- Summer 2006 GeForce 7 Graphics Gear
- GeForce And Radeon Take On Linux
- Can Ageia's PhysX Card Bring Real-World Physics to Games?
- OpenGL Workstation Graphics: Now We're Talking High End!
- Radeon X1600 Pro: Prolonging the Graphics Life of Your AGP Machine
- GeForce 7950 GX2 - SLI on a Single Card
- Graphics Card Quiet: Gigabyte's Silent-Pipe II Cooling
- Maxing Out Your Graphics Card With Tomb Raider Legend
- ATI Buyer's Guide, Part III: All Graphics Cards!
- ATI Graphics Card Buyer's Guide 2006, Part II
Source: Tom's Hardware US – Keywords: ageias, physx, failing
Topics: AMD/ATI
Syndication:
Benchmarks Results
Could PhysX Be Useless?
We took several runs of each test to come to the averaged frames per second results shown in the chart below. The raw scores were all within a frame or two of each other, with each card.

It is clear from the reported scores that there isn't much difference in the performance with and without the card. Of course this is better than having the scores with the card enabled lower than those with the card disabled, as was the case in the Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter results in the last article. But still, this is not good news for Ageia. The Shader Model 2.0 Radeon X850XT was obviously rendering the scenes using a lower code path, but the results were the same. No matter what card we put into that test platform, we came up with the same 2-3 frames per second difference.

Here is the large flag that is displayed in Release 35 when the PPU is enabled and effects physics are accelerated on the PPU.

Here is the same scene without the PPU and running in software mode.
- Previous page So, Cell Factor Doesn't Need a PhysX...
- Next page Software Acceleration Stripped Down...