Yeah because dual gpu configuration is sooo mainstream..Quadcore, let alone hexcores won't become fully mainstream until a year or two from now.
oh wait...
Yeah because dual gpu configuration is sooo mainstream..Quadcore, let alone hexcores won't become fully mainstream until a year or two from now.
oh wait...
And you think you need dual GPU to run PhysX? Depending on what resolution and what detail settings you chose, you can run PhysX on a single card with good or decent frames.
Driverheaven showed that you can run Batman AA with maxed out physics on a single GTS 250 at 1680x1050. While they had playable average frames, their low minimums would have made the game lag a bit though (especially in the Scarecrow levels), but keep in mind they were running the game using maxed out graphical settings, with 2xAA as well.
If they disabled the AA, the performance would have increased significantly.
Intel Core i7 6900K
Noctua NH-D15
Asus X99A II
32 GB G.Skill TridentZ @ 3400 CL15 CR1
NVidia Titan Xp
Creative Sound BlasterX AE-5
Sennheiser HD-598
Samsung 960 Pro 1TB
Western Digital Raptor 600GB
Asus 12x Blu-Ray Burner
Sony Optiarc 24x DVD Burner with NEC chipset
Antec HCP-1200w Power Supply
Viewsonic XG2703-GS
Thermaltake Level 10 GT Snow Edition
Logitech G502 gaming mouse w/Razer Exact Mat
Logitech G910 mechanical gaming keyboard
Windows 8 x64 Pro
I am going to quote your complete post were you were recommending a dual gpu configuration, were one of the gpus will be dedicated for physx to "mitigate" the fact that physx trashes down performance in a game.
Also, maybe dual cores compromise the majority of pc, but with 100 bucks quad cores, what do you think new builds will be based upon? in 2010+
Physx on gpu must die!
Don't try to blame ATI as if PhysX is independent non competitor standard that can be adopted like DX.
2) it doing the first at anything was not the point at all & nowhere do i imply that at all because it all means nothing if its limited to just one vendor & i made that point clear all ready.
3) Your laughing at other PhysX users because they were so impressed with Ghostbusters that some of them thought that it was using PhysX as Ghostbusters is doing things in game that walks all over the scarecrow scene from Batman .
Well of course you're always going to get the best results with a dedicated physX card....
Does that really surprise you? Ageia, the company that first came up with hardware accelerated PhysX, intended for PhysX to run on dedicated hardware.
Nvidia expanded the options by allowing you to run PhysX on your graphics card, without having to buy additional hardware, but this comes at a performance cost.
At the present rate, quadcores won't be the majority till late in the 1Q or early 2Q next year.Also, maybe dual cores compromise the majority of pc, but with 100 bucks quad cores, what do you think new builds will be based upon? in 2010+
Regardless, the kind of PhysX that we see in Mafia 2 and Batman AA won't be feasible on the CPU until CPUs get a lot more powerful, and that won't happen for another generation or two.
Even an overclocked 980x has about 1/5 of the heavy number crunching capability of a low end GPU like a GTS 250.
Also, it's not just the GPUs floating point math abilities that make them superior the CPU in physics. GPUs also have a lot more bandwidth available to them.
Intel Core i7 6900K
Noctua NH-D15
Asus X99A II
32 GB G.Skill TridentZ @ 3400 CL15 CR1
NVidia Titan Xp
Creative Sound BlasterX AE-5
Sennheiser HD-598
Samsung 960 Pro 1TB
Western Digital Raptor 600GB
Asus 12x Blu-Ray Burner
Sony Optiarc 24x DVD Burner with NEC chipset
Antec HCP-1200w Power Supply
Viewsonic XG2703-GS
Thermaltake Level 10 GT Snow Edition
Logitech G502 gaming mouse w/Razer Exact Mat
Logitech G910 mechanical gaming keyboard
Windows 8 x64 Pro
i think people should be interesting in what fusion can do, a duel or quad for the game, the 480 shaders for physics, and a dedicated GPU for the rest.
4 cores make up 25% of the population on steam hardware surveys
reading the gpus is kinda tough, but it looks like less than 25% are decent cards, although 25% are classified as other
"Prowler"
X570 Tomahawk | R7 3700X | 2x16GB Klevv BoltX @ 3600MHz CL18 | Powercolor 6800XT Red Devil | Xonar DX 7.1 | 2TB Barracuda | 256GB & 512GB Asgard NVMe drives | 2x DVD & Blu-Ray opticals | EVGA Supernova 1000w G2
Cooling:
6x 140mm LED fans, 1x 200mm LED fan | Modified CoolerMaster Masterliquid 240
Asrock Z77 thread! | Asrock Z77 Extreme6 Review | Asrock P67 Extreme4 Review | Asrock P67 Extreme4/6 Pro3 thread | Asrock Z68 Extreme4 thread | Asrock Z68 Extreme4 Review | Asrock Z68 Gen3 Thread | 8GB G-Skill review | TK 2.ZERO homepage | P5Q series mBIOS thread
Modded X570 Aorus UEFIs
Please read the whole thread...
Yes, a single GPU is not enough to handle physics found in battlefield, or the ghostbusters physic demo.
Therefore, you'd need to purchase another modern gpu ($250) to get close to what is already capable on a modern $300 cpu. How can you not understand this simple fact. You need extra, to handle what CPU delivers as inherent.
2 fermi's ain't going to handle thousands of hard & soft bodies swirling around a broken castle. Let alone one card.. you are so clueless, it's ridiculous.
there are a lot of claims of what gpu's can/cant do for game physics in this thread with nothing to back them up. fluidmark 1.2 is currently the only physics bench for gpu's and cpu's afaik.
here is some of the underlying math used for physics.
http://developer.amd.com/documentati...ase-Study.aspx
gpu is 15.7x faster than cpu.
This might sound a little cliche but I think its time all our PCs brains evolved Nature evolved us humans, now humans have to evolve the brain of the PC to something much faster. It can be done, but the change would be revolutionary and almost every standard would change. This is also why nobody has taken this step.. yet.
"Prowler"
X570 Tomahawk | R7 3700X | 2x16GB Klevv BoltX @ 3600MHz CL18 | Powercolor 6800XT Red Devil | Xonar DX 7.1 | 2TB Barracuda | 256GB & 512GB Asgard NVMe drives | 2x DVD & Blu-Ray opticals | EVGA Supernova 1000w G2
Cooling:
6x 140mm LED fans, 1x 200mm LED fan | Modified CoolerMaster Masterliquid 240
Asrock Z77 thread! | Asrock Z77 Extreme6 Review | Asrock P67 Extreme4 Review | Asrock P67 Extreme4/6 Pro3 thread | Asrock Z68 Extreme4 thread | Asrock Z68 Extreme4 Review | Asrock Z68 Gen3 Thread | 8GB G-Skill review | TK 2.ZERO homepage | P5Q series mBIOS thread
Modded X570 Aorus UEFIs
Where are those claims as the focus is not about which is faster at physics because no one is saying the the GPU is not faster.
The claims are that even tho the GPU is faster it is simply not needed all the time to do every & all physics.
So it seems you have this thread back to front.
it's hard to interpret what exactly people are saying when they refer to physx/physics. they could be talking about the game as a whole or just the physics engine. i apologize if i took someones post the wrong way.
a middle end gpu beats a high end cpu.
2 middle end gpu's are close to a high end cpu.
You must be smoking some powerful .. First off, your examples of Ghostbusters and BC2 are terrible.
Both games do not allow for GPU physics, so how could you possibly know whether or not a GPU could not perform the physics in both games?
Also, rigid body physics is the least demanding of all game physics.
I've seen the Ghostbuster demo, where they use 3,500 rigid bodies and 200 soft bodies, which "maxed out" a Core i7.
Batman Arkham Asylum during the Scarecrow levels uses thousands of objects, both rigid bodies and pieces of paper that use cloth physics.
Not to mention, the fog and vapor effects that utilize tens of thousands of particles.
I'd like to see a CPU handle that. It's one thing to do rigid bodies, but when it comes to more complex physics effects like cloth, smoke, fluid, the CPU cannot handle them!
As for BC2, I've already been over that a dozen times. BC2 uses scripted animations in combination with real time physics, so stop acting as if it's the ultimate game physics, because it clearly isn't
Intel Core i7 6900K
Noctua NH-D15
Asus X99A II
32 GB G.Skill TridentZ @ 3400 CL15 CR1
NVidia Titan Xp
Creative Sound BlasterX AE-5
Sennheiser HD-598
Samsung 960 Pro 1TB
Western Digital Raptor 600GB
Asus 12x Blu-Ray Burner
Sony Optiarc 24x DVD Burner with NEC chipset
Antec HCP-1200w Power Supply
Viewsonic XG2703-GS
Thermaltake Level 10 GT Snow Edition
Logitech G502 gaming mouse w/Razer Exact Mat
Logitech G910 mechanical gaming keyboard
Windows 8 x64 Pro
Intel Core i7 6900K
Noctua NH-D15
Asus X99A II
32 GB G.Skill TridentZ @ 3400 CL15 CR1
NVidia Titan Xp
Creative Sound BlasterX AE-5
Sennheiser HD-598
Samsung 960 Pro 1TB
Western Digital Raptor 600GB
Asus 12x Blu-Ray Burner
Sony Optiarc 24x DVD Burner with NEC chipset
Antec HCP-1200w Power Supply
Viewsonic XG2703-GS
Thermaltake Level 10 GT Snow Edition
Logitech G502 gaming mouse w/Razer Exact Mat
Logitech G910 mechanical gaming keyboard
Windows 8 x64 Pro
Bookmarks