bystander :
Have you tried running the game with and without PhysX enabled, or the benchmark? I cannot notice a difference myself, so I just don't bother with PhysX in that game. The best I can tell, the difference comes down to whether the physics are guess, or truly calculated, which happen to be very close.
That's not to say PhysX is no good, I've seen it pretty noticeable in Sacred 2, although I'm not sure how important that is to me either.
----------------
Yes, bystander, thanks for asking, I did.
But, I can't get real and quantitative and repeatable values from any game.
Sort of like people in agony about watts, and don't just get a kill-a-watt cheap device to tell them the truth.<g>
The benchmark for Metro does give me those things...
My little cards are hard pressed in the benchmark and with every thing as high as I can get it...I will run a little over 50 fps average with sli and physx off.
With physx on I get about 28 average in SLI only.
This third card brings me back up to over 50 with physx on.
These overclocked 460's in sli scale up better than 90% on most games like fallout new vegas and I get frame rates that are 50 or 60 and run up well over 100 in most places on most games other than Metro (it's a killer).
It is just that metro and metro benchmark will really tax these cards more than anything except maybe prime95.
Another thing no one speaks much of is the speed of the CPU...My 2600K is clocked and stable at 4.6gh+ and I have all the proof I need from all the passmark tests I have run with the only change being in clock speed, that CPU speed will improve graphics and games as much as any thing else. (and a lot cheaper).