Is physx the only reason to keep 2nd nvidia card?

[eyetrip]

As in title. Got 670 was going to sell, but was wondering if there wasn't a good reason to keep it rather than losing half of what I paid.

I know there is physx, but anything else out currently or in future that would make it worth keeping in?

 

[Gregster]

I love PhysX effects but not many games use it. Take the hit?

 

[Make]

Your siggy says you are running a 780. Running physX on that will give you same performance as running it on a dedicated card really.. and it won't take an extra 100-150W of power.

Sell the 670.

 

[Silent_Scone]

I think the days of using a dedicated card which differs from your main GPU are numbered.

 

[Yaayuh!]

I think the days of using a dedicated card which differs from your main GPU are numbered.

Depends on the game and what your primary card is. If you have a GTX680 then it's worth have a 640/650 as a PhysX card for BL2, it sees a damned good increase in FPS when using a dedicated PhysX card.
Hell, i have a 120Hz monitor and GTX690, i have been thinking of getting an EVGA GeForce GTX 650 SC as it will help keep the FPS high under heavy PhysX Anything more than that is overkill currently.

Have a gander: http://1pcent.com/?p=169

 

[Panos]

Your siggy says you are running a 780. Running physX on that will give you same performance as running it on a dedicated card really.. and it won't take an extra 100-150W of power.

Sell the 670.

Err no.

I have a GTX780 and a GTX650Ti for Physx. And there is HUGE difference when I have the GTX650Ti off. If you want to run everything maxed out, you need a second card for PhysX. Or else it will lower the fps of your 780.

And again that depends the game. Batman, Metro for example yes that will happen. XCOM Enemy Within though, isn't the case, since the game doesn't have that demanding graphics.

And there are only ~60 games that support Physx.

 

[eyetrip]

60 games is more than I thought.

And didn't realise Metro supported it - which is likely my next game up after Batman

And there have been certain parts in Batman Origins where my FPS has tanked. Just couldn't be bothered to check what was causing it and played on. One part I remember had lots of steam, which I am not sure is reliant on physx in any way.

What about the likes of Shadowplay? Not sure I will use it, but couldn't that use a 2nd card somehow - or just the one doing the rendering?

I don't have my heart set on keeping it. I just was wondering if it was worth keeping, seeing as in the end I will likely only get £130 back from it, after buying for £300.

 

[MooMoo444]

I don't seem to notice a difference in performance with Physx on the CPU or GPU(either one)

 

[Silent_Scone]

Depends on the game and what your primary card is. If you have a GTX680 then it's worth have a 640/650 as a PhysX card for BL2, it sees a damned good increase in FPS when using a dedicated PhysX card.
Hell, i have a 120Hz monitor and GTX690, i have been thinking of getting an EVGA GeForce GTX 650 SC as it will help keep the FPS high under heavy PhysX Anything more than that is overkill currently.

Have a gander: http://1pcent.com/?p=169

If you have a 680 GTX it's probably better to get a second 680 GTX. You'll get far better performance through SLi and can run PhysX without dedication on the second GPU. Surely that makes more sense? I've played around with it on a lot of cards going back to the 295 in Batman AA. Overall I just think it makes a lot more sense than having a card only useful in a handful of games.

EDIT: Why is the 650 excelling there? :/

I don't seem to notice a difference in performance with Physx on the CPU or GPU(either one)

In what game, I find that extremely hard to believe.