run the calculations. Physics calculations through the cpu is a much bigger bottleneck.

If its coded correctly this phsyx should almost always increase fps, not decrease it

Versus software physx? Yes. But physx universally decreases performance over not having those effects.

BTW, a dual video card setup with two lower end cards (one for physx and one for graphics) almost always outperforms a single faster card, even if the single faster card is faster than both cards combined. There appears to be a performance hit for the context switching between graphics and physx.
Integrated graphics would be too slow for physx though, likely slower than using a dual core and almost certainly slower than a quad core.

 

[evolucion8]

MOD EDIT (removed comments irrelevant to the topic)

I had issues with GRAW 2 which said that no PhysX runtime was found, I just uninstaslled completely the PhysX runtime and installed the latest one, and now it works, but unfortunately the demos are now gone!!

 

[AmberClad]

Do not turn this into yet another ATI vs Nvidia drivers debate. In case you guys didn't notice, the OP is looking for assistance with using PhysX with a GTX280.

Edit: I've finished cleaning up the thread so the OP doesn't have to wade through a bunch of posts arguing about things that don't pertain to the issues he's trying to resolve...

- AmberClad (video Mod)

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: 3MDR
My system:

e8400 @ 3.6 ghz
BFG GTX 280OC2
4 gig ddr2 800 mhz
Corsair TX750


I still can't believe that PhysX drops my framerates. I thought it was supposed to integrate smoothly into games, not be a hindrance.

Running a PhysX game requires more horsepower from the Nvidia GPU than a game without it.
It is an extra feature like anything else. Turn on AA and performance will drop. Turn up eye candy game settings and performance will drop. The card has extra work to do with PhysX enabled games and performance will drop. I do not recall reading anywhere that PhysX integrates seamlessly in a game for "free", meaning zero performance hit. Nor have I encountered zero performance hits on any PhysX enabled game/demo to date. It takes power to run it.

I have mirrors edge here on this rig:

e6420 @ 2.13 GHz
ASUS P5N-E SLI 650i
3GB DDR2
GTX280
180.48 Forceware (I think, I have to double check my current driver version on that rig)
22" LCD native 1650x1080

I'll let you know what kind of framerates I'm getting with max settings in game.
Give me a few and I'll get back to you.

 

[lavaheadache]

Keys can you give me a scenario involving a high end rig using a gtx280 with physx enabled and the same rig with an additional card dedicated to physx such as an 8800 gts. Would you say that the rig with the 8800 GTS doing all the physx work will be getting physx for "free"?

 

[Keysplayr]

Cant say for sure, lavaheadache. About the secondary card doing "all" the work. There is no way I could determine this. I have done testing in the PhysX sticky thread however. I found a about a 30% performance improvement in UT3 when I used a 8800GTS512 for PhysX alongside a 9800GTX+ for the Primary card. And about a 36% increase in performance for GRAW2 with the same setup. It's in the first post of the sticky thread. Just scroll down a bit.

I'll test the GTX280 with and without a 9800GTX+ as the PhysX GPU playing Mirrors Edge.

 

[lavaheadache]

I appreciate it. I just picked up a bfg gtx 280 oc2 and am looking to trade my hd4870 512 to a buddy for his 8800gts 320 superclocked plus 75 bucks and wanna use this card for physx if it is gonna be worthwhile. Plus I was looking to get a third monitor and was gonna need another card anyways

 

[chizow]

GTX 260 c216 at 1680 4xAA

This review may help you get a better idea. You gain about 20FPS using a dedicated PhysX card with a GTX 260, either GPU or PPU, at 1680 with 4xAA. This is about the same FPS (~70) as with no PhysX. At higher resolutions you would most likely benefit even more from a dedicated PhysX card, although you still might get playable frame rates with a GTX 280 at 1920 handling both GPU and PhysX acceleration.

Personally I think a dedicated GPU for PhysX is a bit of a waste at this point, but if you were going to go in this direction, you might want to get one of the newer lower power/Hybrid power options out there. An 9600GSO or 9600GT would be perfect as they offer similar SP performance to that G80 GTS but should generate much less heat both active and idle.

 

[evolucion8]

Wow, that review is interesting, it shows that the AGEIA PPU is faster calculating physics than the 9600GT, is a must have for ATi fans who would like to have nVidia PhysX on their systems.

 

[dguy6789]

Will the Ageia PPU be supported or made for very long? What about drivers for it?