Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [SemiAccurate] Physics hardware makes Kepler/GK104 fast
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[SemiAccurate] Physics hardware makes Kepler/GK104 fast - Page 19

post #181 of 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordikon View Post

You can compare them with GPU PhysX effects turned off, at which point it should be like comparing the video cards in any other game. With GPU PhysX enabled framerate should theoretically drop on the Nvida system, as the GPU that is being used for rendering now has to render effects created by the other GPU that is calculating the physics for those effects.
Generally I would say that games using GPU-enabled physics effects run well on Nvidia cards because Nvidia does a lot of work with developers to make the games run well on their hardware. At my last job Nvidia said, unofficially, that if we supported and touted their new 3D stereoscopic glasses and monitors with our game they would help make sure we had support with our graphics setup, fortunately we declined and took care of it ourselves, I was glad we didn't advertise for one company or the other. They would've given the same offer for PhysX however we were too far along with development and already using Havok, which is quite a bit more efficient anyway, it just lacks GPU acceleration. Havok is efficient enough to do plenty of physics effects on the GPU, we were simulating hundreds of objects per frame with physics updates under 1ms, leaving 15.6 ms for everything else to still get 60 fps, and of those 15ms, about 10 were used for rendering tasks (on the CPU), Havok also supports things like cloth without a GPU, Nvidia has incentive to make some things GPU-only so they can sell more GPUs and hurt AMD by getting proprietary techniques into games.
IMO physics on the GPU is pretty gimmicky until GPUs can be accessed for queries and work just as fast as a CPU can, but a the moment asking the GPU for data takes about 30-45ms, whereas querying for information on memory in the stack (cache), or even system memory, is hundreds of thousands of times faster in most cases. Until the time when there is almost no late cy between CPU and GPU it will just be a little extra visuals at the cost of another entire GPU.

When did Nvidia limit some features to GPU only? As far as I'm aware all the PhysX code/features can be run in software mode on the CPU (thou this is slow as hell). I heard some rumors that Nvidia actually deliberately hampers PhysX performance on the CPU in order to hold on to the exclusive effects. After the way they disabled AA in Arkham City I would not put it past them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nnimrod View Post

they chose opencl of their own accord

Who? Amd? Do you really think it would be wise for AMD to rely on Nvidia to optimize PhysX to run on there hardware? That's why I said it will not be widely used as long as it is proprietary.
The way Nvidia lobbies PhysX is holding game advancement back. If game companies used more open engines we would see much more cloth/fluid and other physics simulations that actually run's on every ones hardware. Have you heard of Hydrophobia by any chance? That game has a wonderful physics engine that does really realistic water simulation on the CPU.

As lordikon I to think GPU PhysX is gimmicky and unnecessary.
Edited by Bit_reaper - 2/3/12 at 7:04am
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 OC 4.0 GHz 1.35v HT on Asus P6T 1366 SLI Gigabyte GTX 970 OCZ 12GB DDR3 GOLD/Platinum mix 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung Spinpoint F1 1TB Western digital 300GB Western digital Caviar Blue 1TB Samsung 840 EVO 250Gb 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
generic LG DVD WC'd , Supreme LT, NexXxoS Xtreme III 360, Phob... Windows 7 x64 Samsung 27" LED S27A550B 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
ACER 23" x233H Dell U3415W Logitech G11 Chieftec 850W 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Phanteks enthoo luxe Razer deathAdder respawn steelseries Qck Yamaha HTR-6130 AV Receiver 
AudioAudio
Yamaha NS-50B floor tower speakers miditech Audiolink II stereo sound card 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 OC 4.0 GHz 1.35v HT on Asus P6T 1366 SLI Gigabyte GTX 970 OCZ 12GB DDR3 GOLD/Platinum mix 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung Spinpoint F1 1TB Western digital 300GB Western digital Caviar Blue 1TB Samsung 840 EVO 250Gb 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
generic LG DVD WC'd , Supreme LT, NexXxoS Xtreme III 360, Phob... Windows 7 x64 Samsung 27" LED S27A550B 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
ACER 23" x233H Dell U3415W Logitech G11 Chieftec 850W 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Phanteks enthoo luxe Razer deathAdder respawn steelseries Qck Yamaha HTR-6130 AV Receiver 
AudioAudio
Yamaha NS-50B floor tower speakers miditech Audiolink II stereo sound card 
  hide details  
Reply
post #182 of 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by dantoddd View Post

Thanks for that explanation about CPUs being better at doing physics than GPUs.
So what is your best guess as to how nvidia is getting much better performance in certain games.
To be concise, GPUs are actually generally better at providing throughput calculating physics.... but CPUs offer lower latency. The latency is important to gaming.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bit_reaper View Post

When did Nvidia limit some features to GPU only? As far as I'm aware all the PhysX code/features can be run in software mode on the CPU (thou this is slow as hell). I heard some rumors that Nvidia actually deliberately hampers PhysX performance on the CPU in order to hold on to the exclusive effects. After the way they disabled AA in Arkham City I would not put it past them.
Who? Amd? Do you really think it would be wise for AMD to rely on Nvidia to optimize PhysX to run on there hardware? That's why I said it will not be widely used as long as it is property.
The way Nvidia lobbies PhysX is holding game advancement back. If game companies used more open engines we would see much more cloth/fluid and other physics simulations that actually run's on every ones hardware. Have you heard of Hydrophobia by any chance? That game has a wonderful physics engine that does really realistic water simulation on the CPU.
As lordikon I to think GPU PhysX is gimmicky and unnecessary.

Proprietary, not property wink.gif


The little story behind video game physics is that Intel killed GPU-based physics. Back in 2006, both ATI and NVIDIA had demos with HavokFX.... GPU-based Havok. In fall of 2007, Intel acquired Havok and killed HavokFX. Due to this, NVIDIA went out and bought Ageia who created PhysX.
Edited by DuckieHo - 2/3/12 at 6:31am
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 #183 of 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckieHo View Post

To be concise, GPUs are actually generally better at providing throughput calculating physics.... but CPUs offer lower latency. The latency is important to gaming.
Proprietary, not property wink.gif
The little story behind video game physics is that Intel killed GPU-based physics. Back in 2006, both ATI and NVIDIA had demos with HavokFX.... GPU-based Havok. In fall of 2007, Intel acquired Havok and killed HavokFX. Due to this, NVIDIA went out and bought Ageia who created PhysX.

Fixed. Thanks. I know the difference but some times I throw a word into google for a quick spelcheck and well don't get the word I was looking for rolleyes.gif
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 OC 4.0 GHz 1.35v HT on Asus P6T 1366 SLI Gigabyte GTX 970 OCZ 12GB DDR3 GOLD/Platinum mix 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung Spinpoint F1 1TB Western digital 300GB Western digital Caviar Blue 1TB Samsung 840 EVO 250Gb 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
generic LG DVD WC'd , Supreme LT, NexXxoS Xtreme III 360, Phob... Windows 7 x64 Samsung 27" LED S27A550B 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
ACER 23" x233H Dell U3415W Logitech G11 Chieftec 850W 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Phanteks enthoo luxe Razer deathAdder respawn steelseries Qck Yamaha HTR-6130 AV Receiver 
AudioAudio
Yamaha NS-50B floor tower speakers miditech Audiolink II stereo sound card 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 OC 4.0 GHz 1.35v HT on Asus P6T 1366 SLI Gigabyte GTX 970 OCZ 12GB DDR3 GOLD/Platinum mix 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung Spinpoint F1 1TB Western digital 300GB Western digital Caviar Blue 1TB Samsung 840 EVO 250Gb 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
generic LG DVD WC'd , Supreme LT, NexXxoS Xtreme III 360, Phob... Windows 7 x64 Samsung 27" LED S27A550B 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
ACER 23" x233H Dell U3415W Logitech G11 Chieftec 850W 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Phanteks enthoo luxe Razer deathAdder respawn steelseries Qck Yamaha HTR-6130 AV Receiver 
AudioAudio
Yamaha NS-50B floor tower speakers miditech Audiolink II stereo sound card 
  hide details  
Reply
post #184 of 204
It's all blabla and rumours till now. I won't buy anything untill Keplers will get released and we have solid legit benchmarks and reviews so I can compare reds with greens.
post #185 of 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brutuz View Post

This is the new release gen, it doesn't matter that much as GTX 700 and HD8k will be out pretty fast after these new GPUs. nVidia do need to get back in line with AMD though.
Yet to see any major issue with either AMD or nVidia recently, and if we're going to use older drivers as an example...Well, I had HD4890 CFX with two screens, a setup notorious for being buggy. Not a single bug that I couldn't trace back to an unstable memory OC (900Mhz @ CL4-4-4-10-1T was pushing it a bit much for my DDR2)
Now, lets compare that to nVidia drivers on my GTX 275 I had afterwards...I'd get random driver crashes when I skipped forward in a video in VLC or Media Player Classic too much, which required a restart to fix. That's it. Since I got the GTX 470, it's been flawless though, same with a friends HD6870 CFX. (Bar a bit of Microstutter)
I'm curious, do you have any reason to say AMD has bad drivers, apart from what you read on the internet? Quite a few people still mention it from when they apparently did (I won't say they had perfect drivers, but I'm pretty sure if people had checked their OCs much more thoroughly then there'd have been a lot less issues...) without actually having any experience, even though the information is out-dated and invalid for todays drivers
.
As of today, AMD has yet to release a fix for the CF 7970 issues. Constant stutter on my fathers system using the same gpu's, just a different brand. Of course Nvidia has it's problems, but their drivers are much better than AMD's. Buy two 7970's and get back to me, until then, you have no idea what you're talking about.
Edited by Khemhotep - 2/3/12 at 7:29am
post #186 of 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khemhotep View Post

As of today, AMD has yet to release a fix for the CF 7970 issues. Spare me the brand loyalty excuses, I actually own a cfx 7970 setup.
Constant stutter on my fathers system using the same gpu's, just a different brand. Of course Nvidia has it's problems, but their drivers are much better than AMD's. Buy two 7970's and get back to me, until then, you have no idea what you're talking about. The "ism" around is pretty ridiculous. rolleyes.gif

I'm calling shens on this, unless you can substantiate it. I have 7970 crossfire and while AMD is by no means perfect, the only issue out of 50+ games in my steam/origin libraries and other games is that the Batman: AC CAP needs to be updated. You can use the snipping tool (included with windows) to post proof of your so called 7970 crossfire desktop, along with your username in notepad, I await anxiously. thumb.gif
Edited by xoleras - 2/3/12 at 7:30am
post #187 of 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khemhotep View Post

You get that 580 lightining back from RMA? winksmiley02.gif

I've posted pics of them before, and they're sold now. I can try to dig those up, i've posted plenty of pics. Mainly of stuff with nvidia inspector and such. I think I know who you are as well, its good to see that you started a new account, was the old one banned?

In any case, you're deflecting. If you can't post pics, thats fine, I understand.
Quote:
Nope, I'm not posting anything. I have my reason why

Good stuff thumb.gif So i'll excuse you for your nonsense about crossfire drivers.
post #188 of 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bit_reaper View Post

When did Nvidia limit some features to GPU only?

They're not, but if you tried to do all the PhysX GPU effects on the CPU it would hurt the framerate quite a bit. PhysX isn't nearly as efficient as Havok, or as multi-threaded, well, at least it wasn't as of about 2 years ago when I last was using it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bit_reaper View Post

As far as I'm aware all the PhysX code/features can be run in software mode on the CPU (thou this is slow as hell). I heard some rumors that Nvidia actually deliberately hampers PhysX performance on the CPU in order to hold on to the exclusive effects. After the way they disabled AA in Arkham City I would not put it past them.

It's not that they're intentionally making it worse on the CPU, it's just that they weren't properly optimizing it for the CPU. It's probably intentional that they're not putting as much effort into the CPU side of things, seeing as how they're a GPU company and want people buying their GPUs to run their effects, whereas with something like Havok you can just use a CPU for all of it, so long as you have the extra threads available.
Foldatron
(17 items)
 
Mat
(10 items)
 
Work iMac
(9 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 950 EVGA x58 3-way SLI EVGA GTX 660ti GTX 275 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
3x2GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-1600 80GB Intel X25-M SSD 2TB WD Black 150GB WD Raptor 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
2x 150GB WD V-raptor in RAID0 Win7 Home 64-bit OEM 55" LED 120hz 1080p Vizio MS Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000 
PowerCase
750W PC P&C Silencer CoolerMaster 690 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5 2500S AMD 6770M 8GB (2x4GB) at 1333Mhz 1TB, 7200 rpm 
Optical DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
LG 8X Dual-Layer "SuperDrive" OS X Lion 27" iMac screen Mac wireless keyboard 
Mouse
Mac wireless mouse 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7-2600K AMD 6970M 1GB 16GB PC3-10600 DDR3 1TB 7200rpm 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256GB SSD 8x DL "SuperDrive" OS X 10.7 Lion 27" 2560x1440 iMac display 
Monitor
27" Apple thunderbolt display 
  hide details  
Reply
Foldatron
(17 items)
 
Mat
(10 items)
 
Work iMac
(9 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 950 EVGA x58 3-way SLI EVGA GTX 660ti GTX 275 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
3x2GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-1600 80GB Intel X25-M SSD 2TB WD Black 150GB WD Raptor 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
2x 150GB WD V-raptor in RAID0 Win7 Home 64-bit OEM 55" LED 120hz 1080p Vizio MS Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000 
PowerCase
750W PC P&C Silencer CoolerMaster 690 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5 2500S AMD 6770M 8GB (2x4GB) at 1333Mhz 1TB, 7200 rpm 
Optical DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
LG 8X Dual-Layer "SuperDrive" OS X Lion 27" iMac screen Mac wireless keyboard 
Mouse
Mac wireless mouse 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7-2600K AMD 6970M 1GB 16GB PC3-10600 DDR3 1TB 7200rpm 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256GB SSD 8x DL "SuperDrive" OS X 10.7 Lion 27" 2560x1440 iMac display 
Monitor
27" Apple thunderbolt display 
  hide details  
Reply
post #189 of 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khemhotep View Post

FA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khemhotep View Post

.

Two excellent posts, back to back.

And I'll make it three.

And somewhat related, you have no avatar, rep, or sig rig. frown.gif
Foldatron
(17 items)
 
Mat
(10 items)
 
Work iMac
(9 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 950 EVGA x58 3-way SLI EVGA GTX 660ti GTX 275 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
3x2GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-1600 80GB Intel X25-M SSD 2TB WD Black 150GB WD Raptor 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
2x 150GB WD V-raptor in RAID0 Win7 Home 64-bit OEM 55" LED 120hz 1080p Vizio MS Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000 
PowerCase
750W PC P&C Silencer CoolerMaster 690 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5 2500S AMD 6770M 8GB (2x4GB) at 1333Mhz 1TB, 7200 rpm 
Optical DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
LG 8X Dual-Layer "SuperDrive" OS X Lion 27" iMac screen Mac wireless keyboard 
Mouse
Mac wireless mouse 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7-2600K AMD 6970M 1GB 16GB PC3-10600 DDR3 1TB 7200rpm 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256GB SSD 8x DL "SuperDrive" OS X 10.7 Lion 27" 2560x1440 iMac display 
Monitor
27" Apple thunderbolt display 
  hide details  
Reply
Foldatron
(17 items)
 
Mat
(10 items)
 
Work iMac
(9 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 950 EVGA x58 3-way SLI EVGA GTX 660ti GTX 275 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
3x2GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-1600 80GB Intel X25-M SSD 2TB WD Black 150GB WD Raptor 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
2x 150GB WD V-raptor in RAID0 Win7 Home 64-bit OEM 55" LED 120hz 1080p Vizio MS Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000 
PowerCase
750W PC P&C Silencer CoolerMaster 690 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5 2500S AMD 6770M 8GB (2x4GB) at 1333Mhz 1TB, 7200 rpm 
Optical DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
LG 8X Dual-Layer "SuperDrive" OS X Lion 27" iMac screen Mac wireless keyboard 
Mouse
Mac wireless mouse 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7-2600K AMD 6970M 1GB 16GB PC3-10600 DDR3 1TB 7200rpm 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256GB SSD 8x DL "SuperDrive" OS X 10.7 Lion 27" 2560x1440 iMac display 
Monitor
27" Apple thunderbolt display 
  hide details  
Reply
post #190 of 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordikon View Post

Two excellent posts, back to back.
And I'll make it three.
And somewhat related, you have no avatar, rep, or sig rig. frown.gif

InB4 new Kepler rumor shows up and this conversation shifts to that thread.
 
PS4 Pro
(1 item)
 
Beast II
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
3930k 4.5ghz Asus X79 Sabertooth 980Ti Lightning 1500mhz 980Ti Lightning 1500mhz 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
Corsair Dominator 16gb 1866 240gb Corsair Force GT SSD Corsair H100 Windows 10 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Acer Predator X34 LogiTech G110 CoolMaster 1200w Silent Pro Gold Azza Hurricane 2000 
Mouse
LogiTech G500 
Monitor
Samsung UN40MU7000 4K 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
8700k 5.0ghz  Coffee Lake "awaiting boards" Volta gpu 32GB DDR4 3200 Corsair Vengeance  
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
500gb Samsung Evo SSD Corsair H100i v2 SP120 RGB Fans Windows 10 Professional 64 Bit  Samsung UN40MU7000 4K HDR 
PowerCase
EVGA 750W SuperNova Corsair Crystal Series 460X RGB 
  hide details  
Reply
 
PS4 Pro
(1 item)
 
Beast II
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
3930k 4.5ghz Asus X79 Sabertooth 980Ti Lightning 1500mhz 980Ti Lightning 1500mhz 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
Corsair Dominator 16gb 1866 240gb Corsair Force GT SSD Corsair H100 Windows 10 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Acer Predator X34 LogiTech G110 CoolMaster 1200w Silent Pro Gold Azza Hurricane 2000 
Mouse
LogiTech G500 
Monitor
Samsung UN40MU7000 4K 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
8700k 5.0ghz  Coffee Lake "awaiting boards" Volta gpu 32GB DDR4 3200 Corsair Vengeance  
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
500gb Samsung Evo SSD Corsair H100i v2 SP120 RGB Fans Windows 10 Professional 64 Bit  Samsung UN40MU7000 4K HDR 
PowerCase
EVGA 750W SuperNova Corsair Crystal Series 460X RGB 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [SemiAccurate] Physics hardware makes Kepler/GK104 fast