-
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.
Dedicated physx card still viable?
- Thread starter DaZzZa
- Start date
Don't think you can use an AMD card for rendering with a dedicated PhysX card even today (not sure on the status of hacked drivers) and most games that use PhysX now just use the CPU portion which normally can't be offloaded to a GPU. If the game has hardware PhysX and you are that bothered about it these days you are better off just having a single powerful nVidia GPU.
To the best of my knowledge the hacked drivers has not been continued for a very long time. I tried those back when 7950 were still popular with a 560 ti and the performance was horrible. Even today physx doesnt seem to be that great to offload unto another gpu unless that gpu isnt fare from your main nvidia renderer in terms of raw performance. Nowadays everything physx related is version 3 (i think) which does run somewhat alright on the cpu.
Is funny how the stubbornness of nvidia has manage to pretty much reck their own tech in terms of use and wide adoption.
Most software PhysX can be offloaded to the gpu with some tinkering but i have yet to see any performance improvement from doing this. Might be alright if your cpu is ancient but im sure other things will bottleneck first in that case.
Is funny how the stubbornness of nvidia has manage to pretty much reck their own tech in terms of use and wide adoption.
Most software PhysX can be offloaded to the gpu with some tinkering but i have yet to see any performance improvement from doing this. Might be alright if your cpu is ancient but im sure other things will bottleneck first in that case.
^^ Yeah the main advantages with offloading physics to the GPU is with stuff like volumetric/fluid dynamics or soft body simulations which most games don't really use sadly 
rigid body these days can be fairly decently threaded on any decent CPU.
Hate the way nVidia stifled the possible progress there - but also hate the vast amount of misunderstanding when it comes to physics simulations.
rigid body these days can be fairly decently threaded on any decent CPU.Hate the way nVidia stifled the possible progress there - but also hate the vast amount of misunderstanding when it comes to physics simulations.
Yea I think developers are going back to other physics engines like Havok now. There's not much point in hardware phyx when only half your customers can use it. The software version is no better than the others.
When it was a dedicated card it had a future, but not now. Nvidia are quite good at shooting themselves in the foot. It's like with them not supporting freesync/adaptivesync. Guess what, now people are slowly switching to AMD for mid/mid-high end setups, because you can have the same thing about £200 cheaper :/
When it was a dedicated card it had a future, but not now. Nvidia are quite good at shooting themselves in the foot. It's like with them not supporting freesync/adaptivesync. Guess what, now people are slowly switching to AMD for mid/mid-high end setups, because you can have the same thing about £200 cheaper :/
Last edited:
They do it with G-Sync to. If they support Freesync I wouldn't be switching back to AMD, I'll do it when I upgrade next in something like 3 years probably.