Physx card

SheriffHD · 16 Feb 2013 at 12:44

Hey there,

So ive seen a few builds were people have used two differnt types of cards (the first oen i saw was a tripple sli 480 with a 250 for physx)

my question is how is this done, ive never done this and treid to google an answer but havnt had much luck.

also is it worth doing? I mean I wont be going out my way to do as such as I already have a GT250 that have from an old build as well as a 630 (I guess which ever one works best)

so any ideas?

tommybhoy · 16 Feb 2013 at 13:05

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18488808

Answers are in there.

Suarez7 · 16 Feb 2013 at 13:10

Well most people regard physx as rubbish marketing crap on these forums, whether it is worth it is down to your perception of physx.

tommybhoy · 16 Feb 2013 at 13:12

Which makes you just as bad bringing it up, and starting round 125, not helpful at all ACE

Is this what you want to see?

tommybhoy said:
The Official AMD/Nvidia Trolling Thread

Do you have any grievance because someone dared to spend their hard earned cash on AMD/Nvidia gpu's and want to lambast their purchase choice?

Have you pushed your rig to unstable levels and want to blame it on AMD/Nvidia drivers?

Have you wrecked your OS with software conflicts/bad housekeeping and want to blame it on AMD/Nvidia drivers?

Are you using AMD and never used the Nvidia equivalent and want to put that sucker down?

Are you using Nvidia and never used the AMD equivalent and want to put that sucker down?

If you simply want to troll on AMD drivers because they are anything but downright perfect, bulletproof to indestructible Nvidia godliness levels.

If you simply want to troll on Nvidia drivers because they are anything but downright perfect, bulletproof to indestructible AMD godliness levels, then this is the place to post

Seriously, when the subject comes up, a dozen or so folks that don't like it doesn't speak for every AMD owner by a long long shot, most won't care, as, if they did, they would have bought Nvidia, no?

Suarez7 · 16 Feb 2013 at 13:21

I'm not starting anything I just just telling him what to expect on here when discussing physx.

ALXAndy · 16 Feb 2013 at 13:25

ACEOWNER said:
Well most people regard physx as rubbish marketing crap on these forums, whether it is worth it is down to your perception of physx.

Really? I find that hard to believe tbh. Especially when you compare two titles side by side like this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=EWFkDrKvBRU

The game looks positively naked without it. Now granted it could probably be done in Havok using your CPU but you can't argue it doesn't add to the game.

My guess is those who regard it as rubbish don't use it in anything.

Suarez7 · 16 Feb 2013 at 13:43

ALXAndy said:
Really? I find that hard to believe tbh. Especially when you compare two titles side by side like this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=EWFkDrKvBRU

The game looks positively naked without it. Now granted it could probably be done in Havok using your CPU but you can't argue it doesn't add to the game.

My guess is those who regard it as rubbish don't use it in anything.

I've already discussed it to the death in the metro 2033 thread. I won't bother adding anything further. It's one of those things that boils down to personal opinion and you can only judge for yourself if it's worth it or not.

SheriffHD · 16 Feb 2013 at 13:51

well to simple put it, I already have cards i can use, so it wont cost me anything to do.

and we all digress, although it seems my question on if it was worth doing is very debatable.
How about we move on to the topic of how it is done?

tommybhoy · 16 Feb 2013 at 13:56

ACEOWNER said:
personal opinion and you can only judge for yourself if it's worth it or not.

Usually they buy AMD if they don't think it's worth it.

Been using PhysX since it could first be hacked(when I don't have CrossFire running), love it but won't pay Nvidia premium tax with lesser specs, I'll leave that for the hardcore followers.

Personally it's worth an extra £40 or so for the pleasure of an equally powerful/spec'd gpu, not +~£80 for a lesser spec'd/slower performer, my 7970 cost £300 when 99% of 670's cost more, my £200 7950, well, need I say more?

Suarez7 · 16 Feb 2013 at 13:56

SheriffHD said:
well to simple put it, I already have cards i can use, so it wont cost me anything to do.

and we all digress, although it seems my question on if it was worth doing is very debatable.
How about we move on to the topic of how it is done?

http://physxinfo.com/wiki/Hybrid_PhysX

ALXAndy · 16 Feb 2013 at 13:57

SheriffHD said:
well to simple put it, I already have cards i can use, so it wont cost me anything to do.

and we all digress, although it seems my question on if it was worth doing is very debatable.
How about we move on to the topic of how it is done?

Just give it a go dude. You'll really like it

Don't listen to those who can't use it so hate it.

Orcvader · 16 Feb 2013 at 13:58

Hmm, comparing the 2 I'm not sure if the 250 or the 630 will be the better PhysX card.

Depends on your main card. If it's Nvidia then just insert the card, install the drivers and in the Nvidia Control Panel choose the 250/630 as the PhysX card.

If your main card is AMD then you will need to do the PhysX hack: http://www.overclock.net/t/508305/howto-ati-nvidia-physx-guide

Suarez7 · 16 Feb 2013 at 13:58

tommybhoy said:
Usually they buy AMD if they don't think it's worth it.

Been using PhysX since it could first be hacked(when I don't have CrossFire running), love it but won't pay Nvidia premium tax with lesser specs, I'll leave that for the hardcore followers.

Personally it's worth an extra £40 or so for the pleasure of an equally powerful/spec'd gpu, not +~£80 for a lesser spec'd/slower performer, my 7970 cost £300 when 99% of 670's cost more, my £200 7950, well, need I say more?

I meant worth it as in do you notice it in games, not worth it for the price. The OP already has the hardware to do it, so price is irrelevant here.

tommybhoy · 16 Feb 2013 at 14:05

Cool, it's worth a try at least, 10 mins tops if you have a rubbish internet connection.

The best way to do it is via the link I posted in my original reply, if you don't follow that link newer titles won't work sheriff.

SheriffHD · 16 Feb 2013 at 17:40

Orcvader said:
Hmm, comparing the 2 I'm not sure if the 250 or the 630 will be the better PhysX card.

Depends on your main card. If it's Nvidia then just insert the card, install the drivers and in the Nvidia Control Panel choose the 250/630 as the PhysX card.

If your main card is AMD then you will need to do the PhysX hack: http://www.overclock.net/t/508305/howto-ati-nvidia-physx-guide

That easy? awesome, yeah i'll be using an nvidia 670 as my main card.

cheers for that dude.

ALXAndy · 16 Feb 2013 at 18:07

SheriffHD said:
That easy? awesome, yeah i'll be using an nvidia 670 as my main card.

cheers for that dude.

I wouldn't bother then you'll probably lose performance. Let us know how it goes, though

tommybhoy · 16 Feb 2013 at 18:15

SheriffHD said:
That easy? awesome, yeah i'll be using an nvidia 670 as my main card.

cheers for that dude.

Then you don't do any hacks, you simply enable it in NCP.

spoffle · 16 Feb 2013 at 18:22

ACEOWNER said:
Well most people regard physx as rubbish marketing crap on these forums, whether it is worth it is down to your perception of physx.

Nope, people regard nVidia's usage of it as such, it does have potential and some of the effects are nice, but because of the extreme lack of PhysX games, people see it as being squandered to be used solely as a checkbox feature to make people feel like they are missing out.

ALXAndy said:
Really? I find that hard to believe tbh. Especially when you compare two titles side by side like this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=EWFkDrKvBRU

The game looks positively naked without it. Now granted it could probably be done in Havok using your CPU but you can't argue it doesn't add to the game.

My guess is those who regard it as rubbish don't use it in anything.

I think you've inadvertently highlighted one of the issues with PhysX. Every example of a game with PhysX on and PhysX off, the off looks bare and naked.

This is done by design to make it look like PhysX is doing a lot more than it really is, compared to other games.

Compare two games, one that doesn't have PhysX, and one with PhysX off and the PhysX one (with it off) will look bare compared to that too.

spoffle · 16 Feb 2013 at 18:23

SheriffHD said:
That easy? awesome, yeah i'll be using an nvidia 670 as my main card.

cheers for that dude.

If you're using a secondary card for PhysX, you may as well use an AMD card as your primary, because AMD have got the performance crown, and the price to performance ratio crown too.

You'll get more performance for your money if you got a 7950 over a GTX 670.

Spudgun · 16 Feb 2013 at 18:30

I'd have a physx card quite low on my list of priorities, but if you are 100% happy with the rest of your equipment, can't think of anything else to spend your money on and enjoy games that are physx enabled then I see no harm in spending a few quid on a used NVidia card from the MM.

It is far from an essential purchase though