-
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.
ASUS Physx Cards
- Thread starter Gedrog
- Start date
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
Welcome to the forums, if memory serves it was discovered that the PPU cards didn't utilise more than 128mb of Ram so it basically meant that you had a double the Ram that would ever be used by the card. Now whether that meant that Asus withdrew the cards or (rather more likely) they sold out and weren't re-stocked I don't know.
“if memory serves it was discovered that the PPU cards didn't utilise more than 128mb of Ram so it basically meant that you had a double the Ram that would ever be used by the card.”
I thought it was BFG got upset about Asus marketing with 256meg so Asus was asked or forced to sell there cards as 128meg even though they had 256meg. My Asus card came with 256meg but said 128meg on the box. All the Asus cards marketing and box’s was changed to 128meg.
As for the amount of memory used I have no idea. I am not aware of anyone comparing the BFG to Asus to see if there is a performance difference. I would be surprised if the extra memory did anything right now.
Even if the higher memory isn’t utilised it’s well known most buyers will buy the card wit more memory thinking its better. You must have seen some know it all buy a 3Dcard and says its better then yours as he has 512meg.
I thought it was BFG got upset about Asus marketing with 256meg so Asus was asked or forced to sell there cards as 128meg even though they had 256meg. My Asus card came with 256meg but said 128meg on the box. All the Asus cards marketing and box’s was changed to 128meg.
As for the amount of memory used I have no idea. I am not aware of anyone comparing the BFG to Asus to see if there is a performance difference. I would be surprised if the extra memory did anything right now.
Even if the higher memory isn’t utilised it’s well known most buyers will buy the card wit more memory thinking its better. You must have seen some know it all buy a 3Dcard and says its better then yours as he has 512meg.
Last edited:
“at the end of the days its total bs.”
I have to ask why is it total BS? You know that’s just what people said about the first 3Dcards.
If your one of those people judging the PPU by the first game that came out and first drivers then you should really look at the new games and drivers. The PPU no longer slows down you PC but speeds it up.
I have to ask why is it total BS? You know that’s just what people said about the first 3Dcards.
If your one of those people judging the PPU by the first game that came out and first drivers then you should really look at the new games and drivers. The PPU no longer slows down you PC but speeds it up.
Last edited:
There are going to be soo many alternatives to a physx card its just not worth the large sum of money.
Very few titles support it, you can even run the games without it.
I dont want to ramble on but there are a number of things that could be a better alternative.
cpu
ati grfx card
nvidia grfx card
The ppu just seems to create rather pathetic effects, deffo not woth the large price tag.
Wait for havok to come up with an alternative, as its much better supported its going to be used more and its probably going to be better.
In tune with your edit, no im not 'one of those people', i dont have bucket loads of money that i can waste on something that doesnt even work on the main games i play.
http://www.ageia.com/physx/titles.html
wow, 6 games, what a huge title list.
Very few titles support it, you can even run the games without it.
I dont want to ramble on but there are a number of things that could be a better alternative.
cpu
ati grfx card
nvidia grfx card
The ppu just seems to create rather pathetic effects, deffo not woth the large price tag.
Wait for havok to come up with an alternative, as its much better supported its going to be used more and its probably going to be better.
In tune with your edit, no im not 'one of those people', i dont have bucket loads of money that i can waste on something that doesnt even work on the main games i play.
http://www.ageia.com/physx/titles.html
wow, 6 games, what a huge title list.
Last edited:
“The ppu just seems to create rather pathetic effects, deffo not woth the large price tag.”
It gives more then new effects its also gives a nice speed boost sometimes as much as 30 to 60%. I don’t think the new effects are pathetic but that’s opinion I guess.
”Wait for havok to come up with an alternative, as its much better supported its going to be used more and its probably going to be better.”
I am not going guess which will be much better support in the long term (2 years) but right now Havok FX has what 1 or 2 games announced that’s going to support it. There are more games out now for Ageia then there games announced to support havok FX in the next year. So I don’t see how you can say its going be better supported. Then there is the cost factor Havok FX costs way more then Ageia’s SDK a lot of devlopers will not be able to aford Havok FX but they will Ageia's.
From what we know of Havok FX its not going be better as it cannot do gameplay physics. That alone make it’s the worse solution.
It gives more then new effects its also gives a nice speed boost sometimes as much as 30 to 60%. I don’t think the new effects are pathetic but that’s opinion I guess.
”Wait for havok to come up with an alternative, as its much better supported its going to be used more and its probably going to be better.”
I am not going guess which will be much better support in the long term (2 years) but right now Havok FX has what 1 or 2 games announced that’s going to support it. There are more games out now for Ageia then there games announced to support havok FX in the next year. So I don’t see how you can say its going be better supported. Then there is the cost factor Havok FX costs way more then Ageia’s SDK a lot of devlopers will not be able to aford Havok FX but they will Ageia's.
From what we know of Havok FX its not going be better as it cannot do gameplay physics. That alone make it’s the worse solution.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
Pottsey said:
I don't know for certain either way, I do think you may be partially right in that BFG or possibly Ageia kicking up a stick meant that Asus had to label their cards as being 128mb even although it was widely known that they had 256mb. However I also am unsure whether the extra memory has be coded specifically for so that Asus more or less slapped on the extra Ram chips and hoped it would work better or if it will help when people work up the amount of physics in game.
As to people buying it for the higher numbers I don't disagree but it doesn't mean there is any point to it either, that was why I said I thought it might simply have sold out rather than being withdrawn.
“Still havnt tackled the problem of the minute games list.
Dont havok do all the physics in the source engine?”
Yes they do but Havok FX physics on the GPU will not boost or help older games. Well not without a patch.
I was just looking on the Havok website for new info and they said
“When Did Havok FX Release?
Havok FX released in Q2 of 2006.“
So what’s going on? Wasn’t Q2 ages ago.
Dont havok do all the physics in the source engine?”
Yes they do but Havok FX physics on the GPU will not boost or help older games. Well not without a patch.
I was just looking on the Havok website for new info and they said
“When Did Havok FX Release?
Havok FX released in Q2 of 2006.“
So what’s going on? Wasn’t Q2 ages ago.
“take into account that havok fx cost the consumer nothing in terms of cash and we have a winner.“
It’s not free to the consumer as you have to have the right type of 3Dcard. If the game is made for ATI Havok and you have Nvidia you have to buy an ATI card. If it’s made for Nvidia Havok you have to buy an ATI card. The two are not meant to be the same as ATI implanted it different and with more things then Nvidia.
Its not that simple anyway when a developer has to pay over 100k to use Havok FX sometimes up to 300k if you want the full package then they will think twice about using it. Havok FX price puts it out of reach for a lot of developers.
It’s not free to the consumer as you have to have the right type of 3Dcard. If the game is made for ATI Havok and you have Nvidia you have to buy an ATI card. If it’s made for Nvidia Havok you have to buy an ATI card. The two are not meant to be the same as ATI implanted it different and with more things then Nvidia.
Its not that simple anyway when a developer has to pay over 100k to use Havok FX sometimes up to 300k if you want the full package then they will think twice about using it. Havok FX price puts it out of reach for a lot of developers.
Ulfhedjinn said:PhysX threads are always hilarious thanks to him.
I totally Agree
Anyways, Off for some PCI-Ex 4x Speed testing with my X1900GT. Less fun than watching this thread, but I want to see if that 4x slot would limit possible Xfire performance.
“pottsy drives a very hard bargain, guess i will have to order my physics card tomorrow. “
Wouldn’t that be a waste unless you have a few PPU enabled games. Just because I think Havok will not take off for a good year or 2 if it does take off at all due to the problems I listed above. But I don’t think everyone should get a Ageia PPU now.
Wouldn’t that be a waste unless you have a few PPU enabled games
. Just because I think Havok will not take off for a good year or 2 if it does take off at all due to the problems I listed above. But I don’t think everyone should get a Ageia PPU now.