[Ninjalane] PhysX performance tests - PhysX not going to die - Overclock.net

slngsht · 2 Weeks Ago

Interesting read for those of you who may not be on the up-and-up about the basics of PhysX.

They even tested older Ageia PPU cards, and they can't handle newer physx titles.

Also is a prediction of how PhysX won't die at the hand of OpenCL and Direct Compute.

Quote:

As of this article DirectX 11 is the hot new technology and there is talk that DirectX 11 Direct Compute and OpenCL will spell doom and gloom for PhysX. This is clearly a misunderstanding in how each of the two technologies work.

PhysX is a simplified way to do physics in the game engines. OpenCL and even Direct Compute are very complicated languages that work mostly on a driver programming level. PhysX is a programming layer that works independent of driver based technologies and allows the game developer to work through the complicated new language with an easy to use interface.

In fact PhysX is actually embracing these new technologies to make a better overall experience for the gamer and developers. So forget that PhysX is dead because it is going to thrive with this new environment.

Quote:

Batman Arkham Asylum is a title that uses so much PhysX you sometimes get lost in knowing what effects are triggered by PhysX and which are not. These effects are all over in the game and not just limited to certain areas.

The single GeForce GTX 285 does show its limits during the testing of Batman and scored quite low, but the game experience is never lost while playing. As we might have expected the Ageia PhysX card and the CPU just take a nose dive when dealing with the Batman Arkham Asylum. The real surprise here is how using dedicated PhysX processor actually increased performance, even over the GTX 285 in SLI.

SOURCE

003 · 2 Weeks Ago

Fantastic read, some great points made there.

tombom · 2 Weeks Ago

Edit:

I retract my statements.

Interesting.

saulin · 2 Weeks Ago

Well to me PhysX is the way it should be played. It just sucks for ATI users but for Nvidia users it is the bomb.

Of course ATI wants to have everythign run on the CPU but look at the performance hit. I say screw CPU PhysX and I more than welcome Nvidia PhySX. One of the reasons why I do stick with Nvidia.

Let ATI run PhysX through OCL but give us the option to get the most out of it through Nvidia PhysX.

Exostenza · 2 Weeks Ago

Yah, but guys its still just a handful of games and all nVidia ever talks about is Batman:AA AND they disabled physX support for ATi users with an nvidia PPU which I think started the slow death because really physX is hardly used anyways. Now that more people are going to be having ATi cards because nVidia is taking their time, well, its not worth it for developers to put time into something only part of the community can take advantage of.

For now I am an nVidia user and I have been for the past 3 generations of cards I have bought, but I think they made the wrong decisions here.

glenbuck1914 · 2 Weeks Ago

Whats up with the really low frame rates in Cryostasis / Darkest Days in SLI configuration.

Edit: Ahh I see there using 8xAA in Darkest Days.

I'm guessing driver issues? Or grunion really does have a good reason for a GTX295 physx card

Acroma · 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exostenza

Yah, but guys its still just a handful of games and all nVidia ever talks about is Batman:AA AND they disabled physX support for ATi users with an nvidia PPU which I think started the slow death because really physX is hardly used anyways. Now that more people are going to be having ATi cards because nVidia is taking their time, well, its not worth it for developers to put time into something only part of the community can take advantage of.

ATI was just lazy and didn't write AA code for Batman, UT engine doesn't use AA so the card guys either have to do it or you have to use a work around. It's not Nvidia's fault that ATI is just flat out lazy.

NCspecV81 · 2 Weeks Ago

physx hasn't compelled me enough to actually install dedicated hardware to use it. Maybe when there are some seriously major titles that actually use it, which I play. Then I may give it some thought. Until then, I'll pass. I do have an aegia card sitting idle at the moment in a desk drawer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acroma

ATI was just lazy and didn't write AA code for Batman, UT engine doesn't use AA so the card guys either have to do it or you have to use a work around. It's not Nvidia's fault that ATI is just flat out lazy.

You just boarded the fail boat. It's not ATI's responsibility to write code for a developers title. Even if it were, have you not read anything on the subject matter?

the_milk_man · 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acroma

ATI was just lazy and didn't write AA code for Batman, UT engine doesn't use AA so the card guys either have to do it or you have to use a work around. It's not Nvidia's fault that ATI is just flat out lazy.

I would like to agree but i need your source of that info.

FSF-Foxhound · 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exostenza

Yah, but guys its still just a handful of games and all nVidia ever talks about is Batman:AA AND they disabled physX support for ATi users with an nvidia PPU which I think started the slow death because really physX is hardly used anyways. Now that more people are going to be having ATi cards because nVidia is taking their time, well, its not worth it for developers to put time into something only part of the community can take advantage of.

For now I am an nVidia user and I have been for the past 3 generations of cards I have bought, but I think they made the wrong decisions here.

Click below to show/hide Hidden Text Below!

yea a handful

		Overclock.net - Overclocking.net > Industry News > Hardware News
[Ninjalane] PhysX performance tests - PhysX not going to die

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)