-
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.
NVIDIA ‘Ampere’ 8nm Graphics Cards
- Thread starter LoadsaMoney
- Start date
I haven't seen a hardware implementation yet that was without serious performance issues even when you had a dedicated GPU/PPU for the job. Just look at Borderlands 2 which was supposed to be the poster child of hardware PhysX. Very cool effects but serious performance issues in certain parts of the game.
EDIT: Forgot about the batman games. PhysX smoke also took an unnatural toll on a dedicated physx GPU
Last edited:
Soldato
It's hardware accelerated on the GPU by default.
You can choose in the Nvidia control panel.
You can choose in the Nvidia control panel.
Depends on the feature and application developer implementation as to whether that choice means a PhysX feature runs on the GPU or not - it won't force a software feature onto GPU if the application developer has decided otherwise but will force hardware processing onto the CPU where supported even if the application developer enabled the feature in hardware.
Caporegime
I regularly change between AMD and Nvidia GPUs and never have I been in a situation where I could not use physx due to having an AMD gpu. It really is not a selling point for Nvidia anymore imo.
GPU-accelerated PhysX is dead. That setting only affects legacy implementations from back when it was a thing. Arkham Knight is the last game I can remember with actual GPU-accelerated PhysX and that was over five years ago. Newer games (like Metro Exodus) have PhysX, but the vendor-agnostic software version that runs on the CPU.
Soldato
Hmm... Are you sure? I'm not quite sure about that. Sure it might run on the CPU but it will run better on the GPU.
Caporegime
Run better how?
Quite sure. Feel free to fire up a game using the CPU-based implementation of PhysX for yourself and test both options. There is no performance impact either way by toggling it, as the "PhysX" it refers to (i.e. the GPU-accelerated PhysX that only supported Nvidia GPUs) is essentially a different thing to the PhysX that's used today, which is open source middleware that runs on any setup and is integrated into engines like Unity and UE4. Maybe they should have rebranded it to avoid this confusion.
Soldato
Yes you are correct. I remember now. Physx was open sourced. However I think on Nvidia cards Physx is executed on the GPU not on the CPU. If you go in to the Nvidia control panel you will find a section on Physx which gives you a choice where you want Physx to be executed and it defaults to the GPU in the presence of a Physx capable card.
I don't really know how many more times I can say it, but you're wrong. That setting only affects games using legacy, GPU-accelerated PhysX, which no new title has used in years as far as I know. Modern PhysX runs on the CPU only. It cannot and does not run on the GPU, no matter how you set the option in the Nvidia control panel. Feel free to do your own research on the subject, feel free to test it yourself, or feel free to just believe whatever you want to believe. Those are the facts though.
Soldato
Actually I think you need to adjust your facts. The Physx SDK was made open source in 2018 by Nvidia. So its available to anyone under the BSD 3 Licence and its available on Github. So far so good. However it can be CPU or GPU accelerated.
This is from the Dec 2018 when it was made open source.
and also
Also if you read the User Guide for the SDK Rigid Bodies can be performed by either CPU or GPU.
4.1
Lots of chat about consoles, TVs and now physx
Soldato
Passes the time whilst awaiting more scraps of news. Only so many times you can post about the speculation of price over performance
Passes the time whilst awaiting more scraps of news. Only so many times you can post about the speculation of price over performance
Thread should be left to die then until something leaks.
Caporegime
It is more fun talking about all the awesome features like PhysX Nvidia bring to us
If the thread was left to die we would not be learning so much from opethdisciple
Soldato
I want to wake up tomorrow with "nvidia RTX 3080 unveiled " headline
Soldato
Physx FAQ
Think about it. Obvisouly Physx runs faster on the GPU than CPU.
"
Does PhysX scale across the GPU and CPU? If yes, does that mean having a faster CPU enhances PhysX performance or visual quality?
PhysX uses both the CPU and GPU, but generally the most computationally intensive operations are done on the GPU. A CPU upgrade could result in some performance improvement, as would a GPU upgrade, but the relative improvement is very dependent on the initial balance of the system. An optimized PC with the right mix of CPU to GPU horsepower will be the best balanced solution.
Intel and AMD say it’s better to run physics on the CPU. What is NVIDIA’s position?
PhysX runs faster and will deliver more realism by running on the GPU. Running PhysX on a mid-to-high-end GeForce GPU will enable 10-20 times more effects and visual fidelity than physics running on a high-end CPU. Portions of PhysX processing actually run on both the CPU and GPU, leveraging the best of both architectures to deliver the best experience to the user. More importantly, PhysX can scale with the GPU hardware inside your PC. Intel and AMD solutions, which utilize the Havok API, are fixed function only and cannot scale.
"
Obviously depends when that was written. But I still think that Physx in the presence of an Nvidia card will run on the GPU.
This is 2018
Recent Physx
Think about it. Obvisouly Physx runs faster on the GPU than CPU.
"
Does PhysX scale across the GPU and CPU? If yes, does that mean having a faster CPU enhances PhysX performance or visual quality?
PhysX uses both the CPU and GPU, but generally the most computationally intensive operations are done on the GPU. A CPU upgrade could result in some performance improvement, as would a GPU upgrade, but the relative improvement is very dependent on the initial balance of the system. An optimized PC with the right mix of CPU to GPU horsepower will be the best balanced solution.
Intel and AMD say it’s better to run physics on the CPU. What is NVIDIA’s position?
PhysX runs faster and will deliver more realism by running on the GPU. Running PhysX on a mid-to-high-end GeForce GPU will enable 10-20 times more effects and visual fidelity than physics running on a high-end CPU. Portions of PhysX processing actually run on both the CPU and GPU, leveraging the best of both architectures to deliver the best experience to the user. More importantly, PhysX can scale with the GPU hardware inside your PC. Intel and AMD solutions, which utilize the Havok API, are fixed function only and cannot scale.
"
Obviously depends when that was written. But I still think that Physx in the presence of an Nvidia card will run on the GPU.
This is 2018
Recent Physx
Last edited: