Confused about Physx

Hi, I'm thinking of getting a mid-range Nvidia card to tide me over until DirectX 11 appears on the scene and then use it as a Physx card whilst the 'next big thing' takes over graphx duties. However, I haven't seen any comparisons for Physx cards, eg 8800GT vs Ageia PCI vs 9600GT or whatever.

Has anyone already started using their old graphics card as a supplementary Physx device yet, and if so, what have the results been like? I think the only game I currently have that may benefit is Unreal Tournament 3.

Can u turn the effects up and down? And what would be the minimum recommended card (I was thinking 9800GTX+)?

I can hardly understand the shaders/ROPs/TMUs stuff for graphics, how am I supposed to work out what a good spec would be for Physx?! :O_o1:

Physx doesn't need anywhere near as powerful a card as the 9800GTX+, that's total overkill!
something more like the 9400 - 9600 would be better as a 'Physx' card

Even a 8200 IGP would be more than sufficient to perform PhysX computations. The rest of the GPU ticks just go to waste if you go higher than that.

Just get a decent graphics card and you should be able to use PhysX at 1920x1200. I thought it'd be really taxing but it wasn't.

Or just pick up an 8800 or 9600 card :) (GT's that is)

I have an 8800gt (G92), It was one of the best vfm cards out there till a while ago.
If Physx isn't necessary i'd recommend an hd4850.

I think performance is 10-20% better than that of 8800GT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr47

I have an 8800gt (G92), It was one of the best vfm cards out there till a while ago.
If Physx isn't necessary i'd recommend an hd4850.

I think performance is 10-20% better than that of 8800GT

---

It's the same sort of performance as a 9800GTX :)

but 4850 is cheaper :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr47

but 4850 is cheaper :P

---

yeap :P

Just not sure on power consumption differences ;)

I've seen a couple of articles that may be of interest:

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/mirr...ance/page4.asp
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,6..._Nvidia_Physx/

Short version is that you need something in the region of an 8600GT to 9600GT to get equivalent performance to an Ageia PPU. Low end cards like the 8400GS just aren't powerful enough to run it, and will actually degrade the performance of a higher end card like a GTX260 if used for PhysX.

In terms of performance per watt, the Ageia PPUs (around 10w) are far better for running PhysX than nVIDIA GPUs. Apparrently they're awkward to get running though and I wouldn't be surprised if nVIDIA kills driver support for them in the future.

An Ageia PPU will still work with ATI cards in Mirror's Edge if you turn up the right drivers though (HD4870 + PPU gives about the same performance as a single GTX260). Alternatively you could mix ATI and nVIDIA cards in either Windows XP or 7. Vista won't let you mix nVIDIA and ATI though.

unless we see more game actually useing physx esp in a real way (most games seem to just use it for added debris atm) I'd not be overly worried about it
I'd not look at a card lower than a 8800gt/9800gt (they are the same card) as any lower really wouldn't be worth replaceing your x1950xt for.

You might under windows 7 be able to mix and match anyway with a primary ATI adapter and Nvidia card for physX. Not with vista though since its limited to one adapter at a time.