Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is Physx really important for Games??

Last response: in Video Games
Share
March 27, 2011 5:49:07 AM

Be real and tell me. :pfff: 

More about : physx important games

March 27, 2011 5:58:05 AM

From a gameplay standpoint PhysX isn't important at all, most games use it as a little bit of extra eye candy ie more accurate modelling of the movement of clothing based on what's happening in the game, debris from explosions, that kind of thing. I personally wouldn't really notice much of a difference whether PhysX is on or off.
m
0
l
March 27, 2011 6:06:55 AM

i think physx is a bit overhyped for gaming but if you want to use it in the realm of astrophysics such that cosmic velocity it has a better rating.
m
0
l
Related resources
March 27, 2011 6:11:41 AM

I notice the difference coming from a ATI card to a Nvidia card using Physx...But is it important? It really depends, to me it kinda is now important because i notice the difference on Batman using Physx. Plus that's whole reason of getting a graphics card is the visual affect..
m
0
l
March 27, 2011 6:31:14 AM

pretty much every game has a physics implementation weather its physx, havok, bullet. The problem with physx is its nvidia specific so it only runs well when you have an adequate nvidia gfx card installed. Otherwise it runs poorly on the cpu. Thankfully there arent too many games that use physx. But you can always turn it off or to a low setting that runs on the CPU ok. It only really adds more particles from what i can see anyway. Overall its not that important. In modern games like Mafia2 that use hardware physx you really need either a gtx570 or better, or a dedicated physx card, to get good performance. So if your looking at low-mid range cards, no, its not important as the game will crawl to a halt with hardware physx on.
m
0
l
March 27, 2011 6:55:32 AM

I don't feel that it affects gameplay very much at all.
It looks nice but not enough games use it for me to consider buying a dedicated card unless I upgrade and use an older card for one.
m
0
l
March 27, 2011 7:16:33 AM

i was wrong..it isnt overhyped..it isnt underhyped as well.I think they put just enough emphasis on it to make it worthy of its hype.
m
0
l
March 27, 2011 7:20:00 AM

and why is this in the wrong section of the forum????
m
0
l
March 27, 2011 8:01:36 AM

It adds nice eye candy, but not enough for me to run out and get an nVidia card for it. Therefore, I personally don't care about it.

Anywaste, I think this topic should have been started in the Graphics section since Physx is dependent on a nVidia GPU, not a CPU.

If this topic was about why nVidia doesn't allow Physx to run properly on a CPU rather than requiring a nVidia video card, then that would be different.
m
0
l
March 27, 2011 9:49:36 AM

Quote:
It adds nice eye candy, but not enough for me to run out and get an nVidia card for it. Therefore, I personally don't care about it.

Anywaste, I think this topic should have been started in the Graphics section since Physx is dependent on a nVidia GPU, not a CPU.

If this topic was about why nVidia doesn't allow Physx to run properly on a CPU rather than requiring a nVidia video card, then that would be different.

i love eyecandy.
m
0
l
March 27, 2011 11:23:20 AM

This topic has been moved from the section CPU & Components to section Video Games by Reynod
m
0
l
March 28, 2011 6:04:38 PM

nvidia physix is poor at best it, it could be much much better but they insist on using an old instruction set.
havoc on the other hand have a great physics engine that can outperform nvidia physix 10 fold if they could use the cuda cores but nvidia wont license em it.

rite now nvidia physix is little more than a gimmick that could be so much more.
m
0
l
March 29, 2011 3:55:30 AM

Quote:
nvidia physix is poor at best it, it could be much much better but they insist on using an old instruction set.
havoc on the other hand have a great physics engine that can outperform nvidia physix 10 fold if they could use the cuda cores but nvidia wont license em it.

rite now nvidia physix is little more than a gimmick that could be so much more.

i havent seen havoc at work.Could you post some pics what it can do
m
0
l
March 29, 2011 7:16:48 AM

razor_gt said:
why is the other screenshot more brighter than the other?

in what way?
m
0
l
March 29, 2011 10:20:59 AM

you havent played bad company 2? there are plenty of games out there that use alternate physics engines but only 1 uses cuda. so that tells me cuda basied physix is a gimmick. it doesnt take a huge amount of computing power to get it looking nice, but nvidia would try and convince you other wise.
m
0
l
Anonymous
March 29, 2011 2:11:31 PM

Not overly drawn by Physics, in Shooters , I tend to worry about FPS, and less distraction to get the enemy, Physics is a Distraction. Now i want to see a good implementation in a Racing sim and I may be swayed a little.
m
0
l
April 5, 2011 12:35:25 AM

hmmmm but still i'll go for Radeon ;) 
m
0
l
!