Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

New Build, SHOULD I PUT AGIA Physx ???????

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 6, 2006 10:34:05 AM

hey there i am planning for an upgrade some time next month with the following components????

C2D E6600
Asus P5W DH Deluxe
2GB Corsair XMS PRO @ 667 Mhz
Asus EN8800GTX

what i would like to know if its worth putting an AGIA physics card in it or its a waste of money of the 8800GTX is fast enuf when it comes to physics calculations ???? (which i certain it will be :roll:) 

comments please ! :roll:

More about : build put agia physx

November 6, 2006 10:51:06 AM

Not unless you're only gonna play GRAW... >.<

You answered your own question - the 8800 will be more than enough.

I suggest you wait a week or two for the 680i mobo to pop up though, just a thought...
November 6, 2006 11:37:07 AM

Is the physics card making a comeback? With the new MBs 680i and RD600. and that extra slot. I see people making comments about the physics board, without being laught at. The GPU makers are trying to
sell SLI, Xfire, Quad.... more cards - more profit. It's not dead yet.
Related resources
November 6, 2006 12:30:01 PM

Everything looks good, but you might want to wait a little for the new motherboards and see how they perform. Otherwise, IMO, the P5W DH Deluxe motherboard is a great choice! I've had it since the end of August and have been using it since and couldn't be happier.

Back to topic. IMO, it's not worth it. Especially with Core 2 Quads and ATI and Nvidia working on making the GPU do the phsyx, definitely not worth the extra $250. Use the $250 for a good power supply or new case.

Note: The new graphics cards are supposedly going to be longer than traditionally. Might want to invest in a case that can handle that. My P180B will be able to handle it and is one of the few I know that can.

My $.02
November 6, 2006 12:52:57 PM

Quote:
Note: The new graphics cards are supposedly going to be longer than traditionally. Might want to invest in a case that can handle that. My P180B will be able to handle it and is one of the few I know that can.


From the measurements I remember, they are supposed to be about as long as your ATX board, if not 1" longer. They are intense pieces of silicon. Compared to previous generation they are resource black holes lol. If you want a 8800GTX be prepared to shell out an overly exhorberant premium for the card. Last prices I saw had etailers gouging people for $800 for a GTX. I have a 1/2 broke ass koolance PC3720 case and I don't think it will be able to handle the new cards, and keep my cooling setup.

Also, Physics? Wasteful. Yeah it we might move that way in the future, but now I think, what? 1 game uses PhysX, a stout premium for one game if you ask me. Plus, as mentioned before, ATi and nVidia are working on on GPU phyX. So my recommendation is to wait and see what plays out before dropping $100+ on something you really don't need.
November 6, 2006 1:49:50 PM

AGEIA PHYSX are practically useless.they look good only on paper.
they dont give noticeable improvement in most games.

the ASUS En8800 GTX will do just fine.

one more thing like the others said wait for the nFORCE 680i to be released.
November 6, 2006 4:25:21 PM

For now, PPU= waste of money.
November 6, 2006 6:09:37 PM

Quote:
For now, PPU= waste of money.

Not only it's a waste of money, the card itself is crap, pointless, will die because nV and ATI will make stupid Ageia go to crap soon.

:roll:
November 6, 2006 7:02:50 PM

Quote:
For now, PPU= waste of money.

Not only it's a waste of money, the card itself is crap, pointless, will die because nV and ATI will make stupid Ageia go to crap soon.

:roll:
Yeah... Ageia is not even remotely worth the $ associated with it. Plus, with 4-core CPUs, there will hopefully be a time in the near future where games can just use one of those cores for physics. I don't like the idea of trying to stack on more and more add-on cards. It will just cost more $ for us gamers.
a c 271 U Graphics card
a b Ĉ ASUS
November 6, 2006 7:41:22 PM

Quote:
what i would like to know if its worth putting an AGIA physics card in



Noooooooo!!! *see's others have got here first, turns goes back up tree*
November 6, 2006 7:59:47 PM

Quote:
For now, PPU= waste of money.

Not only it's a waste of money, the card itself is crap, pointless, will die because nV and ATI will make stupid Ageia go to crap soon.

:roll:
Yeah... Ageia is not even remotely worth the $ associated with it. Plus, with 4-core CPUs, there will hopefully be a time in the near future where games can just use one of those cores for physics. I don't like the idea of trying to stack on more and more add-on cards. It will just cost more $ for us gamers.

I agree. I think it makes more sense to dedicate one of the cores for physics rather than using a dedicated card.
November 6, 2006 8:01:05 PM

Wow, I think we've just about killed this thread! :p 
November 6, 2006 8:02:14 PM

I think the way v-cards are going, that they will incorporate physx onto the cards themselves. I'd be skeptical about the future value of this card.

Look at the E6400. Cheaper, and you can get to CPU speeds faster than my rig (see the sig).

The P5W DH is a good board, but some issues with the mem-divider when OC'ing.
November 6, 2006 8:05:08 PM

No offense, but what did the last two sentences have to do with PhysX?
November 6, 2006 8:16:16 PM

I answered Dredge_3d's question - I dont think the cards are worth it. Save the money, and by a mid-range ATI/Nvidia card in the next 12 months. They should be able to handle the calcs, just like this aftermarket card does now.
November 6, 2006 8:20:04 PM

I think that the physics are usually handled by CPUs (which makes sense to me, to have CPU handle physics and GPU handles rendering), and that is the way it will probably go. GPUs are already powerful enough, and if we keep stacking everything on to the GPU, pretty soon we are going to have to have external GPUs or something because they won't fit in any cases.
November 6, 2006 8:22:46 PM

Dont you see it going that with with the ATI/AMD merger?
November 6, 2006 8:26:27 PM

Not especially, since ATI is in the GPU manufacturing business, not in Physics card manufacturing business. That's just my opinion though, and I don't think anybody can predict how things will go, so it's anybody's guess :) .
November 6, 2006 8:29:16 PM

I read an article somewhere (will try find a link), discussing the convergence of the GPU/CPU. Not sure about the mention of Physx. I need to reread it. My gut says that this is the way it will go, but yes, just another opinion.
November 6, 2006 8:42:54 PM

Quote:
Not unless you're only gonna play GRAW... >.<


Gothic 3 supports PhysiX too. Easily noticeable by the screwed up object weight ingame. :lol: 
a c 271 U Graphics card
a b Ĉ ASUS
November 6, 2006 9:04:51 PM

I'm with you Dude, I like your thinking, who will do it first, be it AMD/ATI or Nvidia on their own or Intel with some sort of collaboration with the aforementioned Nvidia (all hail the Geforce 8 & its power requirements) only time will tell, c'mon it's not the biggest stretch of the imagination that I can think of, a GPU/CPU/PPU on the same PCB the PPU only kicking in when it is needed, it can’t be to far away if it’s decided by the powers that be that we can or will buy such things. :wink:
November 6, 2006 9:12:42 PM

Only if the software you're going to use supports it.

Right now support seems pretty thin...


-Brad
November 6, 2006 9:26:35 PM

physx is cool, but not worth the money
November 6, 2006 10:00:33 PM

No one has mentioned Havok Fx...link at bottom... but it is software Physics not hardware physics.

If you are a gamer - who wants to see everything your next gen (2007) game offers - you will need some type of physics engine.

Unreal Tournament 2007 is among the games that suggest the use of Physics card.

Two cards in SLI will also be a platform for Havok FX software... which is cheaper - I don't know.

Here is the Havok FX site: Havok FX
November 7, 2006 12:25:19 AM

I agree with that, but I thought Fishy was implying that the PPU would be on the GPU (external card). I can see them integrating it on the same bus/chip as CPU, but I can't see much sense in adding more and more to GPU, when it has already turned into nearly a separate computer. Know what I mean?
a c 271 U Graphics card
a b Ĉ ASUS
November 7, 2006 2:31:40 AM

I think so, but my thoughts can't help but stray to the Geforce 8, I mean look at the size of the thing, a few years back we would have laughed at the notion of an 11" card (Voodoo 4 anyone?) and yet here we have a card that is now what the voodoo promised back then (didn’t happen but lets move on). Have you seen piccy's of the 8800 without its HSF? Most prominent is the GPU (single core, I believe) surrounded by GDDR chips and then off to the left is a little Duron...I mean Nvidia processor (check out the pic's in the Honourable labbby's topic: http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/Leadtek-8800GTX-3DMark-01-05-06-SLi-action-ftopict207708.html ) I for one can almost imagine that card a few 'evolutions' ahead with maybe a dual or quad core GPU + CPU (G90x4) with another multi - core processor alongside. :) 
November 7, 2006 2:43:22 AM

Well... they will not be quantitatively alike... obviously. Effects physics software creates a balance for hardware. More specifically it uses instructions that take advantage of multi-core CPUs. Even if the PC has SLI or Crossfire enabled. Less computing power will be drawn from the GPUs.

Havok will be supported by all the big dogs such as Nvidia, ATI, Microsoft...etc... so this is a no brainer IMHO.
November 7, 2006 4:43:48 AM

Yeah, I know that's the way things are headed NOW, but it seems like we can't head down that path indefinately. (or maybe we will and it will change the face of PCs as we know it)
February 9, 2009 1:23:05 PM

I keep hearing about people wanting to put PhysX cards in there computers. For what even todays 100 dollar video card has enogh guts to handle all the processing if your going to game in 17-19 inch window. Even with the built in graphics on some of these motherboards more powerful then the X card. The new duo core 2 processors can handle game and physx processing at the same time. So why do you want to spend money on something that can be done through software. Why do you want to suck up more watts put out more heat when you dont have too. Maybe Agia should make a Stream Processor add-on board that we could use. Be nice to by a cheep video card and a sheep Agia card with 320 stream processors. tie them together and you have killer video card for cheep. Im tired of upgrading these 400-600 a piece multi video cards. They say the hardware Tehcnology doubles in speed every 18 months.
February 9, 2009 3:46:21 PM

you're roughly 2 1/2 years late with that comment
February 9, 2009 4:43:14 PM

Zorginator said:
you're roughly 2 1/2 years late with that comment


i NOTICED THAT BUT STILL RELEVANT TO TODAY. i STILL PEOPLE BUYING THE CARD AND ASKING THE SAME QUESTION..!
!