Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › NVIDIA › Is PhysX a dying technology?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is PhysX a dying technology? - Page 5

post #41 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by eggs2see View Post
Nvidia made a big mistake buying Physx and making it exclusive, developers were never going to jump on board a technology that was exclusive to one GPU manufacturer.
PhysX was just as exclusive when it was Ageia and was most certainly never going to take off because the hardware behind it was simply too inept.

However the difference was that anyone could buy an Ageia card for physics, and nVidia foolish enough to try and be greedy and controlling by limiting PhysX to nVidia GPU rigs only.

What we need is a physics API independent of a hardware manufacturer not unlike what we have with DirectX or OpenGL for graphics, and that has never been the case with PhysX
HK47
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3930K ASUS Sabertooth X79 EVGA GTX780 Samsung Green 4 x 4GB DDR3 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
2 x 256GB Samsung 830 SSD RAID-0 3 x 1.5TB Hitachi 7K3000 RAID-0 2 x 3TB Seagate 7200.14 RAID-0 XSPC Raystorm, EX280, D5 Variant pump 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Pro x64 Update 1 BenQ XL2420T Dell U2711 Filco Majestouch-2 Tenkeyless Cherry MX Red 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic Platinum-1000 Silverstone FT02B-WRI Razer Abyssus Razer Goliathus Speed 
Audio
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium HD 
  hide details  
Reply
HK47
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3930K ASUS Sabertooth X79 EVGA GTX780 Samsung Green 4 x 4GB DDR3 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
2 x 256GB Samsung 830 SSD RAID-0 3 x 1.5TB Hitachi 7K3000 RAID-0 2 x 3TB Seagate 7200.14 RAID-0 XSPC Raystorm, EX280, D5 Variant pump 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Pro x64 Update 1 BenQ XL2420T Dell U2711 Filco Majestouch-2 Tenkeyless Cherry MX Red 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic Platinum-1000 Silverstone FT02B-WRI Razer Abyssus Razer Goliathus Speed 
Audio
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium HD 
  hide details  
Reply
post #42 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horsemama1956 View Post
I believe nVidia wanted a stupid amount of money to license PhysX to AMD, which is why they passed.
That might be... but the bigger issue would have been AMD dependent on NVIDIA. NVIDIA would have a head start on all changes plus could slip in vendor-aware "features". Intel did this with their compiliers.
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #43 of 82

Batman AA, Mafia II, and Metro 2033...
Batman made really good use of it...

and Metro 2033 I barely notice a difference...
Not worth a dedicated physx card for me as i'm happy with my setup...
Oh yeah Unreal Tournament III with like 3 maps use physx...

I don't see it going too far unless more games simply support it. I liked the idea and 3dMark Vantage heavily supported it and showed a whole new meaning of biased.
Gamer
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 970 @ 4GHZ Asus P6X58D-E 2X EVGA GTX 970 SC w/ACX 2.0 Cooler 6GB Corsair XMS3 CAS 7 1600Mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
2X OCZ Vertex 30GB RAID 0 Corsair H100 Win 7 Ultimate 64-bit S23A950D + 55" LED 240Hz 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G710+ Corsair AX 1200 Corsair Carbide Series Air 540 case Razor Deathadder 3500dpi 
  hide details  
Reply
Gamer
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 970 @ 4GHZ Asus P6X58D-E 2X EVGA GTX 970 SC w/ACX 2.0 Cooler 6GB Corsair XMS3 CAS 7 1600Mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
2X OCZ Vertex 30GB RAID 0 Corsair H100 Win 7 Ultimate 64-bit S23A950D + 55" LED 240Hz 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G710+ Corsair AX 1200 Corsair Carbide Series Air 540 case Razor Deathadder 3500dpi 
  hide details  
Reply
post #44 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by lyster View Post
What's a console

Are you trying to say to say games can be played on something other than a PC.

I don't believe you!
CDMAN was trying to say that some consoles make good use of Physx in order to alleviate the lack of processing power of console CPU for modern games. A good example is Castlevania Lords of Shadow, featured on both Xbox360 and PS3. This game utilizes heavy load of Physx, a task of which would be impossible for console's CPU to render. Physx in this game helps a lot to create immensely dazzling sceneries.
Sephiroth II
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-7700K Kaby Lake 5.1GHz ASUS ROG Strix Z270G Gaming Nvidia GTX Titan X Pascal Corsair Dominator Platinum 16GB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
960 PRO NVMe M.2 SSD (512GB) NZXT Kraken X31 Windows 10 Enterprise Sony X800D 49" 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Acer Predator X34 34" Corsair Vengeance K70 Corsair AX1200 Corsair Carbide Air 240 White 
MouseOther
Corsair Vengeance M65 AudioEngine A5+ Black Speakers 
  hide details  
Reply
Sephiroth II
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-7700K Kaby Lake 5.1GHz ASUS ROG Strix Z270G Gaming Nvidia GTX Titan X Pascal Corsair Dominator Platinum 16GB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
960 PRO NVMe M.2 SSD (512GB) NZXT Kraken X31 Windows 10 Enterprise Sony X800D 49" 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Acer Predator X34 34" Corsair Vengeance K70 Corsair AX1200 Corsair Carbide Air 240 White 
MouseOther
Corsair Vengeance M65 AudioEngine A5+ Black Speakers 
  hide details  
Reply
post #45 of 82
As it has been said a million times already...It was never alive and it will never live
At the rate we'r going where mainstream chips like the 2500k are clocking to 5GHz, there is no need for a dedicated physics processor because the CPU is more than capable of running all operations on board.
post #46 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by lyster View Post
Wouldn't that essentially tie the 560 to the performance of the 9800gt? The game could only be run as quickly as the 9800gt permits - hence the bottleneck.
No- the 9800 GT would not be in SLI- it would be a dedicated PhysX card. It wouldnt be used at all for graphics. (Unless you used it to drive additional monitors or something)

(Now if you enabled SLI for some strange reason, it would be a problem.. otherwise it would be fine)
post #47 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by lyster View Post
So can i still expect poor performance when i go SLI (another 560 2gb), whenever i turn on physx?



Wouldn't that essentially tie the 560 to the performance of the 9800gt? The game could only be run as quickly as the 9800gt permits - hence the bottleneck.
I don't think two 560s will be held back by the 9800gt doing PhysX. Isn't PhysX run separately so that if it's performing poorly but on a different card only the PhysX part does poor, not the normal fps?
I have seen people with tri-sli 570s use a fourth 570 for PhysX but I'm not sure if that's because a 9800gt would hold it back at all or not.
post #48 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by christian_piper View Post
No- the 9800 GT would not be in SLI- it would be a dedicated PhysX card. It wouldnt be used at all for graphics. (Unless you used it to drive additional monitors or something)

(Now if you enabled SLI for some strange reason, it would be a problem.. otherwise it would be fine)
Haha, i didn't mean going SLI with a 9800gt. I'm just about bright enough to have figured that one out

I meant wouldn't the game only be able to accelerate as quickly as the 9800gt is able to process the physx. If you have the CPU, GPU and dedicated Physx card all trying to process different sets of information and the dedicated physx card is by far the slowest of these componants then you have a bottleneck. The CPU and primary GPU essentially having to wait for the Physx card to process it's information before the next frame can be generated. It's a nightmare to try to optimize imo - just not worth the effort.

My question about SLI is when i get another 560, which i plan to do at the end of this month, will that improve my ability to process physx? Or will i still have trouble.

Dedicated physx card is out of the question as i'm using m-atx and all pci slots will be taken up when i get my second card. So if £400+ worth of GPU's can't run physx like a hot knife through butter, then i for one will be not be turning it on.
Silent Rig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2600k Asus P8p67-M Pro Palit 560ti 2gb (soon to be going Sli) Vengeance 8gb 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Vertex 2 120gb, WD 500gb Windows 7 64-Bit BenQ 24" 1080p XFX Pro 850w 
Case
P180 Mini 
  hide details  
Reply
Silent Rig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2600k Asus P8p67-M Pro Palit 560ti 2gb (soon to be going Sli) Vengeance 8gb 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Vertex 2 120gb, WD 500gb Windows 7 64-Bit BenQ 24" 1080p XFX Pro 850w 
Case
P180 Mini 
  hide details  
Reply
post #49 of 82
PhysX has been dying since 2005.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pioneerisloud View Post
This. All it EVER was, was an Nvidia marketing gimmick. That's all.
PhysX wasn't picked up by NVIDIA until several years after it was released.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CDMAN View Post
Alot of new console games use PhysX. I know that does not make PC guys feel good, but PhysX is being used.
No console has the hardware to accelerate PhysX, so anything they are doing with it can be done better on a half way decent PC anyway.
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.3/3.6GHz core/uncore, 1.225/1.2v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) 2x Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X OC New Edition (10036... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-11-12-27-T1, 1.37v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.05) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Cooler Master Nepton 280L 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Reference R9 290X w/Stilt's MLU 1000e / 1375m E... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
Reply
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.3/3.6GHz core/uncore, 1.225/1.2v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) 2x Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X OC New Edition (10036... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-11-12-27-T1, 1.37v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.05) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Cooler Master Nepton 280L 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Reference R9 290X w/Stilt's MLU 1000e / 1375m E... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
Reply
post #50 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by lyster View Post
Haha, i didn't mean going SLI with a 9800gt. I'm just about bright enough to have figured that one out

I meant wouldn't the game only be able to accelerate as quickly as the 9800gt is able to process the physx. If you have the CPU, GPU and dedicated Physx card all trying to process different sets of information and the dedicated physx card is by far the slowest of these componants then you have a bottleneck. The CPU and primary GPU essentially having to wait for the Physx card to process it's information before the next frame can be generated. It's a nightmare to try to optimize imo - just not worth the effort.

My question about SLI is when i get another 560, which i plan to do at the end of this month, will that improve my ability to process physx? Or will i still have trouble.

Dedicated physx card is out of the question as i'm using m-atx and all pci slots will be taken up when i get my second card. So if £400+ worth of GPU's can't run physx like a hot knife through butter, then i for one will be not be turning it on.
No, the 9800 GT would have plenty of power for doing just PhysX calculations I believe. The only reason why your performance sucks is that you're running both graphics and physics on your GPU.

And no, I don't think a 560 in SLI will help your PhysX performance a whole lot. It, too, will be doing both graphics and physics.

Anyway, in the future it'd be awesome if you'd just not flame things that you don't know anything about. PhysX does in no way make the experience worse, give you lower graphics or cause problems. Only one thing does that and that is your rig.
M1XN
(18 items)
 
Study Zenbook
(5 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770K @ 4.2 GHz ASUS Maximus VI Impact MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G 2x8 GB Kingston HyperX DDR3 @ 2400 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 64 GB Crucial M4 128 GB SAMSUNG Spinpoint M9T 2 TB LiteOn DL-8ATSH 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-C14 Windows 10 64-bit ViewSonic VP2770 Vortex Pok3r 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair SF600 NCASE M1 V2.5 Logitech G502 SteelSeries QcK+ 
AudioOther
HiFiMan HE-400 Logitech C920 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i5-3317 GT 620M 2 GB soldered + 8 GB Corsair OCZ Vertex 3 120 
OS
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
  hide details  
Reply
M1XN
(18 items)
 
Study Zenbook
(5 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770K @ 4.2 GHz ASUS Maximus VI Impact MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G 2x8 GB Kingston HyperX DDR3 @ 2400 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 64 GB Crucial M4 128 GB SAMSUNG Spinpoint M9T 2 TB LiteOn DL-8ATSH 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-C14 Windows 10 64-bit ViewSonic VP2770 Vortex Pok3r 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair SF600 NCASE M1 V2.5 Logitech G502 SteelSeries QcK+ 
AudioOther
HiFiMan HE-400 Logitech C920 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i5-3317 GT 620M 2 GB soldered + 8 GB Corsair OCZ Vertex 3 120 
OS
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: NVIDIA
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › NVIDIA › Is PhysX a dying technology?