My Test of GRAW running with and without physX

Things change I've changed · 28 Apr 2006 at 04:09

ummmmm, not that happy really

,

Without PPU : Take note of FPS

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With PPU :

10-16 FPS slower with hardware PPU, I guess I need another GPU (SLI) to help render the added debris and effects I get from using the PPU, the price of PC gaming just went up again :-(

, I can't believe that I have to disable the hardware physX card I just paid 200 quid for so that I can play GRAW at an acceptable FPS, tbh I just feel like giving up on PC gaming these days.

spookywillow · 28 Apr 2006 at 08:05

what settings are you running and how did you get AA to work?

its a bit crap that you get less fps
________
Honda FSC600

n3x · 28 Apr 2006 at 08:09

That does suck abit to be honest but i guess it was to be expected, although the physics in graw arnt all that spectacular are they?? Imagine whats gonna be needed when even more complicated physics are used? :eek:

Hopefully they will be able to optimise it in the future but it doesnt look good does it.

Those graphics dont even look all that good either, i would have thought u'd get higher fps even without the ppu :confused:

King_Boru · 28 Apr 2006 at 08:13

Really need to know what settings your running at to predict the low FPS.

But it is very early days in the PPU world.

Metalface Mark · 28 Apr 2006 at 08:23

Seems a bit strange though to spend £200 on a phsyx card when you dont already have the current top card?

Its not a dig at you btw.

Darkwave · 28 Apr 2006 at 08:49

InwardSinging said:
Seems a bit strange though to spend £200 on a phsyx card when you dont already have the current top card?

Its not a dig at you btw.

A 7800GTX isn't top-end? The way I see it, it's not the razor-edge of technology, but it's still top-end and should be just fine for running a PhysX card if these things cost £200.

So, what... It's expected to pay £200 for a PhysX card and £400 for a 7900GTX to play games these days? £800 if one isn't good enough and you need to go SLi? That's £1000 on graphics alone, it's utter rubbish to be honest.

PhysX is a joke, and I hope nobody buys it.

TLJester1 · 28 Apr 2006 at 09:45

I think its worth noting that the extra physics in those screens are for eye-candy explosions. Hopefully games will really use the PhysX PPU for physics that are integral to the game ie that CellFactor demo, where its doing loads of boxes/objects that are a perminant fixture to that map, and not just a spot effect.
... well i *HOPE* thats what they get used for. Probably find they wont as it will then limit the game to only those with PPU's thus cutting potential customers.

Killajaz · 28 Apr 2006 at 09:51

Blatant con from the developers and manufacturers. I said it before and I say it again: If the game developers wheren't so lazy and coded the games properly you would still be fine with an ancient card like Geforce 2 GTS or similar.

They are conning us. Get used to it. DONT BUY THE latest high end cards. IT IS A CON

SteveOBHave · 28 Apr 2006 at 09:53

Cheers for the 'real world' test. Very interesting to see...

Fair comment would be that it's probably the implimentation of GRAW rather than a failing of the PPU. Early days yet.

It really does look like they added more 'bits' for the physics to play with rather than acutally re-modeling the interaction. Looks like it has been a marketing ploy - sell the game because it uses PhysX...

skiba · 28 Apr 2006 at 09:57

just get a 360 and be done with it

I have no interest in PC gaming anymore except maybe for RPG's

snow patrol · 28 Apr 2006 at 10:00

so AA definitely does work in the full version then?

Metalface Mark · 28 Apr 2006 at 10:04

Exsomnis said:
A 7800GTX isn't top-end? The way I see it, it's not the razor-edge of technology, but it's still top-end and should be just fine for running a PhysX card if these things cost £200.

So, what... It's expected to pay £200 for a PhysX card and £400 for a 7900GTX to play games these days? £800 if one isn't good enough and you need to go SLi? That's £1000 on graphics alone, it's utter rubbish to be honest.

PhysX is a joke, and I hope nobody buys it.

your absolutely right, it is a joke, I got Fifa 2006 through the post today, thinking the pc one would be on a par with the videos from the xbox 360, i should have spent the extra tenner, as the pc version looks like a port from the ps2, ill be buying all my games for the 360 in future.

ihatelag · 28 Apr 2006 at 10:29

spookywillow said:
its a bit crap that you get less fps

Hehe, just as I predicted in another thread...communication between the PPU and GPU would just plain suck. I see the way forward as an all in one solution, such as soon to be used HavokFX on the graphics cards...which seems (in theory) better supported, because it is running on the graphics card and probably will not hinder the frames per second.

Well it's all "theory" at the moment, but it does not look like a great start for PPU's such as PhysX.

Noxis · 28 Apr 2006 at 10:57

ihatelag said:
Hehe, just as I predicted in another thread...communication between the PPU and GPU would just plain suck. I see the way forward as an all in one solution, such as soon to be used HavokFX on the graphics cards...which seems (in theory) better supported, because it is running on the graphics card and probably will not hinder the frames per second.

Well it's all "theory" at the moment, but it does not look like a great start for PPU's such as PhysX.

Erm... just erm.... :confused:

The lower FPS is purely caused by the graphics card having to render more, the physx card just allows for more objects with realistic interaction. Nothing to do with "communication between the PPU and GPU".

Arcane · 28 Apr 2006 at 11:01

Lowrider, frame rate aside, does it look much better with the PPU enabled? Screen shots don't ever do these things justice.

Plasmoid · 28 Apr 2006 at 11:02

Yeh... they just tacked on some extra eye candy for those that owned the PPU.

If they had bothered to give you the option of doing everything in software then you would see a boost.

Hopefully developers will begin attempting offloading physics calculations to the PPU rather then inventing things to do when a PPU is available.

ihatelag · 28 Apr 2006 at 11:25

Noxis said:
Nothing to do with "communication between the PPU and GPU".

Go to the PhysX website and learn how the PPU interacts between the GPU and CPU.

Plasmoid said:
Hopefully developers will begin attempting offloading physics calculations to the PPU rather then inventing things to do when a PPU is available.

Graphics card companies have not made their cards to adapt to the way PhysX works. Rather that PhysX has made their cards to work as well as possible with the graphics cards.

If game developers start relying on PPU hardware to do calculations for "physics effects" it could be a problem for them to know how well the interaction will work with the graphics cards.

--
Unfortunately in lowriders instance there could be a problem with either the game not working to well with PhysX or the graphics card not communicating well with the PPU.

sOLId sPOnGe · 28 Apr 2006 at 11:50

ihatelag said:
Hehe, just as I predicted in another thread...communication between the PPU and GPU would just plain suck. I see the way forward as an all in one solution, such as soon to be used HavokFX on the graphics cards...which seems (in theory) better supported, because it is running on the graphics card and probably will not hinder the frames per second.

Well it's all "theory" at the moment, but it does not look like a great start for PPU's such as PhysX.

Yeh I've read about that in this months CustomPC. Nvidia are to release this with on one of their driver updates (not sure when though?). If you're running SLI, one card will run the physics and the other card for the graphics.

Dutch Guy · 28 Apr 2006 at 11:52

Maybe it needs more optimising?

I can't believe it would give you a decrease in fps, the PhysX card should handle the extra calcualtions so in theory it should be 'free' extra IQ, shouldn't it :confused:

Things change I've changed · 28 Apr 2006 at 11:55

Plasmoid said:
Yeh... they just tacked on some extra eye candy for those that owned the PPU.

If they had bothered to give you the option of doing everything in software then you would see a boost.

Hopefully developers will begin attempting offloading physics calculations to the PPU rather then inventing things to do when a PPU is available.

Thats pretty much the same thing that I was thinking,

King_Boru said:
Really need to know what settings your running at to predict the low FPS.

But it is very early days in the PPU world.

16 X AF
No AA (Unhappy chappy about this, really hope this is fixed in the full version)
1280x1024
All settings on Max

InwardSinging said:
Seems a bit strange though to spend £200 on a phsyx card when you dont already have the current top card?

Its not a dig at you btw.

I would have normally went straight out and brought the latested gfx card but I've decided to wait for the next gen this time and also with conroe just around the corner I'm hoping that will give a fair boost when I upgrade.

Arcane said:
Lowrider, frame rate aside, does it look much better with the PPU enabled? Screen shots don't ever do these things justice.

tbh it looks exactly same with the PPU as it does without it, the only difference is you get the extra blocks/debris, the strange thing is these extra blocks/debris seem to appear unrealistictly out of no where when you shot things like the wall, floor etc, it really is like they've just been tacked on just to say *this game supports physX*.