Whiich VGA is the best PhysX card !!!

My system
CPU Core i7 Extreme 965 @ 3.4GHz vcore 1.38125V
Mainboard ASUS Rampage II Gene
Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit RTM
Driver ATI 10.4a
Driver NVIDIA 258.96 beta 64bit

Benchmark Demo Cryotasis, PhysX=ON, 1680*1050, Max Settings
http://forum.amtech.com.vn/attachmen...1&d=1280110014

ASUS HD 5850 @ 800/1150 + dedicated PhysX ASUS 9800 GT 512MB @ 600/1500/900
http://forum.amtech.com.vn/attachmen...1&d=1280110000

ASUS HD 5850 @ 800/1150 + dedicated PhysX ASUS 9600 GT 512MB @ 650/1625/900
http://forum.amtech.com.vn/attachmen...1&d=1280110000

ASUS HD 5850 @ 800/1150 + dedicated PhysX MSI 9600 GT 1GB @ 600/1500/700
http://forum.amtech.com.vn/attachmen...1&d=1280110000

ASUS HD 5850 @ 800/1150 + dedicated PhysX ASUS GTX 285 TOP 1GB @ 670/1550/1300
http://forum.amtech.com.vn/attachmen...1&d=1280110000

ASUS HD 5850 @ 800/1150 + dedicated PhysX ASUS GTX 460 768MB @ 675/1350/900
http://forum.amtech.com.vn/attachmen...1&d=1280110000

power consumption (full load with Cryotasis) ASUS HD 5850 @ 800/1150 + dedicated PhysX ASUS 9800 GT 512MB @ 600/1500/900 + i7 965 @ 3.4GHz vcore 1.38125V
http://forum.amtech.com.vn/attachmen...1&d=1280110014

power consumption (full load with Cryotasis) ASUS HD 5850 @ 800/1150 + dedicated PhysX MSI 9600 GT 1GB @ 600/1500/700 + i7 965 @ 3.4GHz vcore 1.38125V
http://forum.amtech.com.vn/attachmen...1&d=1280110014

And then I benchmark demo Cryotasis with single VGA

ASUS GTX 285 TOP 1GB @ 670/1550/1300
http://forum.amtech.com.vn/attachmen...1&d=1280110000

ASUS GTX 460 768MB @ 675/1350/900
http://forum.amtech.com.vn/attachmen...1&d=1280110000

ASUS GTX 460 768MB @ 800/1600/950
http://forum.amtech.com.vn/attachmen...1&d=1280110000

ASUS GTX 465 1GB @ 608/1215/802
http://forum.amtech.com.vn/attachmen...1&d=1280110000

ASUS GTX 465 1GB @ 700/1400/925
http://forum.amtech.com.vn/attachmen...1&d=1280110000

I am very disappointed with GTX460/465. Both VGAs are much weaker than the GTX 285 TOP in the processing of PhysX games.

I'm waiting until the Mafia 2 game officially released, but I can confirm that GT240 is the best PhysX card.

Do you agree with me?


Source : http://forum.amtech.com.vn/overclock...tml#post700580

So it looks like a 9600GT works just as good as any of the other cards.

I'm just going to use my old 9800gtx, it's good and paid for.

Well the 9800GTX is $50 currently at Fry's, so maybe I will go that way. Just curious, if you are benching, I know you can't use scores with physx turned, but what if you have a physx card installed? Still have to turn off physx?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Utnorris

Just curious, if you are benching, I know you can't use scores with physx turned, but what if you have a physx card installed? Still have to turn off physx?

---

You don't have to turn off PhysX in the Nvidia Control Panel, just go to Options in Vantage and select 'Disable PPU'. :)

Nice review, Guess any physx card will do the job seeming as its only for physx..

1.38v for 3.4ghz :eek:

i think it's funny the 285 does better than the 460. maybe cuz they optimized for tesselation etc?

anyway, the rest seems like the cheaper card will perform equally. i have both a gt240 and a gtx260 (216sp) and while the gtx260 gives me better fluidmark scores, i think the gaming difference isnt so noticeable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TRICHEESE

1.38v for 3.4ghz :eek:

---

Thats what I thought too. Bit over the top for a 3.4 ghz overclock.

Check out my post which basically nobody had much of a clue on

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=255896

I plan to do some serious phsyx tests in about a week or 2, as for the phsyx tests you took, it makes sense that all the different range of cards from different generations didn't have a huge gain since dedicated phsyx cards are fully allocated for use.

As for the tessellation being optimized it is irrelevant to a gpu's computing power, otherwise things like cuda would run slower. As for the people stating any phsyx would do, that varies with each game. Phsyx only kicks in where ever there is processing to be done. So newer games could really suffer from average dedicated phsyx card due to being ppu limited and other games can shed same results as higher generation cards due to limited amount of ppu effects in a game.

When it comes to running phsyx on a single card, it appears to be a percentage that is allocated, which i elaborate in my thread. Basically nvidia it seems is neutering there drivers, for all you know the gtx 460 could have a smaller percentage then a gtx 280 allocated for it, which doesn't make sense but your benches seem to prove it. The gtx 280 was the top of the line model for there last generation, if nvidia really is lowering percentage of what mainstream cards can do with phsyx(based from the results in your test), that would just be another sign of nvidia's tampering with drivers to sell higher cards.

EDIT:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3809/n...he-200-king/15

looking at the gtx 460 reviews the 460 is if anything a little faster then the 285. Just add's more proof that the phsyx is allocated less, possibly with mainstream cards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gatecrasherlok

Thats what I thought too. Bit over the top for a 3.4 ghz overclock.

---

Sorry, my english is not good.

I setup high vCore for measuring electric power consumption, because when you overclock CPU, you have to increase CPU's vCore.