Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

GT240 or GT430 for PhysX?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a c 199 U Graphics card
May 10, 2011 7:11:31 PM

I want to add a cheap PhysX card to my upcoming build since I do play at least one PhysX game (Sacred 2) and anticipate playing others. I've reviewed recent forum threads, but they seem to stop before reaching enough useful information about the GT430/GT440 cards. These all have 96 CUDA cores. The GT430 has a higher clock rate than the GT240, but the GT240 is considerably stronger based on Don's chart. Which will be stronger for PhysX? They're both around $65, and other features are likely to be irrelevant as I'm not going to be attaching a monitor to the card. Which is the better choice, or is there a notably superior alternative for the same or less money? I prefer to buy new rather than go eBay or Craigslist. Thanks.

More about : gt240 gt430 physx

Best solution

a b U Graphics card
May 10, 2011 7:20:15 PM

Most 240GT have ddr5 memory as apposed to the DDR3 memory attached to the 430s

430s are also fermis, while the 240GT is based of the old g92 core (the original 8800GS card, also with 96 cores).

Surprisingly, the new Fermi cores aren't as strong as the old G92 cores (case and point, the 450 GTS is only a tiny bit faster thana 250 GTS, despite having 50% more cores).

The only thing you dont get with the 240GT is DX11, and that doesn't matter for a physics card!
Share
a b U Graphics card
May 10, 2011 7:20:21 PM

The 240 is kinda weak for physx. not sure on the 430--Dont bother with physx unless you play hardware physx accelerated games like mafia or batman or ut3

I use a gtx 260 for my physx card and it does well in Mafia 2 and batman in the other physx games i notice nothing.
Score
0
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
a c 199 U Graphics card
May 10, 2011 7:39:53 PM

Hmmm, that's a useful observation about the memory. I see versions of each available with GDDR5, so I'd spend the extra $10 or so if necessary to get that. It's available on both though.

Yeah I do play Sacred 2, and could see getting UT3 and/or other games that use PhysX.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
May 10, 2011 7:48:29 PM

Sacred 2 had added physx to my knowlege not hardware physx.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
May 10, 2011 7:50:28 PM

What is your main gpu if i may be so inclined to ask lol
Score
0
a c 199 U Graphics card
May 10, 2011 8:55:38 PM

The primary GPU is a GTX560Ti. I know it would have no difficulty on its own with Sacred 2 (which does use hardware PhysX), but I'm thinking of possible future games too. I'm rebuilding next month, and want to be inclusive (but not so much as to buy a second GTX560Ti!).

Edit: PSU will most likely be a Seasonic X-560, but could also be a SG-650. Each has only a pair of PCIe power cables (I don't care to use adapters, even if the SG could handle the load).
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
May 10, 2011 9:01:06 PM

I would tell you to go with a better card like a 100$ gtx 260 or gts 450 somthing like that thats just me i hate a crappy looking card in my corsair 800d but i see it all the time and it is all watercooled.
Score
0
a c 199 U Graphics card
May 11, 2011 12:16:23 AM

That Youtube video was very interesting, although none of the cards I'm considering are anywhere near as weak as the 8600GTS. It does have me wondering if I should consider using an adapter to power something like a GTX550...
Score
0
a c 153 U Graphics card
May 11, 2011 12:23:00 AM

Yeah and thats what I'm getting at. Weaker cards ARE good for dedicated physx, but if you get a couple of the really demanding physx titles, those weaker cards are not only going to not help they will hurt.

Its really a bad situation. Personally I'm going to use one my GTX 260s as a Physx card once I upgrade. I think anything above a GTS250 would be adaquate, but who knows. There needs to be someone who does some benchmarks. I've messaged Linus about it, I think hes actually going to do that same video he did but with a lot more cards to get a better understanding.
Score
0
a c 199 U Graphics card
May 11, 2011 12:35:18 AM

That would be great; I subscribed to his channel. I just reread some old reviews over at HardwareSecrets; in games the GT430 was generally spanking the HD5570, and afaik the HD5570 is about on par with the GT240.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
May 11, 2011 1:20:52 AM

To the OP, the 430GT is NOT available with DDR5, at least not as a retail product. I would be very curious to see if you find one...
Score
0
a c 199 U Graphics card
May 12, 2011 8:02:48 PM

I contacted nVidia directly about it. The GT240 has the higher memory bandwidth. Especially since there is a DDR5 version, that's the one I'll get. Thanks to those who answered.
Score
0
a c 199 U Graphics card
May 12, 2011 8:03:33 PM

Best answer selected by jtt283.
Score
0
October 18, 2012 9:23:35 PM

I was just running some benchmarks in Mafia II with a 560 Ti and a 430 w/ Gddr3 in a few different configurations. With PhysX off and all oter settings maxed I got 54 fps. PhysX on high it was 28 fps on the 560 alone and 43 fps offloading to the 430. On medium 33/49 fps. All these tests were run @ 1080p and both cards are overclocked about 10%. My opinion is the 430/40 is a decent PhysX card for medium settings. A GTS x50 would perform much better if you really want everything maxed out but I don't feel it's worth the added power consumption. I tried a 460 and 240 combo a while back testing Batman AA. I don't recall the actual figures but i believe the performance difference was fairly negligible.
Score
0
!