I can't really find any true comparisons between a video card like a 9800gt dedicated to PhysX and the Ageia PhysX card made soley for PhysX.
Which would be better? It seems like the Ageia would be better and cheaper as it's made for just PhysX processing?
I have Tri-Sli right now and no other PCI-E slots, was thinking I could use an Ageia card. But I also see the new EVGA X58 mother board is coming out late february and lets you run Tri-Sli and add a dedicated PCI-E card just for PhysX.
If the Ageia were better I'd just kill my plans for the X58 Classified board and run Tri-Sli on my vanila X58 and added an Ageia card for Physx.
So if theres any reason an Ageia PhysX card is inferior to a 9800GT when used solely for PhsyX I'd like some info or links etc.
When the first physics cards came out they worked with your video card. After nvidia took them over the drivers they came up with make the stand alone physics card useless. For my money I'd go with the 9600gt.
I just put the physics card back in right after I read this post to make sure. The physics option when using the nvidia card or cards was 3 times faster than trying to use the bfg physics card with one or two graphics card. What nvidia did I have to assume is put the consumer in the position of having to buy their product ( another video card ) if you want to have a separate physics card. IMO you don't need a stand alone card yet. It will run fine on a good graphics card ( single or sli). At least that's the performance I'm getting.