Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [TH]Nvidia Smokes 3DMark Thanks to PhysX
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[TH]Nvidia Smokes 3DMark Thanks to PhysX - Page 2  

post #11 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somenoob View Post
Ok so Futuremark uses hardware accelerated PhysX in vantage but not DX10.1?
the irony... shouldn't this bench be called 3DMark nVantage?
Centurion
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II 940 @3.3GHz 1.25V Gigabyte 790X-DS4 XFX 5850 8GB OCZ DDR2-800 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Corsair Force 3 TRUE Win 7 Pro x64 ACER 23" TN  
PowerCase
400W Silverstone Strider Antec P182 
  hide details  
Centurion
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II 940 @3.3GHz 1.25V Gigabyte 790X-DS4 XFX 5850 8GB OCZ DDR2-800 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Corsair Force 3 TRUE Win 7 Pro x64 ACER 23" TN  
PowerCase
400W Silverstone Strider Antec P182 
  hide details  
post #12 of 36
i daresay the benefits from physx are more than those of dx10.1
post #13 of 36
just me or did anyone else notice that the CPU was oc'ed hella lot more in the second test, and I think that ATI will do just fine expecailly considering that hardly anything uses physics.
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
955 BE Crosshair V MSI 6950 twin frozr III 8GB Vengence 1600MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
F3 1TB ASUS 24" Asus 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair AX850 Corsair 600T White Mionix Naos 5000 
  hide details  
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
955 BE Crosshair V MSI 6950 twin frozr III 8GB Vengence 1600MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
F3 1TB ASUS 24" Asus 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair AX850 Corsair 600T White Mionix Naos 5000 
  hide details  
post #14 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sikozu View Post
Quite frankly saying it smokes ATI is rubbish. You cant compare one to the other, when nvidia has physX running.

Also when running with physX on, it decieves you even more than a normal run since hardly any games have physX and the ones that do, dont even need it. I run UT3 on max settings at 1680x1050 and get nothing but silky smooth frame rates. Same story with every other physX game I own. Note I DONT use the physX drivers.
From my understanding, PhysX adds features to the games. It doesn't make them run better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bionh View Post
i daresay the benefits from physx are more than those of dx10.1
The evidence abound would seem to contradict your statement.
BladeRunner v3.0
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 4.6GHz Core, 4.4GHz Cache ASUS X99 Sabertooth Sapphire R9 380 Dual-X OC G.Skill TridentZ 32GB DDR4 @ 13-15-13-33-1T 320... 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 Home 64-bit Logitech G910 Orion Spark 
PowerCaseMouse
EVGA SuperNova 1000W T2 NZXT Phantom 820 Black Logitech G5 
  hide details  
BladeRunner v3.0
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 4.6GHz Core, 4.4GHz Cache ASUS X99 Sabertooth Sapphire R9 380 Dual-X OC G.Skill TridentZ 32GB DDR4 @ 13-15-13-33-1T 320... 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 Home 64-bit Logitech G910 Orion Spark 
PowerCaseMouse
EVGA SuperNova 1000W T2 NZXT Phantom 820 Black Logitech G5 
  hide details  
post #15 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sikozu View Post
Quite frankly saying it smokes ATI is rubbish. You cant compare one to the other, when nvidia has physX running.

Also when running with physX on, it decieves you even more than a normal run since hardly any games have physX and the ones that do, dont even need it. I run UT3 on max settings at 1680x1050 and get nothing but silky smooth frame rates. Same story with every other physX game I own. Note I DONT use the physX drivers.
Um. Of course you can. Saying you can't compare them is like saying you can't compare a ATI Rage 128 Pro with a GTX280 because one is over $600 and the other one could probably be found for free.

You just won't get the same advantage in all games.
post #16 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by stargate125645 View Post
From my understanding, PhysX adds features to the games. It doesn't make them run better.
It will work like that: If u run a game with PhysX then it will run better with video card doing physics, since GPU will do it much faster than CPU. If u don't have supporting video card then CPU will do physics.
post #17 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nowyn View Post
It will work like that: If u run a game with PhysX then it will run better with video card doing physics, since GPU will do it much faster than CPU. If u don't have supporting video card then CPU will do physics.
No, because PhysX currently doesn't run on the CPU (or at least it never used to). You either have CUDA or a PhysX card.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LegendaryC View Post
Um. Of course you can. Saying you can't compare them is like saying you can't compare a ATI Rage 128 Pro with a GTX280 because one is over $600 and the other one could probably be found for free.

You just won't get the same advantage in all games.
No, they are not comparable because PhysX is a proprietary technology that is not widely available or used. When/if ATI gets support for it, then you can compare. If ATI had been given the choice to add PhysX support into their cards but chose not to then you would have a point, but as it stands that is not how it works. Futuremark made a dirty move by adding PhysX when very few games with any popularity support it, and then following that up by not utilizing DX10.1. There is no reason for PhysX to be in 3DMark Vantage. Period.
Edited by stargate125645 - 6/22/08 at 10:23am
BladeRunner v3.0
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 4.6GHz Core, 4.4GHz Cache ASUS X99 Sabertooth Sapphire R9 380 Dual-X OC G.Skill TridentZ 32GB DDR4 @ 13-15-13-33-1T 320... 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 Home 64-bit Logitech G910 Orion Spark 
PowerCaseMouse
EVGA SuperNova 1000W T2 NZXT Phantom 820 Black Logitech G5 
  hide details  
BladeRunner v3.0
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 4.6GHz Core, 4.4GHz Cache ASUS X99 Sabertooth Sapphire R9 380 Dual-X OC G.Skill TridentZ 32GB DDR4 @ 13-15-13-33-1T 320... 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 Home 64-bit Logitech G910 Orion Spark 
PowerCaseMouse
EVGA SuperNova 1000W T2 NZXT Phantom 820 Black Logitech G5 
  hide details  
post #18 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegendaryC View Post
Um. Of course you can. Saying you can't compare them is like saying you can't compare a ATI Rage 128 Pro with a GTX280 because one is over $600 and the other one could probably be found for free.

You just won't get the same advantage in all games.
You could say that if it was a game being discussed, but it isn't. It's a synthetic benchmark that is meant to make an accurate comparison between different video cards. Obviously this comparison is rendered worthless if it is shown that it clearly favors one side because it only chooses to include certain features.

I think including only PhysX would be perfectly acceptable if ATI didn't have a specific API to compete on this front, but now it has been revealed that they'll have Havok support. Although I don't expect 3dMark to have Havok support yet, but when it is fully implemented they need to add a test if they want to remain fair. In the same respect, I think they should also have a DX10.1 test as well.
post #19 of 36
I think they mean because Vantage was (supposedly) NVidia optimized?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Somenoob View Post
Ok so Futuremark uses hardware accelerated PhysX in vantage but not DX10.1?
Exactly.....that would give ATI an edge with AA support and we can't do that, can we?

Furthermore I don't really see how Physx support is even relevant in a gaming oriented benchmark, as VERY few games even support Physx.....
Edited by binormalkilla - 6/22/08 at 10:31am
PWNzershreck
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4930K @ 4.6 GHz ASUS Rampage IV Black Edition MSI GTX 1080 FE Heatkiller Acetal 16 GB Corsair Vengeance 1600C9 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2x Samsung 840 Pro  ASUS DVD-RW SATA Koolance 380i & 2x HW Labs 480GTX Arch Linux x86_64, Windows 7 x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG UC88-B Ultrawide, ASUS VS278Q Ducky Corsair AX1200i Caselabs STH10 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G500 Func 1030 ASUS Xonar Essence STX 
  hide details  
PWNzershreck
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4930K @ 4.6 GHz ASUS Rampage IV Black Edition MSI GTX 1080 FE Heatkiller Acetal 16 GB Corsair Vengeance 1600C9 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2x Samsung 840 Pro  ASUS DVD-RW SATA Koolance 380i & 2x HW Labs 480GTX Arch Linux x86_64, Windows 7 x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG UC88-B Ultrawide, ASUS VS278Q Ducky Corsair AX1200i Caselabs STH10 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G500 Func 1030 ASUS Xonar Essence STX 
  hide details  
post #20 of 36
Wonder what results dual R700's and Havok will give...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [TH]Nvidia Smokes 3DMark Thanks to PhysX