Physx?

[samtheham1]

Hey guys,

In my last post about a card I just bought, which is a physx card, someone mentioned physx and gave me the impression that I definitely need to know about physx. The simple fact is that I have no clue what it is, how it works, or its pros and cons. So I'm simply asking for any and all information that you guys have in order to learn all I can about physx. So teach me, please!

 

[iam2thecrowe]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physx

 

[iam2thecrowe]

now for my opinion on the subject - It is poorly optimised to run on CPU's, which is Nvidias fault. When hardware accellerated physx is enabled, games can only really run at a decent framerate on a gtx470 or better, to get the best result you need 1 card dedicated to physx (gts250 or better) and 1 to graphics. And all that effort to play maybe 10 games that support hardware accellerated physx. It is basically like 3dFX's Glide API, where only a 3dfx card could run it due to their greed and trying to force people to buy their cards. That didnt go well for them and i expect the same with Nvidia and physx. Devs will start to use an open physics standard that can use ANY brand of card to give hardware physics accelleration, and physx will die off, hopefully sooner rather than later. I want to build my computer the way I want it, not be restricted by proprietry crap like 3Dfx, physx and MAC. They can suck my balls.

 

[wolfram23]

My 2 cents... PhysX gives some very nice eye candy in very few games.

 

[nforce4max]

IDC

I got a few physx titles already and there is still more use than just that. You can also use the card for video encoding under CS5 ect and much more.

 

[17seconds]

Now that I have experienced PhysX, I would never give it up. Having the choice between PhysX or no PhysX, there is no comparison. It may be a subtle effect, or a massive game-changing effect, but in those games where you notice it, it really is pretty cool.

 

[iam2thecrowe]

IDC

I got a few physx titles already and there is still more use than just that. You can also use the card for video encoding under CS5 ect and much more.

physx has nothing to do with cs5

 

[iam2thecrowe]

Now that I have experienced PhysX, I would never give it up. Having the choice between PhysX or no PhysX, there is no comparison. It may be a subtle effect, or a massive game-changing effect, but in those games where you notice it, it really is pretty cool.

Thats great! ......so long as you have a gtx580..good for you. For the rest of us who have a gtx460 or less, its completely useless. Would rather have playable FPS than use physx. Hey, can someone post a link to a video showing physx on vs off...id like to see how "amazing" it really is.

 

[nforce4max]

physx has nothing to do with cs5

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2009/12/14/adobes-mercury-playback-engine-for-cs5-is-cuda-only!.aspx

Do you care to dispute this? It may not be phsyx but it is Cuda and it does benefit from a dedicated card when the main card is needed for other work or isn't compatible.

http://forums.adobe.com/message/2791699

 

[nforce4max]

i knew this was coming....

:lol:

 

[17seconds]

Thats great! ......so long as you have a gtx580..good for you. For the rest of us who have a gtx460 or less, its completely useless. Would rather have playable FPS than use physx. Hey, can someone post a link to a video showing physx on vs off...id like to see how "amazing" it really is.

http://physxinfo.com/news/tag/mafia-2/

 

[iam2thecrowe]

Thanks for the link. Looks like physx=more partacel effects. yes, that benchmark shows 1650 res (most monitors are now 1920) and still the gtx460 average fps is just playable. So ill change my statement to if you have a gtx460, you can run physx with just playable fps at lowered resoltion but fps will most likely drop below 25fps at some stages, but it would be too much for any lesser card. heres the 1920res bench I was looking at. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-physx-hack-amd-radeon,2764-7.html <- that article is also a good read about physx. I still dont change my stance to not like vendor specific features in games. Phys x could just as easily be accelerated on an ati card or multi core cpu if nvidia let it happen. Thank goodness its not the only physics solution.

 

[wolfram23]

Haha I run PhysX off a GT240 with a pair of ATI 5850s... you don't need a super card to use it

Here's some comparisons... super super easy to just search YouTube on your own but anyway:
(Cryostasis) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_11T0jficE
(Mafia 2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMdPk6POe2o
(Batman) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irlmewwLyTo
(Dark Void) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGCZtXg5LyA

 

[Plumble]

http://www.gamephys.com/2010/03/04/ati-dedicated-physx-card-hybrid-video-setup-guide/

 

[17seconds]

Thanks for the link. Thank goodness its not the only physics solution.

I'm actually getting ready to fire up Battlefield Bad Company 2 for the first time to see how the Havok physics engine allows the player to destroy buildings and foliage. No PhysX required.

 

[iam2thecrowe]

Haha I run PhysX off a GT240 with a pair of ATI 5850s... you don't need a super card to use it

dont need a super card to use it??? you have 3 video cards in your system!! what i was refering to was with a single card eg. gt240 and no other cards, you would not be able to run anything comfortably with physx turned on.

 

[samtheham1]

Well I have to admit that playing metro 2033 with physX on and off didn't hold much of a difference to me before watching a lot of these comparison videos. Now that I know what I'm looking at, it really holds a huge dynamic difference.

I'd also like to say that my gtx 460 works well with physx on. I haven't ran it on many games that run physx but I get constantly playable framerates with maxed settings in metro 2033 and my card is probably only OC'd to half of its capacity. So I wouldn't say you need a crazy card to use physX with just one card, although the gtx 460 is certainly no low end product. It's still not as good as it gets. I'd also like to add that I'm even pretty sure my processor bottlenecks my GPU at least a little bit. So if you're concerned about your ability to use physx on just one card I can vouch for gtx 460 or better. You can definitely pull it off.

 

[wolfram23]

dont need a super card to use it??? you have 3 video cards in your system!! what i was refering to was with a single card eg. gt240 and no other cards, you would not be able to run anything comfortably with physx turned on.

True but running it off my 5850s wasn't really an option lol. Still, you can buy any mid range GPU for the rendering and gaming and pair it with a cheap card, my 240 cost me $65.

 

[17seconds]

I wish the guy in this thread:
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/forum2.php?config=tomshardwareus.inc&cat=33&post=304873&page=1&p=1&sondage=0&owntopic=1&trash=0&trash_post=0&print=0&numreponse=0"e_only=0&new=0&nojs=0
was able to read this one. In that thread, he's got a bunch of people telling him he needs a mimimum of two GTX580's in SLI to run PhysX, or at least a 570/580 + a PhysX card.

 

[nforce4max]