Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Best dedicated PhysX card

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 5, 2012 11:46:31 PM

Whats up guys. So I have a i5 2500k and EVGA GTX 590 setup. I started playing Batman AC and it's amazing. With max setting and tesselation at max @ 1920x1080 my framerate is 78fps average. But when I turn on PhysX on high my FPS plummet down to @ 48FPS average. And yes I can tell a huge difference with FPS in 40-50s and locked at a constant 60fps with Vsync enabled. I guess the 590 just spoiled me because I won't except playing anything less that 60fps now, it's gorgeous.

So I'm planning to pick up a dedicated PhysX card. Anyone know what is the lowest card I can get by with PhysX on high and still producing a high FPS with my 590? I've been googling for some benchmarks but no luck. I know there arnt a lot of games but use PhysX but Batman AC PhysX are to badass to play without. Thanks.

BTW PSU no problem, I got a 1050w.

More about : dedicated physx card

a c 80 Î Nvidia
January 6, 2012 12:31:38 AM

I would look at something like a GTS 430, GTS440 or a GTS450. All run cool and use low power while being pretty powerful for what they are.

Best solution

a b Î Nvidia
January 6, 2012 1:40:02 AM
Share

anort3 said:
I would look at something like a GTS 430, GTS440 or a GTS450. All run cool and use low power while being pretty powerful for what they are.


All of those except for the gts 450 are very terrible cards for dedicated physx. A old 8800gt will cream any gt430/440 any day of the week except for power consumption.

Best in slot for dedicated physx is general for most a 8800/9800gt or a gts450 single slot. For dual slot a 9800gtx+ or gtx260. The older architecture has more 32bit floating point unit performance per clock and per unit than Fermi. The main advantage that most users will see is unlinked core and shader clocks allowing you to downclock the core when desired and focus more power on the shader core alone. A very good 9800gtx+/gts250 can top the shader out at 2.1ghz. Last but not least nvidia seams to have designed the physx drivers to not fully load the card so only a certain % of the cpu can be used making cards with higher shader counts and clocks better for physx than others.

Minimum for dedicated physx that is Fermi is basically a GTS450, they have high enough shader count with decent clocks to make it fairly good for another year or two as a dedicated physx card. For retro a 9800gtx+ or gtx260 is better. Anything more than those cards isn't going to give you as much of a bang for the $$ and power used.
Related resources
a c 80 Î Nvidia
January 6, 2012 1:50:13 AM

nforce4max said:
All of those except for the gts 450 are very terrible cards for dedicated physx. A old 8800gt will cream any gt430/440 any day of the week except for power consumption.

Best in slot for dedicated physx is general for most a 8800/9800gt or a gts450 single slot. For dual slot a 9800gtx+ or gtx260. The older architecture has more 32bit floating point unit performance per clock and per unit than Fermi. The main advantage that most users will see is unlinked core and shader clocks allowing you to downclock the core when desired and focus more power on the shader core alone. A very good 9800gtx+/gts250 can top the shader out at 2.1ghz. Last but not least nvidia seams to have designed the physx drivers to not fully load the card so only a certain % of the cpu can be used making cards with higher shader counts and clocks better for physx than others.

Minimum for dedicated physx that is Fermi is basically a GTS450, they have high enough shader count with decent clocks to make it fairly good for another year or two as a dedicated physx card. For retro a 9800gtx+ or gtx260 is better. Anything more than those cards isn't going to give you as much of a bang for the $$ and power used.



Learn something everyday. I appreciate the correction. I was under the impression that the GTS 430-440 were up to it.
a b Î Nvidia
January 6, 2012 1:55:20 AM

anort3 said:
Learn something everyday. I appreciate the correction. I was under the impression that the GTS 430-440 were up to it.


Na, according to wikipedia on the carts the gt430/440 have barely a little over half the 32bit floating point performance of a stock clocked 8800gt. A big lol considering the ages of the cards and how low clocked the 8800gt is by today's standards. That I why I own one for my own use. It handles mafia 2 as a dedicated physx card very well however I would go for a 9800gtx+. They are much better in the long run.
January 6, 2012 2:07:05 AM

nforce4max said:
Na, according to wikipedia on the carts the gt430/440 have barely a little over half the 32bit floating point performance of a stock clocked 8800gt. A big lol considering the ages of the cards and how low clocked the 8800gt is by today's standards. That I why I own one for my own use. It handles mafia 2 as a dedicated physx card very well however I would go for a 9800gtx+. They are much better in the long run.


Awesome. Thanks for the wealth of knowledge. 9800gtx it is.
January 6, 2012 2:07:25 AM

Best answer selected by Swolern.
!