Physx

no comments, seroulsly?

With 3 260's you still need a separate card to do PhysX? I didn't know that it was such a resource hog! Wow!

not a resource hog, but im running in a high res, so want to off load the physc to help my fps as its far to low atm

According to the Batman game review on Tom's front page the GT220 is the sweet spot for a dedicated PhysX card. I checked Newegg and they have several single slot models and the lowest priced one was 49.95 with rebate.

An 8800 will do the trick

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/batman_arkham_asylu...

.... but this was written just for you:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/batman-arkham-asylu...

220, checkin now.

none seem to have a shroud to take ain in from the end, means it will run to hot as 0 air flow

Could you maybe mod a 92mm fan to blow air on it! Or what about a PCI slot blower fan? (With all of those video cards I don't know if you will have a PCI slot available though.)

no slot available, and it would sit right at the bottom of the m/b (above the PSU) i use a Antec P193 case with all fans installed (currently 22 in system).

their is just no way to get air off it, =(

What game are you playing and at what resolution? Please answer this and in the meanwhile I will look for a physx card for you.

Is there any good PCI or PCI Express x1 Physx card for those without an extra PCI Express x16 slot?

No. I thought he is asking for a regular pciE card to be put in the fourth slot.

What about the AGEIA Physx card? It comes in two flavors: regular PCI 3.0 and PCI Express x1.

Alright I'll just put this out there...

PhysX is useless and not worth spending money on, the differences in even Batman AA with it on and off aren't all that noticeable especially if you are not looking. PhysX wont catch on, it wont go any further, it is dead. DirectX 11 is out and it does what PhysX and Havoc do, but better and can be used on either company's cards so that it is infinitely easier to use and wont alienate potential customers.

PhysX is dead.

If you want a cheap physx card but don't have the room get a 8400gs pci but only get it cheap and used but if you can find any thing better for 1x or pci get it.

It's pretty damn hard to find one that's not PCI-E x16, though. Not to mention the PCI models are more expensive than the x16 ones. I can get a brand new AGEIA card for less, shipped.

PhysX may very well be dead in the near future, but my favorite game has it (Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 1 and 2).

See, the thing that I dont get is how can somebody have problem with physx when they are running not 1. not 2 but 3 gtx 260 cards?
I mean there is no game out there that will crumble with that configuration even at 2560x1600 or whatever the highest resolution is.

And for what Raven said, he is partially right. physx can either be dead or can be the next big thing. But only time will tell. Till then, I dont think, the op needs a separate card for physX. I think he should tell us the hardware configuration that he has and what games he is facing slowdowns in and at what resolutions, so that we can help him further. He seems to have gone AWOL now

My thoughts as well. 260s in sli should handle any game at almost any res, the memory is or may be the only shortfall, not core etc, and having the third 260 for Physx is overkill for it

jaydeejohn - you are right 260 sli can handle nearly any res, but it cant handle 5040*1050. I am running a res that is 25% larger than the max res of any 30" monitor.

You cant have a 260SLI set up and use another 260 for Physx as nVidia drivers thinks you are trying for 3way SLI and you cant select which card to dedicate to PhysX.

Hellraiser06, FPS mostly, Crysis / FC3 etc.

Your video ram will still be limited to 896mb, unfortunately, even if you have 3x896mb VRAM, as each card carries the exact same information each other one does. That may be the real roadblock you are running into, but that wasn't really your question, heh.

I would defintely go with the 220: 40nm, $50 with some deals as mentioned, if PSU is gettin close to max load with the triple sli 260s, then this card might be the best candidate as it would have a relatively low power footprint.

I have a Asus 8800 GTX die on me after 2yrs10months, got a refund for £380!!!

Had to buy new grfx card.

needed nvidia as have 680i m/b

2 x 275 are slower than 3 x 260, and u cant 3 x SLI 275s

2 x 285 are the same as 3 x 260 - this also would have cost £720 instead of £360, and no chance i would have stuck a 3rd in for tri 285 due to finding £360 in one go.

1 x 295 is same as 2 x 275 (very slightly slower due to heat). and 2 x 295 would have cost £740, and no chance i would have stuck a 2nd in for SLI 295.

280s are more expensive than 285s in the UK and slower !

no single ATI GPU could keep up.

What i wanted to to do was 3 x 275, but it is not possible.

I have a Coolermaster 1100w UCP, so one of the very best on the market. Tho i am certaintly pulling masses of power from it

3x 260 216
4 x SATA 7200 HDD
19 Fans (various sizes)
1 optical Drive
4 low power USB devices
1 High Power USB device
65w CPU

with my monitors pulling power as well, it costs about £2200 a year to run my PC just on the electicity alone

Sounds like a SW/driver problem to me.
If it cant differentiate between 3 260s, using 1 for Physx, whats to say another card would work?
To be honest, Im not up on my tri card with Physx usage

cause i have a 275 kicking around in a spare system, and with 260 SLI on slots 1 and 3, and the 275 in slot 2, i can set it to dedicated PhysX.

The lowest card on the list is the 8600GT.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/physx_gpus.html

I run 2x 5970's for quad fire and a 285 for dedicated physx on my classy 

So you are running some hack to trick Nvidia's drivers?