Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

AMD GPU 3D and PhysX?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
October 30, 2013 11:16:32 AM

A couple of things that I've been pondering about my graphics on my soon to assemble PC build.

I ended up going with a Radeon HD 7950 graphics card.

I have also picked up a new monitor which can do 120hz and 3D.
Acer HN274HBBmiiid monitor
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

The monitor from what i read is more geared towards Nvidia because it has no display port which is what AMD uses for high res 3D bandwidth. Does anyone have experience with something similar?
I've read reviews that they were limited to 720p when running 3D mode with a AMD graphics by way of HDMI.

My other question is the use of PhysX in games while running a AMD card. Will it even work? Will it require me to edit files per game for it to work?

I hope the best move would not be to sell my card and just go spend more money and buy and Nvidia one now before I even put it all together.


Thanks!

More about : amd gpu physx

a b Î Nvidia
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
October 30, 2013 11:19:28 AM

Nope and nope. You can run 3D but an incredibly gimped version not worth bothering with, and Physx will work but you'll get huge framerate slowdowns as all the calculations are offloaded to the CPU. Gotta love Nvidia proprietary software.
m
0
l
a c 191 À AMD
a b Î Nvidia
a b U Graphics card
October 30, 2013 11:38:12 AM

in gaming world, almost no body cares about physx anymore..
m
0
l
Related resources
October 30, 2013 12:31:45 PM

Ok, so going AMD I should have anything to worry about then. I've been lost on PC gaming for some time now. My current box would be 8 years old this December.

Still curious about 3D thing. My 3d monitor has VGA, DVI, and HDMI. I wonder if a Display Port-DVI cable would allow for greater bandwidth for higher res to work in 3D. That is if I have enough performance to run 120FPS anyways. Maybe the fact it may be locked at 720p via HDMI would be about right for performance.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
October 30, 2013 12:45:19 PM

It's not the resolution thats the issue its a lack of support. The AMD software is total crap, barely any games work and theres no community made fixes (Helixmods) like there is with Nvidia.
m
0
l
October 30, 2013 1:18:37 PM

cookybiscuit said:
It's not the resolution thats the issue its a lack of support. The AMD software is total crap, barely any games work and theres no community made fixes (Helixmods) like there is with Nvidia.


So something that's sold like Tridef3D won't take the pain out of some of those issues?
http://www.tridef.com/
m
0
l
a c 168 À AMD
a c 431 Î Nvidia
a c 639 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
October 31, 2013 6:59:45 AM

It really is a shame that you went AMD with that monitor. It is specifically listed as Nvidia 3D Vision ready and would allow you to use their synchronized active 3D system for which they provide full driver support.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/3d-vision-system-requireme...

With the AMD system, you are going to have to rely upon third party software and driver support, rather than drivers from AMD. With TriDef, you hope that they have a driver that supports the games you want to play. Supposedly, its gotten better but still not as good as the alternative. Forum user "bystander" is the resident expert on 3D gaming if you want to PM him.

In terms of PhysX, three of the top AAA titles this season are GPU-accelerated games, Call of Duty: Ghosts, Batman: Arkham Origins, and the Witcher 3. All are using the most advanced APEX PhysX effects seen to date. With an AMD card, you simply won't be able to play these games with the full effects enabled with any reasonable level of performance.
http://physxinfo.com/news/11782/some-facts-about-gpu-ph...
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/gamescom-2013...
m
0
l
October 31, 2013 8:28:45 AM

17seconds said:
It really is a shame that you went AMD with that monitor. It is specifically listed as Nvidia 3D Vision ready and would allow you to use their synchronized active 3D system for which they provide full driver support.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/3d-vision-system-requireme...

With the AMD system, you are going to have to rely upon third party software and driver support, rather than drivers from AMD. With TriDef, you hope that they have a driver that supports the games you want to play. Supposedly, its gotten better but still not as good as the alternative. Forum user "bystander" is the resident expert on 3D gaming if you want to PM him.

In terms of PhysX, three of the top AAA titles this season are GPU-accelerated games, Call of Duty: Ghosts, Batman: Arkham Origins, and the Witcher 3. All are using the most advanced APEX PhysX effects seen to date. With an AMD card, you simply won't be able to play these games with the full effects enabled with any reasonable level of performance.
http://physxinfo.com/news/11782/some-facts-about-gpu-ph...
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/gamescom-2013...


I see myself spending a good amount of time in BF4. The cost I spent on the 7950 was about $220 after tax. Just curious what would be the best move without losing/spending much more money. It's still new in the box at this time.
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 168 À AMD
a c 431 Î Nvidia
a c 639 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
October 31, 2013 10:01:14 AM

You have two options:
1) Keep your 7950, use TriDef for 3D, and forget about PhysX since BF4 doesn't use it.
2) Sell/return the 7950, buy a GTX 760 (comes with free games), and then pick up a 3D Vision kit.

It depends on your needs and priorities, but you could have it all with a minimal investment.
Share
!