PPU more then 100% faster then CPU in UT3 benchmark here.

[Marc Fraser]

You didn't, I did. And it is if you're losing half your framerate for effects that make a difference to gameplay.

I haven't played the PPU maps or seen that much of them but it looked to me like you had a destructable terrain, at least a lot of the walls anyway. If so how does that make no difference to gameplay? If an enemy is hiding behind a wall you can blow it up. That cover is therefore no longer there for anyone else to hide behind. How does that not effect gameplay?

Granted this can be done on a small scale without a PPU but with one you can achieve a lot more and have more of the environment destructable. However as I said earlier the amount you would be able to do this is a balancing act between how much more strain you would be putting on the cpu and gpu.

I thought a PPU was supposed to take all the physics and stuff off the CPU, Ageia need to change their advertising because they've seemingly left us all grossly misinformed.

It does take the physics off the CPU. What makes you think it doesn't? What is this "and stuff"?

 

[Tom|Nbk]

UT3 was the clincher for me to get a Physx card. Having seen the framerate drop in half when you put Physx on even with a card they can take a running jump.

 

[Darkwave]

If an enemy is hiding behind a wall you can blow it up. That cover is therefore no longer there for anyone else to hide behind. How does that not effect gameplay?

By Pottsey's own definition in the previous Crysis thread, blowing up a wall that you can interact with is not "high physics" and therefore doesn't count. Especially so since a CPU can do just that.

 

[Pottsey]

“That's not the source I meant. I meant the one for your claim about Crytek removing effects.”
I just posted it. Those effects are in the game engine but disable for the main game as the game cannot handle them with today’s CPU’s.





“You use the PhysX API and its effects with a PPU in UT3 and you get half the framerate.”
No.
You use the PhysX API and its effects “That's not the source I meant. I meant the one for your claim about Crytek removing effects.”
I just posted it. Those effects are in the game engine but disable for the main game as the game cannot handle them with today’s CPU’s.



“You use the PhysX API and its effects with a PPU in UT3 and you get half the framerate.”
No.
You use the PhysX API and its effects with a PPU and you gain 100% FPS on the bonus maps.

You use the PhysX API and its effects with a PPU and you gain 10% ish FPS on the rest of the maps.

That’s why I don’t think its fair to call the PPU a FPS halving card. As its boosting FPS.

(10% is a guess we need accurate benchmarks.)

 

[Marc Fraser]

By Pottsey's own definition in the previous Crysis thread, that is not "high physics" and therefore doesn't count.

Especially so since a CPU can do just that.

Did you even read the rest of the post? You know the bit where I said you could do it on a small scale on the CPU.

If you leave it all on the CPU and do the same effects you will be even more CPU limited. Look at the graphs in the link pottsey posted when they ran the PPU maps on the CPU. That sure looks like the CPU can handle it to me.

 

[Darkwave]

You use the PhysX API and its effects with a PPU and you gain 100% FPS on the bonus maps.

You use the PhysX API and its effects with a PPU and you gain 10% ish FPS on the rest of the maps.

You take those over-elaborate, pointless effects out of the game and you gain 100% FPS.

Did you even read the rest of the post?

No I didn't read the rest. I just wanted you to follow your boss's rules.

 

[Pottsey]

"By Pottsey's own definition in the previous Crysis thread, blowing up a wall that you can interact with is not "high physics" and therefore doesn't count. Especially so since a CPU can do just that."
Are your reading what’s wrote? Marc Fraser asked How does that not effect gameplay? Me saying its not high end physics by my definition has nothing to do with what he asked.

High end physics to me would be knocking down 10+ walls. But I fail to see what that has to do with this thread.


EDIT
“You take those over-elaborate, pointless effects out of the game and you gain 100% FPS."
Then plug in a PPU and gain 110% instead of 100%.

 

[Darkwave]

High end physics to me would be knocking down 10+ walls. But I fail to see what that has to do with this thread.

It has a lot to do with this thread because you're cheer-leading for Ageia PhysX as usual.

If you're not going to complain about the effects in UT3 not being "high physics" then I guess you have finally come to your senses and see that Crysis has good physics.

 

[Marc Fraser]

No I didn't read the rest. I just wanted you to follow your boss's rules.

You are becoming increasingly childish the longer this thread is going on.

You have made some claims which we have disagreed with and given you technical explanations as to why but instead of trying to counter them with sensible arguments you are quoting us and replacing what we have written with nonsense.

If you don't want to take part in sensible discussion please leave the thread so that those of us who do can get on with it.

 

[Darkwave]

You are becoming increasingly childish the longer this thread is going on... // ...If you don't want to take part in sensible discussion please leave the thread so that those of us who do can get on with it.

Dude this thread was dead on its arse in childishness even before I got here, that includes you two.

You have made some claims which we have disagreed with and given you technical explanations as to why but instead of trying to counter them with sensible arguments you are quoting us and replacing what we have written with nonsense.

Yes, and you both already agreed with me. The physics effects in the PPU maps of UT3 put extra strain on the CPU, and you two are the only gamers on this forum who seem to think it's worth halving framerates.

Basically you've made my point for me, so why is there any need to go round in circles?

Now that Pottsey has contradicted himself about the Crysis physics, it's time for me to have fun.

 

[Pottsey]

“If you're not going to complain about the effects in UT3 not being "high physics" then I guess you have finally come to your senses and see that Crysis has good physics.“
A tornado ripping about multiply buildings, tearing the roof off tile by tile with lots of bits flying around is high end physics. All the while with strong winds that blow missiles and weapons away from there target. While this is going off 10+ walls are being shot though creating lots of physics work.

Crysis does have good physics they are just on a small scale as the CPU cannot do a large scale.

 

[Darkwave]

“If you're not going to complain about the effects in UT3 not being "high physics" then I guess you have finally come to your senses and see that Crysis has good physics.“
A tornado ripping about multiply buildings, tearing the roof off tile by tile with lots of bits flying around is high end physics. All the while with strong winds that blow missiles and weapons away from there target. While this is going off 10+ walls are being shot though creating lots of physics work.

Crysis does have good physics they are just on a small scale as the CPU cannot do a large scale.

So why aren't you complaining about the rest of the physics in UT3?

I would've thought they would be below standard for you.

 

[Combat squirrel]

POTTSEY BEHAVE !



Er thats total rubbish, my agiea physx PPU makes ~2fps difference to UT3 and is damned near unplayable on the physx maps, refer to my thread here:

My UT3 experience with my physx card1

As title, running with it on or off makes no noticible difference to game play on all the normal levels. On the special physx levels it runs noticibly slower, tornado drops to ~6 fps, it runs and is coded oh so very badly, yet the debri and all that stuff are simply shapes, i REALLY dont know...

forums.overclockers.co.uk

Why did you not reply to that thread then pottsey ? And have you personally played these maps on your computer pottsey ? please list your systems specs for me, mines in sig and 1st hand experience shows me it doesnt do much.

Additonally the crysis physx engine (as iv said in the above thread) its wayyyyyy more advanced than physx, physx ONLY seems to do basic shapes in UT3 physx levels and 'models' the roofs in the tornado as 'fabric' (using agieas 'fabric' algorythm but just made 'stiffer' lol)

 

[RavenXXX2]

Whats the point of debating the performance of the PPU when its glaringly obvious its a POS, we have two peps defending it like they got shares in ageia, simple facts are that the card is an outright failure with little or no future game support, check out ageias sight, its dead, so why debate it. Let em rot in peace.

 

[Pottsey]

“The physics effects in the PPU maps of UT3 put extra strain on the CPU, and you two are the only gamers on this forum who seem to think it's worth getting your framerate shredded in half.”
When did I ever say its good to get your FPS shredded in half. I said the very opposite. I don’t like the PPU maps. Are you just out to cuase touble? It looks like it.

Its not worth getting your FPS cut in half. It is worth useing the PPU to boost FPS on normal maps.





“Now that Pottsey has contradicted himself about the Crysis physics, it's time for me to have fun.”
Where have I contradicted myself. If you understood what I said you will see I have not.

 

[Darkwave]

When did I ever say its good to get your FPS shredded in half. I said the very opposite. I don’t like the PPU maps. Are you just out to cuase touble? It looks like it.

There you go contradicting yourself again.

All you've done pretty much every waking hour since this thread went up is cheerlead, now this?

Besides you just completely and utterly, flat-out agreed with me. So how am I trouble-making?

 

[Pottsey]

“Er thats total rubbish, my agiea physx PPU makes ~2fps difference to UT3”
I missed it and it appears your guessing. Did you run a timedemo and record the results? How did you benchmark? Did you use the UT 3 PPU drivers?



“So why aren't you complaining about the rest of the physics in UT3?”
Why would I complain?



“There you go contradicting yourself again.”
Give me the post numbers that’s shows that.

 

[Marc Fraser]

Dude this thread was dead on its arse in childishness even before I got here, that includes you two.

Yes, and you both already agreed with me. The physics effects in the PPU maps of UT3 put extra strain on the CPU, and you two are the only gamers on this forum who seem to think it's worth halving framerates.

How are we being childish? Please quote one example?

Whilst we have agreed it has put more strain on the CPU we are still waiting for you to prove the PPU maps are obviously PPU limited as you claimed.

I don't think I have said at any point that it is worth halving framerate. But if you can quote me then please do.

The only reason I posted was because people were saying the PPU was to blame for the low framerates when no one has yet posted any evidence to support that the PPU is the bottleneck.

Basically you've made my point for me, so why is there any need to go round in circles?

Now that Pottsey has contradicted himself about the Crysis physics, it's time for me to have fun.

We have not made your point for you at all. You said the game was PPU limited and the PPU was not up to the task of calculating the Physx API. You have still yet to provide any evidence for this.

 

[Darkwave]

“There you go contradicting yourself again.”
Give me the post numbers that’s shows that.

I made an edit to elaborate.

 

[Darkwave]

How are we being childish? Please quote one example?

I consider fanboyism very childish, which is why I love it when I see you and Pottsey get together in a PPU thread. Always a good read.

We have not made your point for you at all. You said the game was PPU limited and the PPU was not up to the task of calculating the Physx API. You have still yet to provide any evidence for this.

Pottsey just agreed with me.

And what Combat squirrel just posted also seems to indicate that the PPU is not up to the task.