Not liking the temps:
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/...rce_9800_gtx+/
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/731/1/
Couple of good comparisons... 9800gtx+ and 4850 are very close, but the 9800gtx+ is slightly ahead and should pull further ahead when physx is properly implemented in games.
I really dont understand why physics will help the card perform, at the end of the day the cards are bottlenecked without using its time and power on physics so i would think that physiscs would slow it down? if the cpu are not going 100% load then why does the job from the cpu need to be diverted? the only way physicx processors were useful was because cpu's were not the best back then and so a dedicated item for that was useful now its just a dead weight. Care to enlighten me?
(im really curious how it will work , not having a go just so u know.)
I haven't got a clue... I am just trying to hype it up a bit because everyone else is anti-hyping it... I reckon it will make a small difference...
The best thing to do is, forget what everyone (including me!) says about physx until its been properly reviewed... everything people is saying is speculation... so far all we know is that it adds some 3d marks (but who cares about 3d marks )
Fixed?*
It doesn't even do that officially unless FM change their policy But yes, your right, it needs to be reviewed in a sensible fashion, then we'll know for sure.The best thing to do is, forget what everyone (including me!) says about physx until its been properly reviewed... everything people is saying is speculation... so far all we know is that it adds some 3d marks (but who cares about 3d marks )
*I'm jealous really - even your 'spare' card is much faster than my 1950xt
lol... I am happy with my purchase either way... I have been using it for the last 3 months so I am hardly bothered about price cuts...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)