Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Are Intel processors powerful enough to run Physx and Cuda?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Are Intel processors powerful enough to run Physx and Cuda?

post #1 of 7
Thread Starter 
Isn't it a myth that the Intel processors are powerful enough to run Physx and Cuda? Ati fan boys keep saying that their Ati graphics card can run Physx and Cuda mostly because of their intel cpu.

I thought Physx and Cuda were only in Nvidia's Graphics cards not the Intel processor? They acted like the games are fully playable with Physx on too. Are they telling truth or are they what I suspect as Fan Boys? I was on youtube, and they kept bragging and claiming I overpaid for Nvidia's gpu when Ati is better and that their processor can do Physx and Cuda without Nvidia's gpu. I am calling their bluff.


They are also saying Physx is dated technology and that the future is Ati. Are they right? If it's true and Physx is dated and Havoc is the future. Is it time to drop support for Nvidia?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-Yuyc8W-U0
post #2 of 7
You can run Physx on a CPU even thought its not recommended, Physx can be runned on AMD cards and Nvidia blocked it but people always break the limit that Nvidia puts. You can also have Physx run on Nvidias only and AMD's/ATI's will be fully for the game(SLI-Crossfire Hybrid)...

Its not a complete BS, Physx is not used and Nvidia just pays the developers to implement Physx since its just another way to make people buy their cards, Havok is better than Physx since its more open and more optimized. Physx is just for graphic galore, nothing else...

Its not a BS, its a fact... and proven numerous times.
post #3 of 7
Nobody really like Physx.
Sure the tech is cool but you can get the same effects if they programmed it into the game engine. You can get the same effect out of using open CL if you wanted.

Really Physx as a property API should die and something totally open should take its place. Not only that but Physx is kinda doggy and same games take a real big performance hit with it on. I do not care about Physx support and find it kinda dull, I go for the price/performance.
Red Dragon
(19 items)
 
HTPC
(20 items)
 
HomeServer
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 2600K @4.8ghz Asrock p67 Extreme4 GTX1080 G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 16GB 9-11-11-31 2133MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
3x 640 WD blacks Raid 0 Mushkin Enhanced Reactor 512GB SSD Sandisk 1TB SSD Samsung 470 Series 128GB SSD 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
XSPC Raystorm Windows 10 64bit Microboard m340clz 100hz 3440x1440 Corsair K70 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
TX850 HAF922 Logitech G502 Creative Sound Blaster Z  
AudioAudioAudio
Elac B6 & Dayton Audio SUB-800 Yamaha HTR-5790 Audio Technica ATH-A700 headphones 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q9550 @ 4GHZ Gigabyte EP45 UD3P GTX470 4GB OCZ Reaper 1150mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Western Digital Blue 500gb OCZ Vertex 2 60GB LG Bluray Corsair H50 
OSKeyboardPowerCase
Windows 7 Home Premium  Logitech K400 Corsair CX500 nMEDIAPC 6000B 
AudioOtherOtherOther
Yamaha HTR-5063 PS3 80GB BC PS3 with 250GB hard drive. Polk Audio Monitor 60s Bi-AMP Front Polk Audio Monitor 30s Rear 
OtherOther
Polk Audio CS1 Center Polk Audio PSW10 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Xeon Harpertown 3.6ghz Asus P5Q SE/R HD7770 4GB DDR2 800mhz Corsair 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
5TB Toshiba 5TB Toshiba 5TB Toshiba 2TB Hitachi 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
2TB Seagate 2TB Western Digital 1TB Hitachi Windows Home Server 2011 
Power
Corsair CX500 
  hide details  
Reply
Red Dragon
(19 items)
 
HTPC
(20 items)
 
HomeServer
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 2600K @4.8ghz Asrock p67 Extreme4 GTX1080 G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 16GB 9-11-11-31 2133MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
3x 640 WD blacks Raid 0 Mushkin Enhanced Reactor 512GB SSD Sandisk 1TB SSD Samsung 470 Series 128GB SSD 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
XSPC Raystorm Windows 10 64bit Microboard m340clz 100hz 3440x1440 Corsair K70 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
TX850 HAF922 Logitech G502 Creative Sound Blaster Z  
AudioAudioAudio
Elac B6 & Dayton Audio SUB-800 Yamaha HTR-5790 Audio Technica ATH-A700 headphones 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q9550 @ 4GHZ Gigabyte EP45 UD3P GTX470 4GB OCZ Reaper 1150mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Western Digital Blue 500gb OCZ Vertex 2 60GB LG Bluray Corsair H50 
OSKeyboardPowerCase
Windows 7 Home Premium  Logitech K400 Corsair CX500 nMEDIAPC 6000B 
AudioOtherOtherOther
Yamaha HTR-5063 PS3 80GB BC PS3 with 250GB hard drive. Polk Audio Monitor 60s Bi-AMP Front Polk Audio Monitor 30s Rear 
OtherOther
Polk Audio CS1 Center Polk Audio PSW10 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Xeon Harpertown 3.6ghz Asus P5Q SE/R HD7770 4GB DDR2 800mhz Corsair 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
5TB Toshiba 5TB Toshiba 5TB Toshiba 2TB Hitachi 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
2TB Seagate 2TB Western Digital 1TB Hitachi Windows Home Server 2011 
Power
Corsair CX500 
  hide details  
Reply
post #4 of 7
I suggest you do your own research, and come to your own conclusion on the matter.

I wonder how many people around here know that AMD was at one point interested in buying AGEIA?

AMD and PhysX: History of the Problem
http://physxinfo.com/news/2279/amd-and-physx-history-of-the-problem/

NVIDIA responds to AMD's attack on Physx
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,706466/AMD-vs-Nvidia-Nvidia-responds-to-AMDs-attack-on-Physx/News/

http://physxinfo.com/articles/?page_id=154
2010rig
(14 items)
 
Galaxy S3
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5660 @ 4.5  ASUS P6X58D-E 980TI? 12GB OCZ Platinum - 7-7-7-21 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1 80GB SSD x25m - 3TB F3 + F4 NH-D14 Windows 7 Ultimate LG 47LH55 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Natural Wireless Keyboard Corsair 750HX CM 690 II Advanced MX 518 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Snapdragon S4 Dual core 1500mhz Adreno 225 Samsung 2GB 16GB Onboard Flash 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Android 4.4.2 - CM11 4.8" AMOLED 1280x720 2100 mAh battery Otterbox Defender 
  hide details  
Reply
2010rig
(14 items)
 
Galaxy S3
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5660 @ 4.5  ASUS P6X58D-E 980TI? 12GB OCZ Platinum - 7-7-7-21 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1 80GB SSD x25m - 3TB F3 + F4 NH-D14 Windows 7 Ultimate LG 47LH55 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Natural Wireless Keyboard Corsair 750HX CM 690 II Advanced MX 518 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Snapdragon S4 Dual core 1500mhz Adreno 225 Samsung 2GB 16GB Onboard Flash 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Android 4.4.2 - CM11 4.8" AMOLED 1280x720 2100 mAh battery Otterbox Defender 
  hide details  
Reply
post #5 of 7
I have Nvidia cards and Physx is awesome, I don't notice it while gaming but i use it for Photoshop making normal maps and Maya for Physics simulations. Just thought someone should let you guys know its not just for gaming. When gaming in certain games for example GTA 4 if i change the physx settings from auto and choose a second card i get crazy physics in game like if i crash a car it will totally smash and crumple.
Using physx in Maya is awesome can do rigid body sims in a fraction of the time of using my cpu.

All fanBoys are stupid Nvidia and amd always really close, So do you like green or red lol
post #6 of 7
Thread Starter 
I feel like I'm more of a Nvida fanboy since why sacrifice graphics? I want all the special effects, not just some of them. But at same time, when it comes to price, I think Amd might be winning in that department both in gpu and cpu.
post #7 of 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by funnyman View Post

I feel like I'm more of a Nvida fanboy since why sacrifice graphics? I want all the special effects, not just some of them. But at same time, when it comes to price, I think Amd might be winning in that department both in gpu and cpu.

They still offer a slightly better price ratio on their gpu's but they have lost any such claims for processors... Don't get me wrong you still might be able to get a cheaper amd processor than an Intel, but Intel has drastically closed that gap, and the price/performance is so deep into Intel territory since the 2ng gen cores came out that I'm not sure if AMD will ever get it back.

That said though even with their GPUs I have run into way Kore driver related issues in games than I ever did with nvidia (especially when I added my 2nd 6950). I always had going with nvidia in the past and my next build will be nvidia as well (hopefully when haswel comes out)

My last nvidia was a 460 and though I obviously can get better from rates with my newer setup, the addition of physx to games that required it are missed... That said I do agree that CPU based physx is most likely what will win out in the future.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 3570k Batch# 3207B712 Asus P8Z77-V PRO Asus 6950 DCii (2gb) 8Gb Gskill Ares 1866 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
1x120Gb ssd, 1x750Gb, 2x1.5Tb raid0, 2x3Tb Asus 12x BD-RW AC Cuplex Kryos (water) Windows 7 Ultimate x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
73" Mitsubishi DLP (73738) MX 5500 Corsair AX750 NZXT Switch 810 
MouseMouse Pad
MX Revolution Xtrac Ripper 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 3570k Batch# 3207B712 Asus P8Z77-V PRO Asus 6950 DCii (2gb) 8Gb Gskill Ares 1866 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
1x120Gb ssd, 1x750Gb, 2x1.5Tb raid0, 2x3Tb Asus 12x BD-RW AC Cuplex Kryos (water) Windows 7 Ultimate x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
73" Mitsubishi DLP (73738) MX 5500 Corsair AX750 NZXT Switch 810 
MouseMouse Pad
MX Revolution Xtrac Ripper 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Intel CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Are Intel processors powerful enough to run Physx and Cuda?