How PhysX runs on Nvidia and AMD (ATI) systems - Page 5

Stew · 2012-06-26, 03:27 AM

Buy some Nvidia card end of the story BTW i have a Asus engtx570 DcuII for sale for anyones in quebec or canada

i see you naked · 2012-06-26, 03:28 AM

a gtx 560 ti will run this game fine, i highly doubt its gonna take more performance than BF3 and Crysis 2..

and if u believe the marketing gag of their 670's, ur problem

Xikuner · 2012-07-06, 01:34 AM

I just replaced my crossfired HD6950s for SLI'd gtx 680's and haven't been happier. I know it's a bit pricier, however I'd rather spend the extra dollar on cards that will have consistant drivers, and will run the game smoothly.
I've been playing fps games for 11 years and one thing I have stuck by is that the frame rates for optimum gameplay are above 65fps. And I think I've put in enough time to prefer maximum settings for todd frame rates. So if you're wondering what is best, just beef it up with what ever feels best

All being said, and all benchmarks aside, SOE won't produce a product thatll only be playable on one of two cards. It's poor marketing.
It'll run great if you have a beefy system, and run (ok) on a mediocre system.

Before you guys argue over hypetethetical conclusions based of technical aspects of how physX runs, I'd suggest jus waiting to see how the game operates. That way you spend less time guessing

Thanks Goku for the information!

Astrok · 2012-07-06, 02:06 AM

Originally Posted by Goku

Vancha why are you using so low resolutions? Anything 1680x1050 to 1920x1200 in mainstream these days.

in every game i do play on low resolutions to.

Since back in the day when i played delta force 1 on 640x something.

I normally play at max res around 1280.I cant handle high resolutions in games.
Right now i play arma 2 alot and if i get high res my eyes killing me for sure.If i put it a bit lower i can concentrate longer and that way i can play longer.

i know the higher the res how better it looks but somehow i never gave about pixels on my screen.

CasualCat · 2012-08-16, 03:34 PM

So how important are the specs of the card were you to run an older Nvidia card just for PhysX?

In the example the chart example they showed a a 460 w/a 275 for PhysX. What about a 6 series Nvidia (660/670,etc.) with a 9800GTX for the PhysX?

Is there a threshold in which the older card may actually hold the new card back in some way?

Masterr · 2012-08-16, 04:04 PM

i5-3450 quad core @ 3.1 Ghz Ivy Bridge
Radeon HD 6670
8GB Ram

Wanting to run game on 1440x900 on High

So with all this physX stuff, your saying I'm basically screwed...

Dkamanus · 2012-08-16, 04:15 PM

Originally Posted by Masterr

i5-3450 quad core @ 3.1 Ghz Ivy Bridge
Radeon HD 6670
8GB Ram

Wanting to run game on 1440x900 on High

So with all this physX stuff, your saying I'm basically screwed...

Not necessarily, if I understood. I have a similar config:

i5-2500k 3.3 Ghz, 8gb 1600Mhz DDR3 RAM, and an HD 6870 Graphics card.

Both processors, in theory, could handle PhysX quite well on our CPUs, since we'd be forced to do so there, cause of our Radeon GPUs. The problem would be more severe on older dual core processors where the load of the game PLUS the PhysX would simply be too much for the CPU.

Masterr · 2012-08-16, 04:17 PM

Originally Posted by Dkamanus

Not necessarily, if I understood. I have a similar config:

i5-2500k 3.3 Ghz, 8gb 1600Mhz DDR3 RAM, and an HD 6870 Graphics card.

Both processors, in theory, could handle PhysX quite well on our CPUs, since we'd be forced to do so there, cause of our Radeon GPUs. The problem would be more severe on older dual core processors where the load of the game PLUS the PhysX would simply be too much for the CPU.

if thats the case...thank goodness for quad cores.

Dkamanus · 2012-08-16, 04:29 PM

Originally Posted by Masterr

if thats the case...thank goodness for quad cores.

Im not saying that Dual Cores wont be able to do their jobs, or that quads will (considering the amounts of calcs that must be done in a game like this). But considering that you aren't using a 5 years old CPU (which is quite usable these days still), I'd say you might be fine.

I was kinda thinking of getting a 2nd GPU, but idk if the Motherboard will make it work at the same rate as the primary.

Crator · 2012-08-16, 04:34 PM

Interesting info! Thanks Goku and Atranox!

Joomba · 2012-08-16, 04:54 PM

For the CPU-run PhysX, how does thread count factor in? I have an i3, which is a hyperthreaded dual core processor (4 threads). Since the i3 has a built-in GPU, is there any way for it to assist (however small) HD 6850 card?

As for running an Nvidia card in addition, what would be a good and relatively inexpensive card to use to run PhysX? Would the original PhysX card work well? I have a friend who wanted to sell me one for $5.

Mansen · 2012-08-16, 06:31 PM

I severely doubt that SOE is going to have enforced PhysX in the game since it will severely gimp just about any AMD based setup - an extremely poor design choice given their prospective market.

As for the people mentioning PhysX affecting anything gameplay related - you do realise that PhysX is strictly clientside right? It cannot bend bullets or sway tanks in any way that will affect other players. If it could you'd have to run physX on the server as well as clientside just to get equal results.

There's a reason why PhysX is primarily used for fog, swaying flags and for some ragdoll like effects.

Masterr · 2012-08-16, 07:25 PM

Originally Posted by Mansen

I severely doubt that SOE is going to have enforced PhysX in the game since it will severely gimp just about any AMD based setup - an extremely poor design choice given their prospective market.

As for the people mentioning PhysX affecting anything gameplay related - you do realise that PhysX is strictly clientside right? It cannot bend bullets or sway tanks in any way that will affect other players. If it could you'd have to run physX on the server as well as clientside just to get equal results.

There's a reason why PhysX is primarily used for fog, swaying flags and for some ragdoll like effects.

I hope my cpu can take it then, Id like to keep fog in the game and not have it removed due to my AMD GPU ...man y couldn't they use havoc D=

Goku · 2012-08-16, 08:03 PM

Didn't think anyone was going to dig this back up. We still haven't heard much on GPU based PhysX, so I edited that portion out.

Sunrock · 2012-08-17, 03:15 AM

Originally Posted by Zulthus

I'm pretty sure it doesn't matter if you have ATI or Nvidia for PS2, since they most likely aren't designing PS2 with Nvidia users in mind. Metro 2033 uses PhysX heavily and I'm able to run it on my CPU with better than average performance on max settings. I haven't played/seen Mafia II, so I wouldn't know how graphics intensive it is.

Mafia 2 is less graphic intensive then Batman Arkham City or BF3 for an example but, for being a 2 year old game it was very graphic intensive.

However my experience is that ATI cards run better in windowed mode then Nvida and Nvida runs better in full screen then ATI.