-
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.
My Test of GRAW running with and without physX
- Thread starter Things change I've changed
- Start date
![[ui]ICEMAN](/styles/overclockers/avatars/5.png){kind=avatar}
Soldato
Own. Sorry for the delay, been busy with flight planning today, I'll hopefully get around to posting some rough fps figures this evening.
[ui]ICEMAN said:
Nice one!!
I will try and get my friend (in Denver [Colorado, USA]) who owns a Dell XPS Quad SLi system to post his results, he has got similar problems with FPS being reduced up to 20% when PPU is on...
Looks like you're not the only one Iceman.I suppose my guess of communication overhead causing the issue was sort of right...but...who knows..there could be something fundamentally flawed with the drivers or something of that nature...bah trying to pin down the reason why the FPS is reduced is all speculative...I guess we have to wait and see how many more ppl are experiencing the same problems.
Associate
I think we will need more comprehensive benchmarks to get to the bottom of this.
Maybe, and just maybe, the physX card is doing all the physics processing and since it's their with capacity to spare some more stuff was thrown in.
In theory you should get better performance, in practice maybe it was never cpu limited in the first place.
Perhaps GRAW is completly gfx bound in its performance and those extra effects grind it down further. If you could test it while underclocking your cpu a lot maybe that would show more.
Course i still think GRAW dev's went and took money from physX, tacked on some eye candy and some detection for physX cards and laughed all the way to the bank.
Maybe, and just maybe, the physX card is doing all the physics processing and since it's their with capacity to spare some more stuff was thrown in.
In theory you should get better performance, in practice maybe it was never cpu limited in the first place.
Perhaps GRAW is completly gfx bound in its performance and those extra effects grind it down further. If you could test it while underclocking your cpu a lot maybe that would show more.
Course i still think GRAW dev's went and took money from physX, tacked on some eye candy and some detection for physX cards and laughed all the way to the bank.
Soldato
Ok some quick figures and pics for you, sorry I don't have time to do much tonight, got a busy few days ahead of me.
FX60, 2gb 3200 2/3/2/2, DFI Expert, 2x7900GTX BFG, X-Fi Elite Pro, BFG PhysX.
1280x1024 to lessen the load on the graphics cards, otherwise high quality settings.
Gunshot PhysX ON :
Gunshot PhysX OFF :
Explosion PhysX ON :
Explosion PhsyX OFF :
Now I know the pictures aren't taken at *exactly* the same time but I watched the counters carefully and the differences at each stage are about the same. As another easy test, throwing a grenade directly in front of me with the PhysX on drops to 50 fps, with it disabled during the explosion the lowest was 55.
FX60, 2gb 3200 2/3/2/2, DFI Expert, 2x7900GTX BFG, X-Fi Elite Pro, BFG PhysX.
1280x1024 to lessen the load on the graphics cards, otherwise high quality settings.
Gunshot PhysX ON :
Gunshot PhysX OFF :
Explosion PhysX ON :
Explosion PhsyX OFF :
Now I know the pictures aren't taken at *exactly* the same time but I watched the counters carefully and the differences at each stage are about the same. As another easy test, throwing a grenade directly in front of me with the PhysX on drops to 50 fps, with it disabled during the explosion the lowest was 55.
Last edited:
Soldato
Yes it is off, the explosions are good without the PhysX but my screenshot for the PhysX on was a little offtimed so you don't really get to see the new effects. It's definitely noticable, adds a little extra but until they fix why its performing so badly I can't honestly recommend one for GRAW no matter what system you're running.
Soldato
Ok if you give me 20-30 mins, I'm making short FRAPS clips of explosions with and without, will post them up in a bit.
Soldato
Ok here goes, turns out the explosion of the truck isn't hugely different but I've included a short vid of it anyway and a standard grenade for comparisons.
PhysX on, Explosion
PhysX off, Explosion
PhysX on, Grenade
PhysX off, Grenade
Enjoy.
PhysX on, Explosion
PhysX off, Explosion
PhysX on, Grenade
PhysX off, Grenade
Enjoy.
[ui]ICEMAN said:
Awesome Iceman, great job.
I think that the games explosions does not "wow" me so much with PhysX on ..but the grenade explosion on the other hand, looks okay with the PhysX on, but the falling debris hasn't got much to be desired from it...I think that there is lots of room for improvement. At the moment, PhysX cards, does not quite warrant a £200 investment :s
I think I can live without a PPU for a while
Once again, thanks Iceman for the video clips...gives us a good idea of what to expect from PhysX.
Last edited:
Soldato
That really does look like it was just bolted on at last minute so they could stick a "PhysX Enabled" sticker on the box... the grenade one especailly... the blocks look bland and untextured and you can clearly see a large framerate drop that shouldn't be happening.
Soldato
Cyanide said:
Its not too hard to believe really either, PhysX had just been released, its main title which will probably sell the card isn't due for release for many months (ut2k7) so I'd guess as a joint thing they wanted some actual exposure in the PC gaming market, it may have been implemented badly but at least Ubisoft can say "buy a physx card for ultra realism!" and Ageia can of course claim that their PPU can be used "today".
Soldato
[ui]ICEMAN said:
But personally I wouldn't want my brand new product to be showcased by a poorly implemented bolt on to a game. I can't see why Ageia didn't just wait untill it was fully ready and they had devised a way for good implementation and some better drivers.
It's like saying "Hey, look at our new sports car! It works and it's really fast... it just has 2 wheels missing but it'll be fine in a month or 2!"
Soldato
Cyanide said:But personally I wouldn't want my brand new product to be showcased by a poorly implemented bolt on to a game. I can't see why Ageia didn't just wait untill it was fully ready and they had devised a way for good implementation and some better drivers.
It's like saying "Hey, look at our new sports car! It works and it's really fast... it just has 2 wheels missing but it'll be fine in a month or 2!"
Indeed, I never said the implementation was a good idea! You know as well as I do that in the computer industry more than almost any other, things are rushed out to the marketplace far earlier than they should be.
[ui]ICEMAN said:
Hehe, as we can see from the videos "ultra realism" does not seem to exist! Let's hope in the next games that support PhysX PPU, it looks more realistic. and does not disappoint us.
I wonder what systems they were testing PhysX on when they implemented it with GRAW? Doesn't look like much testing was happening at all
Soldato
Well Bet on Soldier: Blood Sport and City of Villains are both listed on Ageia's website as being PhysX Optimized... any chance of getting them tested too? 
Soldato
Bit off topic, but what's the link to your review site?[ui]ICEMAN said:
Or is that a different member i'm thinking of
