• 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.

New PhysX drivers available (2.4.4)

Pottsey

Pottsey

Pottsey

Soldato
Joined
29 May 2006
Posts
5,378
New PhysX drivers available (2.4.4) +new full game with PPU support

Still a lack of retail games but at least we have regular driver updates and more then 1 demo to try.
EDIT: Stoked Rider featuring Tommy Brunner is now out with PPU support. There is a demo at http://www.stokedrider.com/game.htm but I am unsure if the demo has support.

"Changes In 2.4.4
• Misc. application-specific optimizations included for City Of Villains™ (GRAW Enhancements are also included)
• Misc. technical bug fixes & enhancements"
http://www.ageia.com/drivers/2.4.4_release_notes.txt
http://www.ageia.com/physx/drivers.html
 
Last edited:
BetOn Solider arrived a few hours ago and I have been playing with it to get a feel for the game. So far its fun. The game automatically search’s for a PPU on start-up in the background there is no settings to turn it on or off. Though there is a liquid quality setting in the advanced menu. As far as I can tell the PPU is only used for liquids both for weapons and explosive canister around the maps. The same canister are there in the none PPU version just you only get a little flame effect.

Disabling the PPU cause’s the game to load up as normal. I am unsure if the extra liquids are just a fancy effect or if they do change gameplay when they hit you. Going to have to load up multiplayer tomorrow for some testing.

The bad news is I don’t see any FPS counter or built in benchmark program.
The good news is there’s a nice scripted cutscreen event near the start of the game where a solider runs forwards. The enemy hits an explosive canister which sprays liquids all over the screen. As the scripted event is the same every time it looks like a good point to benchmark and see how much the PPU slows down the screen if it does.

Can anyone recommend a good 3rd party program that records FPS? Also if you know of a program that records movies without to much of a FPS impact I can record and upload the liquids effects.

EDIT: will be adding a screenshot to this post soon.
EDIT2: As stupid as it is taking a screenshot of physics I did it anyway. This is my attempt at showing the liquids flowing down the slope on the wall onto and around the box’s. A short movie would be far better to show how the physics act. Its not like you can see physics in the screenshot.

Please remember if you don’t like the graphic in the screenshot its the the graphic card not the PPU that does the graphic effects. That and the liquids are made to be seen in motion.

http://www.dissonance-corp.com/Files/1a.JPG
 
Last edited:
Use fraps with all in game settings on max, drivers set to best IQ with x4 FSAA and x16AF but with V-sync off.

Without the PPU I got
Min 32
Max 104
Avg 60.096

With the PPU I got
Min 20
Max 111
Avg 58.177

The explosion where it hit 20 FPS was a scripted screen and it was only for a split second. Didn’t notice a drop in game as it was so short.
 
Pottsey said:
Use fraps with all in game settings on max, drivers set to best IQ with x4 FSAA and x16AF but with V-sync off.

Without the PPU I got
Min 32
Max 104
Avg 60.096

With the PPU I got
Min 20
Max 111
Avg 58.177

The explosion where it hit 20 FPS was a scripted screen and it was only for a split second. Didn’t notice a drop in game as it was so short.
Click to expand...

What extra effects do you get? Anything impressive?
 
“What extra effects do you get? Anything impressive?“
I wouldn’t go as far to say it’s impressive. More nice. When the first canister explodes liquid goes all over the screen including hitting the side walls and flowing down to the ground and then spreading around. Any that goes flying and lands on box’s flows off. The liquids splits up and merges together again if the parts touch each other.

The flame thrower also has extra liquids that come out and flow on objects. Apart from that the PPU is just used to speed up the physics that the CPU used to do. So no nothing else looks different. At least I assume that’s the case.

I could capture of a movie if someone will host it.
 
Is it me, or is the performance better without the PPU? Ok with the PPU you get a slightly higher max FPS, but the average and minimum (which is the most important) are lower, with min FPS dropping to 20fps :confused:
 
“Is it me, or is the performance better without the PPU? Ok with the PPU you get a slightly higher max FPS, but the average and minimum (which is the most important) are lower, with min FPS dropping to 20fps “
It’s not better and it’s pretty much the same speed with or without the PPU. Minimum FPS does not matter as its less then 1 second. Now if it was longer I would say it’s a problem. A lot of people seem to focus on the minimum FPS but what does it matter if it’s so short you cannot see it?

Also not all the benchmark was scripted I had to manually walk though a few bits. I did try to make both the PPU and without the PPU runs the same. But that’s not possible and I would have walked a different path each time.

All in all there is only a 2FPS difference between with and without the PPU. If you put that down to margin of error or even if it’s not an error 2 fps for extra effects is good. Are people really bothed by a 2fps

Are people really bothered by a 2fps difference with extra effects?
 
Pottsey said:
All in all there is only a 2FPS difference between with and without the PPU. If you put that down to margin of error or even if it’s not an error 2 fps for extra effects is good. Are people really bothed by a 2fps

Are people really bothered by a 2fps difference with extra effects?
Click to expand...

For £200 I'd be left somewhat disappointed by that showing.
 
Pottsey said:
Each to his own I guess. Personally I think extra effects for no FPS change is worth it. What would you considering worth it?
Click to expand...

Can you record a video of with PPU and without?

And I don't consider adding liquid effects for £200 is worth it. :rolleyes:
 
Pottsey said:
Each to his own I guess. Personally I think extra effects for no FPS change is worth it. What would you considering worth it?
Click to expand...

Now Im not trying to flame you mate, I realise you have tried to be objective in this thread. The thing is, I can buy a decent graphics adapter that will create whole 3D environments, complete with liquid, cloth and physics, for about £100.00.

The problem many here seem to be having is justifying the cost of a card that performs certain functions of a Video card (supposedly better than the video card, CPU). I havent seen anything that would make me spend £200.00 on PhysX.

I saw my friends Crossfire setup and 2 days later I bought one. Why? Because it has tangible and noticeable effects on all games. That cost me just over £400.00. Who would spend £200.00 on something that really, in it's present state doesnt seem to do very much at all and is very badly supported?

We really dont know where this is going to end up and I won't go into ATI's upcoming solution etc. I'll simply say this, right now PhysX is not appealing. It isn't being marketed properly and it really needs at least one SOLID title where the gains of having one of these cards will get the MAJORITY of gamers to see it as a "must have" piece of hardware.

Im sure they've sold a few, there are always people who buy the latest and greatest (Im one of them, but not with PhysX). PhysX is just not "must have" hardware and it is not that because it really doesn't justify its price tag in real world performance.

S :)
 
Last edited:
“The thing is, I can buy a decent graphics adapter that will create whole 3D environments, complete with liquid, cloth and physics, for about £100.00.”
I understand your point but I don’t really agree as we cannot get the same effects on a GPU right now. The type of liquids we get cannot be done on the GPU as far as I am aware. Perhaps in the future when we start seeing physics support on the GPU but according to ATI that’s not going see wide spread support for 9 to 12 months. I could be wrong in which case show me some examples of games doing full liquids. Right now it appears to be buy the PPU and get the extra effects or buy a 2nd GPU and get no extra effects but more speed or if you’re rich buy both. I can see why someone would want to wait due to the lack of game support but it’s not a case of you can buy a GPU to do what the PPU does. At least for now, that could well change.

As for the vid I will try YouTube On Tuesday so you can see what the liquids are like in game.





“in it's present state doesnt seem to do very much at all and is very badly supported?” &
“I'll simply say this, right now PhysX is not appealing. It isn't being marketed properly and it really needs at least one SOLID title”
I agree its not appealing to everyone and it does need a really good AAA title. But you have to admit its getting better. Support is still lacking but we are getting more support all the time and each game that comes out seems to be making better use of the PPU. The effects have already got far better then what we had in Ghost Recon and they look to improve further. I would be a bit worried if all 6 games where as bad as Ghost Recon.
 
“The thing is, I can buy a decent graphics adapter that will create whole 3D environments, complete with liquid, cloth and physics, for about £100.00.”
I understand your point but I don’t really agree as we cannot get the same effects on a GPU right now. The type of liquids we get cannot be done on the GPU as far as I am aware.


You didn't quite get the point I dont think. You're right, the PhysX can do "better" liquid, cloth and physics. My point is that for half the price you can get video cards that do that (albeit, maybe not as well) and generate full 3D environments in EVERY game out there.

Again, I think most people have not seen anything that will entice them to drop £200.00 on a card like this. I'll be honest, if it was sub £100.00, I may have bought one when I did my last upgrade.

It seems there are a few more games that support Physx, but even 3 B-list games are far from enough to draw most people in. I genuinely hope this technology takes off as innovation is good for everyone. As it stands, I dont think the hardware buying public is convinced. Time will tell.

S
 
“You're right, the PhysX can do "better" liquid, cloth and physics. My point is that for half the price you can get video cards that do that (albeit, maybe not as well)”
I do get your point I just don’t agree as the liquids the PPU can do are meant to be impossible on the GPU. It’s not a case of the GPU does a worse version it’s a case of the GPU doesn’t do any of the effect but instead it does a fake effect that looks like a liquid. I am not aware of any games doing full 3d liquids that are interactive with the environment its always fake flat transparent water. As for the GPU doing physics they don’t currently and when they do its none gameplay physics so its not really in the same league as the Ageia PPU. Sure perhaps in a few months the GPU can do physics but its half of the effects the Ageia PPU can pull off.

I guess it depends on how you define liquids. I don’t really class the liquids in most games as true liquids just fake flat transparent objects most of the time. Are there any games I missed with real liquids?

As for BOS capturing the movie was a bit harder then I expected as I am getting a large FPS drop during movie capture. That added with the PPU effects is putting the minimum FPS quite a bit below 15fps which spoils the PPU effects. It doesn’t look as good in slow motion but this is the best I can do http://www.bestsharing.com/files/ms00176004/BOS with PPU.avi.html 11meg in Mpeg-4 V3 codec.

There is FPS drop when not capturing the movie but its not that low and you don’t get that pause just before the explosion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom