The official GT300/Fermi Thread

[VoodooProphetII]

Bro, you do understand that PhysX can and does run on the CPU...! It doesn't require a Nvidia GPU... until Nvidia bought Ageia and decided to code idle GPU resources to speed up PhysX. Then decided to market THAT ability as revolutionary.

Okay Intel is working on Larrabee which, as I understand it, will be more a GPGPU then just a GPU. Now why would a leading CPU maker get into the GPGPU market if they already have working 6 core 12 thread processor which will be availible for retail in a couple of months? Please keep in mind, I'm only asking to learn more.

So, how often do you have idle GPU time when playing a modern game..? Show me a PhysX simulation that has 3500 objects swirling around a tornado on a single Nvidia card...
It won't happen.. not even on 2 nVidia GPU's.. not even on THREE nVidia GPU's.. Go ahead, find a PhysX demo where they have any amount of real physical objects being moved around, specially that move as fluently as those in the Velocity engine demo.

Not in a game environment, but it looks pretty impressive, given the fact that GPU is processing the graphics and physics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r17UOMZJbGs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuZQp...eature=related

Speaking of CPU physics. What does the CPU test in Vantage test? The second CPU test. Now if the CPU is so much better then the GPU why does the CPU score jump considerably when you enable the PhysX driver when running a Nv card. Yes a Gulftown does pretty well with its 6 cores and 12 threads, but why does it need such a high core speed to do what a GTX295 can do at 650Mhz core speed?