Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Prepare for the Hybrid PhysX

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 14, 2013 9:10:53 PM

I am going to buy a Gigabyte Radeon HD 7970 WF 3X GHz Edition 3GB
OR Gigabyte GeForce GTX 680 OC 2 GB

Should i go for the HD7970 Ghz editiion with GeForce GTX280(Hybrid PhysX)
OR GTX 680 with GeForce GTX280(PhysX)


Which one will get a better performance?
Also, 750W for these options is enough or not?

Specs:
Intel i7 3770K
Gigabyte H77M-D3H Mobo
GeForce GTX280
2 x 4GB DDR3 1600Mhz
SanDisk SSD 120GB
Seagate HDD 500GB SATA 3
ASUS DVD RW
CoolerMaster GX 750W

More about : prepare hybrid physx

a b U Graphics card
January 14, 2013 9:16:25 PM

Gigabyte Windforce OC 3X 680 is the best thing out on market besides the Asus Top.
I own a Gigabyte GTX 670 Windforce OC X3 2GB and it performs better than a Galaxy GTX 680 on 3D benchmarks. Its soo quiet and all I use to power it under maximum load is a 600W PSU. I use a 2600K gen 2 of your CPU also:)  I definitley recommend the GTX 680 as its super quiet and low on power consumption under load.
January 14, 2013 9:20:12 PM

I want to use GTX680 or HD7970ghz for the main graphic card with the GTX280 for the PhysX. Is it possible if i have 750W psu?
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
January 14, 2013 9:35:26 PM

It should be possible with your psu. The minimum for Xfire/SLI anything is right at 750w(I think). You also need to be able to power the two cards which is at least 3 6/8 pin PCIe connectors.
January 14, 2013 9:40:11 PM

Quote:
It should be possible with your psu. The minimum for Xfire/SLI anything is right at 750w(I think). You also need to be able to power the two cards which is at least 3 6/8 pin PCIe connectors.


I have four 6+2Pin PCIe Connector. So, it should be fine.
By the way,
which one can get a better performance?

HD7970 ghz edition+ gtx280 (Hybrid PhysX)
OR
GTX680 +gtx280(PhysX)
a b U Graphics card
January 14, 2013 10:50:56 PM

If you really want physx you get nvidia and use ONE card. If you have AMD and an old nvidia card and want to play with it you try hybrid physx. Physx is really a non issue feature at this point. Its barely supported by any games... Nvidia ruined it by buying them and locking it down.

750W means nothing, nor does having connectors. Coolermaster is known to make garbage, you have to check PSU reviews
a c 91 U Graphics card
January 14, 2013 10:58:02 PM

do you realize that if you use the 280 for a physx card you might end up harming performance?
January 14, 2013 11:07:03 PM

Quote:
do you realize that if you use the 280 for a physx card you might end up harming performance?

Why ?
a b U Graphics card
January 14, 2013 11:11:00 PM

EOR said:
Quote:
do you realize that if you use the 280 for a physx card you might end up harming performance?

Why ?


reason #1 : heat.
a b U Graphics card
January 14, 2013 11:29:14 PM

EOR said:
I am going to buy a Gigabyte Radeon HD 7970 WF 3X GHz Edition 3GB
OR Gigabyte GeForce GTX 680 OC 2 GB

Should i go for the HD7970 Ghz editiion with GeForce GTX280(Hybrid PhysX)
OR GTX 680 with GeForce GTX280(PhysX)


Which one will get a better performance?
Also, 750W for these options is enough or not?

Specs:
Intel i7 3770K
Gigabyte H77M-D3H Mobo
GeForce GTX280
2 x 4GB DDR3 1600Mhz
SanDisk SSD 120GB
Seagate HDD 500GB SATA 3
ASUS DVD RW
CoolerMaster GX 750W



as unksol has expressed, don't get a cooler master PSU. most are just horrible. and considering what you're spending on, you can definitely choose a quality PSU that's less likely to crap out on you. tier 1, 2a, or 2b from the list below will do you just fine.

http://www.eggxpert.com/forums/thread/323050.aspx

decide on whether or not you wanna OC that CPU. if you're not grab a non-K cpu. if you are, buy a Z77 board.

not sure what you're using this for, but assuming at most it's for gaming; buy an i5-3570K if you're OCing, a 3470 if you're not. little to no benefit in getting an i7 for gaming. if my initial assumptions are wrong, and you're running multiple VMs, rendering, are into photo/image editing,etc, keep the i7.

i don't know what the gtx280 looks like nowadays and i'm not sure if there's a newer streamlined model, but being a former high-end card, i have to assume it's big and thick. pair that with a more recent high-end card, and you're looking for a bit of space on your motherboard. try grabbing an ATX board. much less stressful trying to fit in two thick cards as that second card will block those connectors at the bottom on an mATX board.

and in regards to PhysX; while physx is neat, it's not an absolute must have, though i guess you're capable enough to spend on it. so if you really want to do this; GTX670 + GTX280. yes, i know you ask for the 680, but for the price, you get a better value with the 670 as it performs close to the 680 for a lot less. and while hybrid physX has so far been successful to many if not all forum users who has it, it's not 100% guarantee it'll work perfectly in the future, so better to err on the side of caution.
a c 123 U Graphics card
January 15, 2013 12:56:01 AM

You WILL lower your performance with the GTX280.

A high-end card like the GTX680 will end up WAITING for the PHYSX calculations if the addon card is too slow.

Testing varies by game, but I believe you need a minimum of a GTX660 if you have a GTX680 and in some cases higher.

Other points:
1) PHYSX is mostly a little extra eye-candy for most games and simply NOT worth using due to the performance hit (even on a single GTX680). Borderlands 2 is an exception, but then a GTX680 can handle that fine by itself.

Rule of thumb for PHYSX:
If the frame rate drops below 60FPS using PHYSX, then don't bother.

2) Batman Arkham City:
- disable both DX11 features and PHYSX regardless of your hardware. They cause major stuttering for very little visual benefit.

3) Since you're interested in PHYSX, I suggest you buy the following card (mentioned above) which I own and love, the Asus GTX 680 DC2T or "TOP" model:

Out of stock here, but this is the card (don't confuse with the "DC2" without the "T"):
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

4) There are some great HD7970's out there as well, and as I've said PHYSX in general is simply not that big of a deal. If you can find the Asus GTX680 DC2T for $540 or less go for it. Otherwise, I recommend something like this:
http://us.ncix.com/products/?sku=77488&vpn=MATRIX-HD797...

SUMMARY:
- addon PHYSX card? NO. NO. NO.
- recommended card? (HD7970 or GTX680 models above)
- *both cards use the 3-slot solution from ASUS which is VERY QUIET compared to most other cards. Highly recommended unless you absolutely need that slot free.
a c 169 U Graphics card
January 15, 2013 12:57:22 AM

if you want physx just get the 680, and ditch the 280. the 680 alone is powerful enough to do physx, there is no need for a dedicated card with it.
a b U Graphics card
January 15, 2013 1:00:34 AM

overall the 7970Ghz is the faster card, but its Physx you want than a single GTX 680 will suffice!
a c 132 U Graphics card
January 15, 2013 1:14:46 AM

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by locked down Physx to my knowledge is a open source program. There just aren't many games being made for it there are titles yes that use it Metro is no series to scoff at or the Batman games which are amazing. Honestly, if you are that into Physx yes I agree a 670/ or 680 will do. I wish that Nvidia would just let AMD use there Havok Physx engine to power this stuff up so I have to stop explaining why I prefer Nvidia because of the features it gives me.
January 15, 2013 1:16:29 AM

SO, i should go HD7970GHZ or GTX 680 only?

And i just throw the gtx280 away?
a c 123 U Graphics card
January 15, 2013 1:21:27 AM

Here are some BENCHMARKS for you (the HD7970 one is up to date).
*In reality, it's likely that some games will perform better on the HD7970 and some on the GTX680 models that I'm recommending.

You can't go wrong with either card. I tend to lean towards NVidia myself but you'll have to way the Pros and Cons yourself.

HD7970 (Asus Platinum version):
http://hothardware.com/Reviews/ASUS-Matrix-Radeon-HD-79...

GTX680 (Asus DC2T "TOP" version):
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...

Other:
I should note that NVidia's "SHIELD" portable gaming device only works with NVidia's cards (660 or better). Odds are you won't care and it's likely $400 at least anyway. However, I thought I should mention it just in case.
a c 123 U Graphics card
January 15, 2013 1:24:32 AM

EOR said:
SO, i should go HD7970GHZ or GTX 680 only?

And i just throw the gtx280 away?


You can do what you wish, what I'm saying is that the GTX280 will not only add a lot of heat to your case but it will also slow down your games when used as an addon PHYSX card.

There's absolutely NO point to keeping that card in your current rig. I'd still keep it as a backup in case your new card fails at some point.
a c 132 U Graphics card
January 15, 2013 1:27:46 AM

If you are into physx and you play games that use it don't cut corners trying to make use of a older card. I would only get the ASUS 680 Top if your intentions were to overclock as the TOP series cards are cherry picked GPU's which for all intensive purposes in theory should have better thermal results (temps). Otherwise a standard DirectcuII card will do. List the games you play and then we can talk if its worth it or not.

I play games that use it. For me it makes sense to use a Nvidia card because without it I wouldn't get the full feature set for these games and For me I can handle not having the best card in the world as long as the visuals are good. And I get a little bit of both with a 670.

Metro 2033
Borderlands 2
Batman Arkham City
Batman Arkham Asylum
January 15, 2013 1:28:01 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbww3dhzK0M

A GTX 280 PhysX will bottleneck your system, a 550 or something mid-range last generation would be a better option.

Or get a better CPU cooling setup so you can OC the processor farther.
a c 91 U Graphics card
January 15, 2013 1:32:53 AM

i wonder if nvidia didn't buy aegia......... would physx be any good then? I really get tired of the anti BS.
a c 132 U Graphics card
January 15, 2013 1:46:42 AM

Both companies have a physx engine. havok is AMD's. It's a cleaver thing a GPU handling the physx of a game that there are aspects of the game that use physx (not the branding but the tech). You are never going to please everyone people are for it or against it are more about FPS or Visuals different things appeal to different crowds this will never change. And yes I agree that a 280 would bottleneck your system.
a c 91 U Graphics card
January 15, 2013 2:54:01 AM

Havoc Physx is not proprietary. both camps run it fine.
a c 132 U Graphics card
January 15, 2013 3:03:46 AM

I just think the reason people are jaded with nvidia is because its you use our product you get our features or you don't. And I can understand the frustration that goes along with that. Either way circling back to this guys desire. Unless you are in love with Physx you will be fine with a 7970.
a c 123 U Graphics card
January 16, 2013 11:25:53 PM

swifty_morgan said:
Havoc Physx is not proprietary. both camps run it fine.


FYI,
You mean "Havok physics" as opposed to "NVidia's PhysX".
a c 123 U Graphics card
January 16, 2013 11:30:59 PM

I think this topic should be CLOSED as the question has been answered.

The ONLY decision is which card to get and I think I've given enough info (benchmarks) and links to the top HD7970 and GTX680 for him to make up his mind.

I own an Asus GTX680 DC2T but I there's no "wrong" answer here.
a c 132 U Graphics card
January 16, 2013 11:46:29 PM

You are correct there isn't a wrong answer both are capable cards which are strong in different areas.
a c 91 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 12:36:35 AM

photonboy said:
FYI,
You mean "Havok physics" as opposed to "NVidia's PhysX".



you actually wasted time to print that?
a c 123 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 6:13:45 AM

swifty_morgan said:
you actually wasted time to print that?


You actually wasted time to print that I wasted time printing that?

I was just trying to point a mistake that's somewhat common, but if you're offended then I'm not actually sorry.
a c 91 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 7:27:04 AM

insulted no, I only thought it was stupid...................
a c 132 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 9:17:07 AM

Oye can we give it a rest here. Physx is a niche thing as I've said over and over again. Both companies have tech that can utilize elements of Physx I would like at some point for both companies to give developers a universal way of pushing things onto the GPU with Physx. However I find that highly unlikely due to the specific things that Physx does. But still I would like a developer to have the balls to have both AMD and Nvidia cards to do the same thing with Physx without using the CPU its stupid. It just bugs me I guess because you have reviewers who just wont include it in game reviews especially with batman to keep it fair with AMD and I would just rather it be a element of turning game settings on max instead of keeping it fair. I guess my view is that Nvidia needs to stop monopolizing it and let AMD work with it as well is what I'm saying ><
a c 123 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 5:00:31 PM

bigshootr8 said:
Oye can we give it a rest here. Physx is a niche thing as I've said over and over again. Both companies have tech that can utilize elements of Physx I would like at some point for both companies to give developers a universal way of pushing things onto the GPU with Physx. However I find that highly unlikely due to the specific things that Physx does. But still I would like a developer to have the balls to have both AMD and Nvidia cards to do the same thing with Physx without using the CPU its stupid. It just bugs me I guess because you have reviewers who just wont include it in game reviews especially with batman to keep it fair with AMD and I would just rather it be a element of turning game settings on max instead of keeping it fair. I guess my view is that Nvidia needs to stop monopolizing it and let AMD work with it as well is what I'm saying ><


There's been some discussion of converting Havok physics into OpenCL so that it can use BOTH the GPU and CPU (ideally either or both depending on the benefit). This seems a long way off though.

NVidia has a point, they created PhysX and have spent money to get it working, why should they let it work on AMD cards?

For the most part though, NVidia's PhysX often drops frame rates considerably for the benefit of a small eye candy and my advice for most is turn it off. I've got a GTX680 and disable PhysX for Mafia 2. It causes stuttering in Batman AC (as does DX11). However I turn it on Borderlands 2 and a few others.

So yes, in some games NVidia's PhysX is usable, but you really need to monitor the game with FRAPS to determine if enabling PhysX is worth it (my rule of thumb is to disable it if your frame rates drop below 60FPS because that GPU power would be better spent increasing quality elsewhere or maintaining a high frame rate.)

So let's put a small checkmark in the NVidia column, but it's not necessarily a dealbreaker over an AMD card if the AMD card is better value otherwise (especially when the HD7950 was about $300 with $170 worth of games; that was awesome.)
a c 132 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 6:42:10 PM

For me it is a deal breaker against AMD. I play games that use it I don't really get this stuttering effect in Arkham City. Physx has really become a easier thing to turn on with the 600 series cards. The way I deal with it is to not turn up AA+AF all the way up. And the reason I do this is because its something that isn't as easily seen in terms of what it does to the game. The reason you use it in Borderlands is because you are running in DX9 which is childs play.



a c 132 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 6:46:51 PM

EOR said:
SO, i should go HD7970GHZ or GTX 680 only?

And i just throw the gtx280 away?



I think that is up to you. I don't see really the need to get an additional card for Physx at this point in the game who knows Metro 2033: Last Light may prove me wrong.

I think you should get the card you feel will best serve your needs if the games you play don't use the technology then I would say make your choice on that. I wouldn't spend the money it costs to get a 680 is you don't intend on turning on Physx in games that use it I would get a 7970 ghz edition card.
a c 91 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 7:27:28 PM

photonboy said:
There's been some discussion of converting Havok physics into OpenCL so that it can use BOTH the GPU and CPU (ideally either or both depending on the benefit). This seems a long way off though.

NVidia has a point, they created PhysX and have spent money to get it working, why should they let it work on AMD cards?

For the most part though, NVidia's PhysX often drops frame rates considerably for the benefit of a small eye candy and my advice for most is turn it off. I've got a GTX680 and disable PhysX for Mafia 2. It causes stuttering in Batman AC (as does DX11). However I turn it on Borderlands 2 and a few others.

So yes, in some games NVidia's PhysX is usable, but you really need to monitor the game with FRAPS to determine if enabling PhysX is worth it (my rule of thumb is to disable it if your frame rates drop below 60FPS because that GPU power would be better spent increasing quality elsewhere or maintaining a high frame rate.)

So let's put a small checkmark in the NVidia column, but it's not necessarily a dealbreaker over an AMD card if the AMD card is better value otherwise (especially when the HD7950 was about $300 with $170 worth of games; that was awesome.)



nvidia didn't create it, the purchased it.......... renamed it. and if it were still it's own entity both camps could easily take advantage of it.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=w...
a c 271 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 7:42:30 PM

photonboy said:
You WILL lower your performance with the GTX280.

A high-end card like the GTX680 will end up WAITING for the PHYSX calculations if the addon card is too slow.

Testing varies by game, but I believe you need a minimum of a GTX660 if you have a GTX680 and in some cases higher.

Other points:
1) PHYSX is mostly a little extra eye-candy for most games and simply NOT worth using due to the performance hit (even on a single GTX680). Borderlands 2 is an exception, but then a GTX680 can handle that fine by itself.

Rule of thumb for PHYSX:
If the frame rate drops below 60FPS using PHYSX, then don't bother.

2) Batman Arkham City:
- disable both DX11 features and PHYSX regardless of your hardware. They cause major stuttering for very little visual benefit.

3) Since you're interested in PHYSX, I suggest you buy the following card (mentioned above) which I own and love, the Asus GTX 680 DC2T or "TOP" model:

Out of stock here, but this is the card (don't confuse with the "DC2" without the "T"):
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

4) There are some great HD7970's out there as well, and as I've said PHYSX in general is simply not that big of a deal. If you can find the Asus GTX680 DC2T for $540 or less go for it. Otherwise, I recommend something like this:
http://us.ncix.com/products/?sku=77488&vpn=MATRIX-HD797...

SUMMARY:
- addon PHYSX card? NO. NO. NO.
- recommended card? (HD7970 or GTX680 models above)
- *both cards use the 3-slot solution from ASUS which is VERY QUIET compared to most other cards. Highly recommended unless you absolutely need that slot free.


Actually some people have posted that anything more than a GTS250 or a GTS450 is a waste so where did you get the idea that anything less than a 660 won't cut it? :heink: 
a c 132 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 7:57:17 PM

Monkey for what sorry a dedicated physx card?
a c 271 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 8:21:12 PM

bigshootr8 said:
Monkey for what sorry a dedicated physx card?

Yes.
a c 91 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 8:22:46 PM

"Monkey for what sorry a dedicated physx card?"



what the hell foreign language is that?
a c 132 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 8:22:51 PM

To my knowledge I thought it was a 550/ or 650 was the top of where you ought to be with a dedicated Physx card. In all the big name physx games I play though I keep asking people on the forums why do you want a dedicated card honestly.
a c 132 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 8:26:38 PM

swifty_morgan said:
"Monkey for what sorry a dedicated physx card?"



what the hell foreign language is that?



Swifty, really? Fine I'll break it down for you the grammar nazi. Monkey? for what "Actually some people have posted that anything more than a GTS250 or a GTS450 is a waste so where did you get the idea that anything less than a 660 won't cut it? :heink: "-Monkey Are you talking about a dedicated Physx card?

Happy Swifty? Do you want a cookie or a piece of paper for your mom to stick on her fridge?
a c 91 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 9:00:15 PM

thanks, that would be nice.............. now, how was anybody supposed to decipher what you wrote?
a c 132 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 9:01:32 PM

apparently it didn't take a monkey to decipher it dun dun dunce :) 
a c 271 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 9:28:48 PM

Now now, play nicely together.
a c 132 U Graphics card
January 17, 2013 9:41:10 PM

I guess really to bring it back to the discussion of what the OP was suggesting. You don't gain anything from having a dedicated Physx card NVIDIA or AMD. I mean if you wanted to hack physx to work with your AMD card I can see you possibly doing it but given the amount of games that support Physx I would see it as a waste of money. You would really have to love Physx and AMD to do it and if you really loved Physx wouldn't you had purchased a 670 or 680.
a c 123 U Graphics card
January 18, 2013 4:24:48 PM

Mousemonkey said:
Actually some people have posted that anything more than a GTS250 or a GTS450 is a waste so where did you get the idea that anything less than a 660 won't cut it? :heink: 


Linus at NCIX did a test with a GTX580 and some lower cards as dedicated PHYSX addon cards.

What actually happens is the main GPU (say a GTX680) does all the normal game processing, however if the addon card is too slow crunching the PHYSX numbers then the GTX680 simply WAITS for the addon card to finish.

*This will VARY by the game, AND the level of PHYSX chosen, but here's an example (from the Linus video):

GTX580 (by itself; game + PhysX)
49.7FPS

GTX580 + 8600GTS
30.3FPS

GTX580 + GTX560Ti
55.3

Analysis of results:
- using the 8600GTS bottlenecks things so the frame rate DROPS a lot
- the GTX560Ti helps by 11%

*This is just one example so I can't speak for all of them. But from what I can see, you have to have a relatively powerful card to get a small boost in performance and this card will also sit in your case producing heat and noise.
a c 132 U Graphics card
January 18, 2013 6:59:52 PM

Typically the way I would look at it depending on the game it will weight differently. For a modern game they normally recommend a mid range card of the previous generation of cards taking a look at Batman pictures that is. This was prior to the 650. Right now the 650 or 650Ti would be the cards on the cheap that would do the job. However this changes But I guess the way to look at it is if you purchase a card that is more then 2 generations old for a dedicated physx card you will more then likely see hurt from it rather then help.

Either way on a single modern gpu I have no issues running the game on high physx. And the idea that one needs a dedicated physx card is silly. Mainly because there aren't a lot of games that use it to start so you are just powering a card to sit there when you do play a game that uses it. And two games now don't really need the power of a dedicated physx card unless you are using a older high end card and would like to see physx and you pair a 650/ti as the card.
a c 271 U Graphics card
January 18, 2013 7:05:45 PM

photonboy said:
Linus at NCIX did a test with a GTX580 and some lower cards as dedicated PHYSX addon cards.

What actually happens is the main GPU (say a GTX680) does all the normal game processing, however if the addon card is too slow crunching the PHYSX numbers then the GTX680 simply WAITS for the addon card to finish.

*This will VARY by the game, AND the level of PHYSX chosen, but here's an example (from the Linus video):

GTX580 (by itself; game + PhysX)
49.7FPS

GTX580 + 8600GTS
30.3FPS

GTX580 + GTX560Ti
55.3

Analysis of results:
- using the 8600GTS bottlenecks things so the frame rate DROPS a lot
- the GTX560Ti helps by 11%

*This is just one example so I can't speak for all of them. But from what I can see, you have to have a relatively powerful card to get a small boost in performance and this card will also sit in your case producing heat and noise.


Did they use anything else other than an 8600 and a 560?
a c 132 U Graphics card
January 18, 2013 7:14:12 PM

The video is quite dated. So I think its validity is losing strength because people go in thinking that there is one top dawg physx card.
a c 123 U Graphics card
January 21, 2013 2:35:48 AM

bigshootr8 said:
The video is quite dated. So I think its validity is losing strength because people go in thinking that there is one top dawg physx card.


The information I gave up is VERY relevant today.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by your statement though.

It's important to note:
1. An addon card must be PROPORTIONATELY powerful. This is because the more powerful card ends up WAITING, so you can use a LESS-POWERFUL card as an addon card if your main card isn't as powerful (i.e. GTX660 + GTX680; GTX560 + GTX580).

2. The usefulness of an addon card VARIES A LOT!
*You MUST test a game both WITH and WITHOUT the dedicated card at the same settings (i.e. HIGH PHYSX) to be sure if the card is helping or hurting.

**Do NOT assume because an addon card benefits in one game that it will in another.
!