QUOTE='seanmcloughlin'I have a Gigabyte GTX 560 Ti 1 GB @ 950 MHz and an AMD phenom II x4 955 BE. So which is better to have doing Physx?
![]()
Or does it even matter?hitman6actualFor games that actually utilize the Physx engine, your GPU should always be doing it. Your CPU can do the same job, but do it in a much slower fashion. For the most part though, Physx isn't widely used, and I would be careful when turning it on, even on your GPU, as it needlessness decreases your in-game performance for no reason IMO.Yeah I might just leave it off as the only game I have that uses it is Metro 2033. And it doesn't really add much to it except gobble up my fps. QUOTE='seanmcloughlin'I have a Gigabyte GTX 560 Ti 1 GB @ 950 MHz and an AMD phenom II x4 955 BE. So which is better to have doing Physx?
![]()
A number of years ago, when Havok was owned by Intel, they offered a binary distribution for Windows. Intel sponsored this as a marketing tool to help promote the sale of Intel processors, and to fight the idea of GPU-accelerated physics such as PhysX (which leverages NVidia's CUDA).
![]()
Or does it even matter?hitman6actualFor games that actually utilize the Physx engine, your GPU should always be doing it. Your CPU can do the same job, but do it in a much slower fashion. For the most part though, Physx isn't widely used, and I would be careful when turning it on, even on your GPU, as it needlessness decreases your in-game performance for no reason IMO.Thats a bit of a misconception, many games use physx, even on consoles. Every single unreal engine 3 game uses Physx for example. There are very few games in comparison that have fancy optional hardware accelerated physx stuff like mirrors edge.
QUOTE='hitman6actual'QUOTE='seanmcloughlin'I have a Gigabyte GTX 560 Ti 1 GB @ 950 MHz and an AMD phenom II x4 955 BE. So which is better to have doing Physx? Or does it even matter?ferret-gamerFor games that actually utilize the Physx engine, your GPU should always be doing it. Your CPU can do the same job, but do it in a much slower fashion. For the most part though, Physx isn't widely used, and I would be careful when turning it on, even on your GPU, as it needlessness decreases your in-game performance for no reason IMO.Thats a bit of a misconception, many games use physx, even on consoles. Every single unreal engine 3 game uses Physx for example. There are very few games in comparison that have fancy optional hardware accelerated physx stuff like mirrors edge.in total 15 games use physx.I checked nvidias site, most of those games are crap.
Also radeon cards use havok for its physics so theres no real difference. QUOTE='ferret-gamer'QUOTE='hitman6actual'For games that actually utilize the Physx engine, your GPU should always be doing it. Your CPU can do the same job, but do it in a much slower fashion. For the most part though, Physx isn't widely used, and I would be careful when turning it on, even on your GPU, as it needlessness decreases your in-game performance for no reason IMO. Blaznwiipspman1Thats a bit of a misconception, many games use physx, even on consoles. Every single unreal engine 3 game uses Physx for example.
There are very few games in comparison that have fancy optional hardware accelerated physx stuff like mirrors edge.in total 15 games use physx.I checked nvidias site, most of those games are crap. Also radeon cards use havok for its physics so theres no real difference1. Nvidia's website lists alot more than 15 games, it lists over 70 actually. Even games exclusive to consoles can use physx.2. Radeon cards do not use Havok. The Havok FX project was canceled years ago.
AMD is working with Bullet physics to make a hardware implmentation, but no games have released using it.3. Havok is a CPU only physics engine, any computer can use it regardless of card.
![]() Comments are closed.
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
January 2023
Categories |