Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

GPU Dedicated PhysX and CUDA

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
February 11, 2013 1:36:42 PM

Ok I plan on using a 680 for general gfx and CUDA. and another, much cheaper card for PhsX and possibly CUDA. Does this hav anything to do with SLI? Also, what are some recommendations for a card dedicated for PhysX?

EDIT:
Can someone please give an accurate comparison of Havok and PhysX?
a c 160 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 1:44:55 PM

1. No this has no connection to SLI.

2. A GTX680 will not even get a dent from using PhysX on it. Adding an extra card would just be creating needless extra effort for no improvement.



m
0
l
February 11, 2013 1:54:55 PM

Novuake said:
1. No this has no connection to SLI.

2. A GTX680 will not even get a dent from using PhysX on it. Adding an extra card would just be creating needless extra effort for no improvement.


Ever heard of a game called Planetside 2? I plan to max it out with maybe some AA, which is one of the reasons why I want dedicated PhysX.
m
0
l
Related resources
February 11, 2013 2:01:20 PM

coolitic said:
Ever heard of a game called Planetside 2? I plan to max it out with maybe some AA, which is one of the reasons why I want dedicated PhysX.


The 680 is the fastest, consistently performing, single GPU card in the world right now. You underestimate its power. Other people are maxing the game out on lower-end cards. Unless you're playing at a ridiculously high resolution across multiple monitors?
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 2:11:49 PM

I have a single GTX 680... I play on 6040x1200 resolution... I can play planetside 2 MAX settings and keep 40+ FPS at that resolution... You will be fine w/o a dedicated physics card on a 1080p monitor ( I assume that is what you are using)
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 2:15:46 PM

TheMadFapper said:
The 680 is the fastest single GPU card in the world right now. You underestimate its power. Other people are maxing the game out on lower-end cards. Unless you're playing at a ridiculously high resolution across multiple monitors?



I am a Nvidia fan, but this sure is going to bring out the AMD fanboys..
m
0
l
a c 160 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 2:19:08 PM

TheMadFapper said:
The 680 is the fastest single GPU card in the world right now. You underestimate its power. Other people are maxing the game out on lower-end cards. Unless you're playing at a ridiculously high resolution across multiple monitors?


You sure about that?

larrym said:
I am a Nvidia fan, but this sure is going to bring out the AMD fanboys..


Hahhahahahaha :lol: 

You don't need to be an AMD fanboy to argue with that statement. He is clearly a Nvidia fanboy.

I am neither. But the GTX680 is not faster than an HD7970 GE.

ANYWAY... Before we start a flame war AGAIN.
m
0
l
a c 160 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 2:20:55 PM

coolitic said:
Ever heard of a game called Planetside 2? I plan to max it out with maybe some AA, which is one of the reasons why I want dedicated PhysX.


The GTX680 is VERY powerfull. Planetside 2 WILL NOT give it any problems unless you are running multiple screens.

I am trying to help. Please don't react like that, its not very nice. :non:  :) 

Especially since you are asking for assistance.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 2:25:10 PM

Novuake said:
You sure about that?



Hahhahahahaha :lol: 

You don't need to be an AMD fanboy to argue with that statement. He is clearly a Nvidia fanboy.

I am neither. But the GTX680 is not faster than an HD7970 GE.

ANYWAY... Before we start a flame war AGAIN.



I was thinking, uh oh, 7970 anyone. Even us Nvidia fanboys know not to say the 680 is faster..lol More stable maybe ..dig dig..but not faster.
m
0
l
a c 160 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 2:35:37 PM

larrym said:
I was thinking, uh oh, 7970 anyone. Even us Nvidia fanboys know not to say the 680 is faster..lol More stable maybe ..dig dig..but not faster.


Exactly... hehehe, at least AMD is working on the smoothness issue. So that won't even be applicable for very long.

BUT one thing that Nvidia has in their favour.
AMD will only be releasing HD8xxx in Q4, so for the first time in YEARS Nvidia will be first in releasing the next gen IF they can keep to schedule!
m
0
l
February 11, 2013 2:58:48 PM

Novuake said:
You sure about that?



Hahhahahahaha :lol: 

You don't need to be an AMD fanboy to argue with that statement. He is clearly a Nvidia fanboy.

I am neither. But the GTX680 is not faster than an HD7970 GE.

ANYWAY... Before we start a flame war AGAIN.


Novuake said:
Exactly... hehehe, at least AMD is working on the smoothness issue. So that won't even be applicable for very long.

BUT one thing that Nvidia has in their favour.
AMD will only be releasing HD8xxx in Q4, so for the first time in YEARS Nvidia will be first in releasing the next gen IF they can keep to schedule!



Pardon me, you're right. If you want a much hotter card that sucks down power and falls apart in Crossfire with newer games, falls apart with various 3D applications I use,...get the 7970.

I'll edit my original post to say "fastest, consistently performing" to make you AMD "fanboys" happy. Although I don't get the name calling, I just use what works best, and it's not AMD cards. Powerhouses yes, efficient and consistent, no.

m
0
l
a c 160 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 3:08:57 PM

TheMadFapper said:
Pardon me, you're right. If you want a much hotter card that sucks down power and falls apart in Crossfire with newer games, falls apart with various 3D applications I use,...get the 7970.


LOL I won't deny that in some cases Nvidia is a better option(if you use PhysX or an APP that utilizes cuda). Even F@H Nvidia is also much better.

BUT I do not entirely agree with your gross exaggeration. Listen to your fellow Nvidia fan larrym, he knows.

m
0
l
February 11, 2013 3:12:50 PM

Novuake said:
LOL I won't deny that in some cases Nvidia is a better option(if you use PhysX or an APP that utilizes cuda). Even F@H Nvidia is also much better.

BUT I do not entirely agree with your gross exaggeration. Listen to your fellow Nvidia fan larrym, he knows.


Yes, I added two words to my original post that completely voids your entire argument. So let's leave it at that.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 3:16:07 PM

TheMadFapper said:
Yes, I added two words to my original post that completely voids your entire argument. So let's leave it at that.


Well that was a quick war, these usually go for 2 or 3 pages with at least 1 AMD fan..lol
m
0
l
a c 160 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 3:21:15 PM

larrym said:
Well that was a quick war, these usually go for 2 or 3 pages with at least 1 AMD fan..lol


LOL no AMD fanboys involved and an irrational Nvidia fanboy. Very disappointing war indeed.
m
0
l
a c 160 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 3:25:10 PM

TheMadFapper said:
Yes, I added two words to my original post that completely voids your entire argument. So let's leave it at that.


LOL consistently performing. LONG LIVE THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE!
m
0
l
February 11, 2013 3:34:50 PM

Novuake said:
LOL no AMD fanboys involved and an irrational Nvidia fanboy. Very disappointing war indeed.


I have/had a non-gaming rig for bitcoin mining that uses a pair of 7950's. Why? Because they can do brute force calculations faster. So now what am I a fanboy of? Applying strengths where they belong and noting weaknesses where they are? Please keep labeling me, I know it makes you feel better to categorize those around you :) 
m
0
l
a c 160 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 3:37:32 PM

TheMadFapper said:
I have/had a non-gaming rig for bitcoin mining that uses a pair of 7950's. Why? Because they can do brute force calculations faster. So now what am I a fanboy of? Applying strengths where they belong and noting weaknesses where they are? Please keep labeling me, I know it makes you feel better to categorize those around you :) 


Suuuure... Its just because Kepler compute performance is SOOOO dismal that you had no choice but to use HD7970s.
m
0
l
a c 271 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 3:41:08 PM

Novuake said:
Suuuure... Its just because Kepler compute performance is SOOOO dismal that you had no choice but to use HD7970s.

Whilst I'm not going to disagree with you it's not exactly on topic is it?
m
0
l
February 11, 2013 3:44:18 PM

Mousemonkey said:
Whilst I'm not going to disagree with you it's not exactly on topic is it?


We went off topic a long time ago. Kill it now, kill it with fire.
m
0
l
a c 271 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 3:49:19 PM

TheMadFapper said:
We went off topic a long time ago. Kill it now, kill it with fire.

I'm going to give the OP a bit of time to respond before I decide what to do with the thread and it's contributors. ;) 
m
0
l
a c 85 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 3:52:35 PM

Is today a national holiday celebrating being rude or some'at?

This is the fourth thread I've run into in as many minutes where there have been more people interested only in insults and snarkiness than in helping.

OP: The fact that the 680 is a poor pick over a 670 aside, it'll max out planetside 2 just fine. Don't worry about spending more money to do nothing but generate more heat.
m
0
l
February 11, 2013 4:03:19 PM

DarkSable said:
Is today a national holiday celebrating being rude or some'at?

This is the fourth thread I've run into in as many minutes where there have been more people interested only in insults and snarkiness than in helping.

OP: The fact that the 680 is a poor pick over a 670 aside, it'll max out planetside 2 just fine. Don't worry about spending more money to do nothing but generate more heat.


Negative. All of us in this thread were originally helping the OP. I made a comment that was not accurate in the way it was worded, so it offended a few people. No big deal. Tom's is a much more friendly atmosphere than most message boards so I wouldn't go so far as calling it a national holiday of being rude. That's a bit much.

I agree with you though, in that the 670 is undoubtedly a better value pick. You can pick it up on Amazon "used - like new" for less than $350. That's a great deal!
m
0
l
a c 160 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 4:21:55 PM

Mousemonkey said:
Whilst I'm not going to disagree with you it's not exactly on topic is it?


Fair point. But i have assisted the OP and got it thrown in my face... Can't expect me to care much for "on topic"... :( 

It just aggravates me sooooo much when people are unhappy with accurate and HELPFUL answers and choose to believe and argue for falsehoods(especially when they have asked for the help originally).

:cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry: 

EDIT : Classic human nature. People only want to accept what they WANT to.
m
0
l
February 11, 2013 4:30:34 PM

Novuake said:
Fair point. But i have assisted the OP and got it thrown in my face... Can't expect me to care much for "on topic"... :( 

It just aggravates me sooooo much when people are unhappy with accurate and HELPFUL answers and choose to believe and argue for falsehoods(especially when they have asked for the help originally).

:cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry: 


Nobody threw anything in your face, stop whining. The OP assumed the game required a higher level of performance than it actually does. It happens. All you had to do was calmly explain that to him, and now you're derailing the thread again.
m
0
l
a c 160 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 4:33:24 PM

TheMadFapper said:
Nobody threw anything in your face, stop whining. The OP assumed the game required a higher level of performance than it actually does. It happens. All you had to do was calmly explain that to him, and now you're derailing the thread again.


I should probably stop now... LOL
m
0
l
a c 271 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 4:43:40 PM

Novuake said:
I should probably stop now... LOL

And wait for the OP to respond perhaps?
m
0
l
a c 160 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 4:49:39 PM

Mousemonkey said:
And wait for the OP to respond perhaps?


Yes. :sarcastic: 
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 4:59:16 PM

Honestly I would opt for a physx card just for the heck of it, why not right?
My system:
m
0
l
a c 592 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 5:47:47 PM

People do tend to assume that one GTX 680 is enough, which is true. But they also tend to ignore the fact that pairing a 680 with the right dedicated PhysX card can improve your framerates by roughly 25%.

The key for a good dedicated PhysX card is the number of CUDA cores. With the latest generation of 600 series cards, the CUDA cores have increased dramatically. A lower level GT 640/650 packs 384 CUDA cores, is inexpensive, uses very little power, and produces relatively little heat. I would start with the GT 650 as a minimum target and then consider a 650 Ti if you can afford one, or a GT 640 if the 650 is too expensive.


Oh, and I know this is hard for some to believe, but according to TechPowerUp in their latest review, using the latest drivers, the GTX 680 and 7970 GHz perform exactly the same in their suite of 19 benchmarks:

m
0
l
February 11, 2013 6:25:14 PM

Erm...I mean I was defending the 680 but I AM very skeptical about that chart, because the 7970 Ghz Ed should indeed be a little bit faster than it. Was that chart for a specific game? Could you link us to the original article please and thanks.

Edit: Nevermind sorry, I'm capable of Googling geez I'm getting lazy.
m
0
l
a c 160 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 6:33:49 PM

17seconds said:
People do tend to assume that one GTX 680 is enough, which is true. But they also tend to ignore the fact that pairing a 680 with the right dedicated PhysX card can improve your framerates by roughly 25%.

The key for a good dedicated PhysX card is the number of CUDA cores. With the latest generation of 600 series cards, the CUDA cores have increased dramatically. A lower level GT 640/650 packs 384 CUDA cores, is inexpensive, uses very little power, and produces relatively little heat. I would start with the GT 650 as a minimum target and then consider a 650 Ti if you can afford one, or a GT 640 if the 650 is too expensive.


Oh, and I know this is hard for some to believe, but according to TechPowerUp in their latest review, using the latest drivers, the GTX 680 and 7970 GHz perform exactly the same in their suite of 19 benchmarks:

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/ASUS/ARES_II/images/perfrel_1920.gif


Although I don't mind believing that. I would like to see the source please.

But even IF they are equal. The HD7970 GE still is cheaper and has more VRAM so it will scale better as the resolution increases compared to the GTX680.
m
0
l
February 11, 2013 6:39:10 PM

I post one little thing, and it turns into a flame war...

Here is what I think with GeForce and Radeon.

Radeon:

More raw power (not by too much though)

Cheap

GeForce:

Optimized

Better Technology

Energy Efficient

Quiet

A bit smaller
m
0
l
February 11, 2013 6:39:36 PM

Novuake said:
Although I don't mind believing that. I would like to see the source please.

But even IF they are equal. The HD7970 GE still is cheaper and has more VRAM so it will scale better as the resolution increases compared to the GTX680.


680 can get 4 GB VRAM
m
0
l
February 11, 2013 6:46:25 PM

Novuake said:
You sure about that?



Hahhahahahaha :lol: 

You don't need to be an AMD fanboy to argue with that statement. He is clearly a Nvidia fanboy.

I am neither. But the GTX680 is not faster than an HD7970 GE.

ANYWAY... Before we start a flame war AGAIN.


He said Single GPU. 7970 uses 2 GPUs.
The equivalent nVidia card would be a GTX690 which stomps all over a HD7970:
http://www.hwcompare.com/12666/geforce-gtx-690-vs-radeo...
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 6:50:39 PM

@Niz actually the 7970 is a single GPU card, the dual GPU is the 7990 or 7970x2.

@OP - In all regards it is up to you to decide if you want phsyx. Coming from the beta of Planetside 2 with phsyx I can 100% tell you that having a dedicated is about 70% faster than using a single card for everything at least in this super demanding game.

Edit: Heres a link to the 7990 dual GPU http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... or http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... are examples
m
0
l
February 11, 2013 7:01:59 PM

Mousemonkey said:
Isn't it the 7990 that uses two GPU's, the 7970 is a single GPU card.



Correct. And that ASUS Ares II "7990" looks so cool, but it would rip my PSU a new one whereas a 690 would play nicely. That power draw is ridiculous.

Edit: Please read the comment on the Ares II from Newegg, I had a chuckle: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...



m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 7:14:55 PM

coolitic said:
Ever heard of a game called Planetside 2? I plan to max it out with maybe some AA, which is one of the reasons why I want dedicated PhysX.


Planetside 2 does not use heavy Physx calculations, just a few small vog volumes for visual effects at most. With hardware Physx a 680 will probably not even take a 6% fps hit, the Physx is just simply NOT demanding in this game. Even my GTX 480 wasn't bothered by using the Physx in Planetside 2.
m
0
l
a c 160 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 7:18:22 PM

mightymaxio said:
@Niz actually the 7970 is a single GPU card, the dual GPU is the 7990 or 7970x2.

@OP - In all regards it is up to you to decide if you want phsyx. Coming from the beta of Planetside 2 with phsyx I can 100% tell you that having a dedicated is about 70% faster than using a single card for everything at least in this super demanding game.

Edit: Heres a link to the 7990 dual GPU http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... or http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... are examples


70%? I find that VERY doubtful with a GTX680 as a main card. Even with mid range cards, and then you may as well go SLI.
m
0
l
a c 160 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 7:21:33 PM

17seconds said:
For the uninitiated, you should familiarize yourself with TechPowerUp. Their reviews feature 19 benchmarks, always use the latest drivers available at the time and have those handy charts that show cumulative performance, in addition to things like Performance per Dollar, Performance per Watt, etc.
Cheers!
http://www.techpowerup.com/
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/ARES_II/27.html


I have an interesting question to put to you. That WHOLE list of GPU benches you posted. Do you think TechPowerUp would retest each and EVERY single card with the latest drivers or would they just test the card they are currently testing with the latest drivers?
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 7:22:25 PM

@Azathoth the reason it only uses 6% of your card right now is because they disabled and removed the ability to enable physx for the time being. It was too laggy and glitchy without a dedicated card that they canned it right after beta.

You would know this if you played planetside 2 and saw the "grayed" out option. In beta you could enable this option.
m
0
l
a c 592 U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 7:26:53 PM

Novuake said:
I have an interesting question to put to you. That WHOLE list of GPU benches you posted. Do you think TechPowerUp would retest each and EVER single card with the latest drivers or would they just test the card they are currently testing with the latest drivers?

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/ARES_II/5.html

Quote:
Benchmark scores in other reviews are only comparable when this exact same configuration is used.

All video card results were obtained on this exact system with exactly the same configuration.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 7:38:26 PM

Well to throw my hat into the ring, sound like the best thing for the op to do is buy a 670 (oc if he wants) and use the money he saved to buy a 6 series card for phyx seems like a good compromise.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
February 11, 2013 7:45:41 PM

why would you even want to enable physX anyways? do you really need to see some additional glowing dust/spark particles in the game? are you really willing to spend extra cash just to enable it - just to see some extra party tricks? your 680 is fine by itself, just forget about the PhysX B.S. since you wouldn't be needing it when you're too busy popping heads.
m
0
l
!