• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

does crysis support physx cards?

not this again :/
crysis is gpu limited anyone disputing the fact should post proof
we went through this in the other ppu debate :mad:

is there a way to turn off all textures and stuff on crysis? would be interesting to see those vids with no textures being rendered
 
Last edited:
“crysis is gpu limited anyone disputing the fact should post proof
we went through this in the other ppu debate ”

Yes we did and I proved it was both GPU limited and CPU limited with high end physics. During normal gameplay with high end physics disabled its GPU only limited. Do I really have to post the same proof and vids again?





“The reason the videos like the 1000 barrels explosion one run at a slide show, isn't due to the physics being badly done..As people have already said, the game is very graphics heavy. Physics plus graphics, make more graphics work for the GPU to calculate.”
Your wrong as when there are no physics it runs smooth its only when the physics activate the slowdown appears and when the physics stop it smooth again. That and PPU games have 1000+ objects flying around no problem the GPU can handle it.

A moving box is no harder to render then a still box for the GPU. If it’s moving or still it’s the same textures, same amount of polygons, same filtrate needed e.c.t





“All of the thing's I see, are done with stupid block colours.”
Like what? Most of the games use textures and its not just one game I link to.





“It still plays absolutely fine with it COMPLETELY uninstalled, ie no more physx files, uninstalled and then manually deleted the files.”
That’s impossible you must be missing some of the files. You cannot delete the files, which do all the physics and still have physics.
 
“crysis is gpu limited anyone disputing the fact should post proof
we went through this in the other ppu debate ”

Yes we did and I proved it was both GPU limited and CPU limited with high end physics. During normal gameplay with high end physics disabled its GPU only limited. Do I really have to post the same proof and vids again?
No because your vids didnt proove anything, you posted them then ignored anyone who said you were wrong
remember the screenies of my cpu usage when in game (which incidently you said were wrong, i cant remember the reason)
EVERY crysis vid you posted had high textures, none of them gave a printscreen/live/comment about how much cpu was actually being used if i remember correctly they simply said it was running at a low fps which it undoubtebly would be considering the number of things happening on the screen

As i said proove me wrong, none of the videos you previously posted did
a vid with the same sequence and no physics would do i guess without trickery in the background
I did a quick search with yourname and youtube and couldnt find it so it if you did post one i would appreciate if you posted it again
 
Seems a quad core isn't needed to handle the physics in Crysis. It's so graphically intensive that the game is very gpu limited.

Having said that, I gained nearly 10fps by upgrading my cpu but I think the old X2 3800 was a bottle neck for my 8800GTS card.

Only 10? That fills me with hope for when I get a 9800 :) I really don't want to upgrade from a dual core to another dual core!

Edit: AGEIA PhysX v2.3.3, that I supposedly required to play some game, uninstalled.
 
Last edited:
my e6600 @ 3.2Ghz hardly jumps above 60%

Barely going above 30% usage with my Q6600, so theres allot more room for complex physics but I guess it's limited for those with older CPU's

But considering there pushing modern graphics cards to the point of being unplayable in many cases you have to wonder why they didn't just do the same with physics on the highest setting.
 
“No because your vids didnt proove anything, you posted them then ignored anyone who said you were wrong”
I didn’t ignore them I proved them wrong. A few people didn’t understand it and said I was wrong. Just because someone doesn’t understand something doesnt mean its wrong. I didnt ignore anyone who said I were wrong. They said I was wrong as the game isn’t CPU limited during default physics and normal gameplay. Only I wasn’t talking about default physics and normal gameplay. Some people didnt seem to grasp the concept that a game can be both CPU and GPU limited at the same time and only CPU limited during certain situations.





“EVERY crysis vid you posted had high textures, none of them gave a printscreen/live/comment about how much cpu was actually being used if i remember correctly they simply said it was running at a low fps which it undoubtebly would be considering the number of things happening on the screen”
Lots of people said it was the CPU and physics I even quoted them word for word. You could turn away from the action so the GPU had nothing to do and the physics still caused slow down. Proveing again that its not the GPU caseing the problem.;

Everyone who tried the high physics said the same thing the CPU is to slow.

“TIP - Keep the Physics radius fairly low, as this drags the performance down trying to calculate the destruction of too many trees.” from the thread I got the tweaks from.

It wasnt just me there was lot of people saying the same thing about the CPU being to slow.




“As i said proove me wrong, none of the videos you previously posted did”
Yes they did when taken along with the text I wrote.
It wasn’t just the video; the video was there to back up what I wrote not as evidence by its self. I gave instructions how to repeat the test and how to get rid of the GPU as the bottleneck. Various people ran the test with all the GPU settings on lowest.


Even without video recording and turning away from the action so the GPU has nothing to do you still get sub 1fps.






“remember the screenies of my cpu usage when in game (which incidently you said were wrong, i cant remember the reason)”
You mean the screenshots that was taken in a low physics screen as evidence for the game not being CPU limited during a high physics screen? Hrrm I wonder why I said that was wrong.





“a vid with the same sequence and no physics would do i guess without trickery in the background”
Its been done, default physics no slowdown same graphics, edit file for high end physics same graphics massive slow down.
 
Last edited:
Lots of people said it was the CPU and physics I even quoted them word for word. You could turn away from the action so the GPU had nothing to do and the physics still caused slow down. Proveing again that its not the GPU caseing the problem.;

Everyone who tried the high physics said the same thing the CPU is to slow.

“TIP - Keep the Physics radius fairly low, as this drags the performance down trying to calculate the destruction of too many trees.” from the thread I got the tweaks from.

It wasnt just me there was lot of people saying the same thing about the CPU being to slow.
I honestly dont know what you are trying to proove here :s, even UT3 is only a small radius when physics are used if you cover an entire maps physics for no reason there is inevitably going to be a performance hit even with a PPU
When i played the game with physics on very high my cpu (e6600) peaked at about 70-85% on most levels, i did a quick test to show cpu usage and posted screenies in the "Merry Xmas pottsey" thread

You said crysis was cpu limited, the very fact when playing the game my cpu isn't being maxed out surely says the opposite?

Hard tweaking values is pretty irrelevant to the game as those settings would never be used in a game, i could take a PPU game add a million effects and i bet i could simulate a performance hit. In reality it is completely pointless to the game itself
“remember the screenies of my cpu usage when in game (which incidently you said were wrong, i cant remember the reason)”
You mean the screenshots that was taken in a low physics screen as evidence for the game not being CPU limited during a high physics screen? Hrrm I wonder why I said that was wrong.

Perhaps you didn't read the description properly? i dont know
I said i maxed out all the settings, so as far as the game is concerned it is running high physics
Regardless of your opinion of what constitutes "high physics", Crysis didnt even need a dual core to run it at its highest in game setting

“a vid with the same sequence and no physics would do i guess without trickery in the background”
Its been done, default physics no slowdown same graphics, edit file for high end physics same graphics massive slow down.

This is the video i am after not some random nuke with settings which will never be used in a game, including those with a PPU

Anyhoo home time, i will see what happened to this thread tomorow
 
Last edited:
Barely going above 30% usage with my Q6600, so theres allot more room for complex physics but I guess it's limited for those with older CPU's

But considering there pushing modern graphics cards to the point of being unplayable in many cases you have to wonder why they didn't just do the same with physics on the highest setting.

Hmm ok. We really are just begging for more gfx power right now aren't we? I know I am! TF2 goes down to 20 fps sometimes.

I'd be really tempted by a quad core if it used ~99% on all cores. But, since 25/25/25/25 = 50/50 = 100, it's just not worth the money, at least for me and TF2.

Sorry for going off topic.
 
Last edited:
“even UT3 is only a small radius when physics are used if you cover an entire maps physics for no reason there is inevitably going to be a performance hit even with a PPU”
It’s not no real reason. Take a nuke when it goes off you expect it to effect things more then a 2 meter radius around your foot or what every tiny size it really is in game. Physics that cover an entire maps are done in PPU games like UT, Cellfactor or Warmonger at 30fps so how can you say the PPU cannot do it? Yes there will be a performance hit with the PPU but at least it stays playable at 30fps over 1fps with the CPU.







“You said crysis was cpu limited, the very fact when playing the game my cpu isn't being maxed out surely says the opposite?”
I said its CPU limited with the extra physics turned on, not CPU limited during normal gameplay. http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10587094&postcount=34
Another time I said “Crysis is both CPU limited and GPU limited in certain situations. During normal gameplay its mostly only GPU limited.” Slight but very important difference to saying its CPU limited.






“I said i maxed out all the settings, so as far as the game is concerned it is running high physics”
I very clearly said in the other discussion I was talking about extra physics turned on with the ini file. In the thread I defined what I classed as high physics and explained how to turn them on. I was not talking about default in game physics. Yes runing the ingame settings on max physics is not CPU limited but that doesnt prove me wrong as I never said it would be CPU limited like that.

I don’t considering a tiny physics radius to be high physics. I don’t consider a nuke going off and trees, buildings e,c,t not being effect outside a 4 meter area as high physics. (4 meters is a guess might be a little less or more)







“Hard tweaking values is pretty irrelevant to the game as those settings would never be used in a game, i could take a PPU game add a million effects and i bet i could simulate a performance hit. In reality it is completely pointless to the game itself” which will never be used in a game, including those with a PPU”
You’re completely missing the point. It’s not irrelevant. The only reason those settings are not done in game is because the CPU is too weak and cannot handle them. Same with 3d liquids and other neat pshyics effects, the only reason we dont have them is the CPU is holding us back.

If the CPU was powerful enough we would have those effects in game. I was using those physics as an example of how the CPU is a bad choice for physics and we need something more powerful then the CPU. I was in that older discussion talking about PPU’s in general not the Ageia PPU, there is no reason why a PPU couldn’t do those physics the CPU cannot. My main point was Crysis is an example of how high end mass physics are unusable on CPU’s and PPU’s are needed to push phsyics forwards.

CPU’s are holding physics back. Extra cores are not enough for physics.
 
“Crytek made a point of saying how hard physX cards were to code for and how they can do better on CPUs.”
That’s not what I read. They said not enough people own PPU’s for them to justify the time to code it. Can you give a link to where they said its hard to code for?

Crysis shows the CPU cannot do better then the PPU. Just look how poor it performs with lots of physics going off at once.




“As already said, no Crysis does not use it. It doesn't need it either.“
It sure could do with it going by the amount of physics video's are out there running at a slide show. They had to keep the physics at a low level by default due to the CPU not being able to handle lot of physics.



“Seems a quad core isn't needed to handle the physics in Crysis.”
Turn the physics to very high and watch the nuke and physics put a quad core down to less then 1 fps.


Seriously potsey stop pulling random concoctions out of the air about how the world needs a ppu and all your random serposid facts about crysis which simply arn't true.
 
“Seriously potsey stop pulling random concoctions out of the air about how the world needs a ppu and all your random serposid facts about crysis which simply arn't true.”
Random connections? How is turn physics up, FPS go down only when physics go off and FPS go back to normal when no physics around a random connection?

If it’s not true prove it. Sometimes on here it feels like a child saying 1+1 =2 and another child saying no your wrong, I don’t believe you e.c.t
My facts are very true and easily tested by anyone who wants to try it them self.

Simply arn't true now your lieing 8igdave. Look its not just me the Crysis forum is full of people saying the same thing as me. The CPU is to weak to handle the high end physics and the normal in game physics are kept low because of the slow down..
 
“Seriously potsey stop pulling random concoctions out of the air about how the world needs a ppu and all your random serposid facts about crysis which simply arn't true.”
Random connections? How is turn physics up, FPS go down only when physics go off and FPS go back to normal when no physics around a random connection?

If it’s not true prove it. Sometimes on here it feels like a child saying 1+1 =2 and another child saying no your wrong, I don’t believe you e.c.t
My facts are very true and easily tested by anyone who wants to try it them self.

Simply arn't true now your lieing 8igdave. Look its not just me the Crysis forum is full of people saying the same thing as me. The CPU is to weak to handle the high end physics and the normal in game physics are kept low because of the slow down..

Youve already shown countless times how you have randomly made assumptinos about crysis when you dont even ahve the game or even the demo!


Crysis shows the CPU cannot do better then the PPU. Just look how poor it performs with lots of physics going off at once.

Proof? your right this is obiously fact which you didn't just pull out of thin air due to your love for the ppu.

It sure could do with it going by the amount of physics video's are out there running at a slide show. They had to keep the physics at a low level by default due to the CPU not being able to handle lot of physics.

As many have already asid and you refuse to beleive, the fact taht the graphics card is seriously limitating crysis means putting anything more on screen would really kill the pc even more. The CPU isn't getting maxed out.

Turn the physics to very high and watch the nuke and physics put a quad core down to less then 1 fps.

Pitty then taht because of bad coding its not using all 4 cores then isn't it or even maxing them. Doesn't mean the cpu cant handel higher physics.

Also so far what ive seen its not put it down to 1fps. id like to see evidence of it going down to 1fps on an overclocked q6600.

Once again you pull facts out of thin air.
 
Pottersey, I have one point.

Out of everyone on here who has the card installed and used?

1%? 2%?

I doubt its much more than that.

IF it had a performance increase that is worth the outlay then I would have one, as would everyone else. The fact is its not worth it, and there is nothing you can say about it because sales = success and currently, there hasn't been enough.

End thread.
 
Pottsey going back in the killfile..not only for rapid defending of aegia but the way he replies to posts.

hmm. thats all i really have to say about that coming from you, Badbob.


i love the way everybodys getting on Pottsey's back lol. crysis isnt cpu limited, it isnt cpu limited blah blah ect ect.

we all know that lol. Pottsey knows it. but he also knows (as do ALL of you) that they didnt squeeze in half of the physics processing that they wanted to and what happens when you turn the heat up? slide shoooow. its really as simple as that and that's all he's saying, but people do like to draw it out and make an unnecessary painful to read argument and all because its cool to kick in to Pottsey.

crysis doesnt need a ppu in the state that they released it in. however, if it was where they intended it to be, it would almost certainly have benefited greatly from one. but hey ho thats the way the world turns. or something.
 
Back
Top Bottom