Page 11 of 15 FirstFirst ... 891011121314 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 275 of 371

Thread: Nvidia GTX280/260 and 9800GTX/+ 177.39 Beta Driver with PhysX-Support

  1. #251
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,356
    So... The sum of this topic is you get to lose FPS by doing physics on the GPU and leave the CPU to just idle away.

    Amazing technology this is, I'd like to thank Nvidia... The $400 that bought my card back in the day... The academy...

    Yeah, what a joke, Intel+Havok plz.

  2. #252
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    793
    I guess no one else is interested in using a separate GPU as a physx card....


    Rig Specs
    Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 4.0ghz 1.37v - DFI Lanparty UT P35 TR2 - 4x1GB Team Xtreem DDR2-1066 - Palit 8800GT Sonic 512MB GDDR3 256-bit
    160GB Seagate Barracuda 7200RPM SATA II 8MB Cache - 320GB Western Digital Caviar 7200RPM SATA II 16MB Cache - Liteon 18X DVD-Writer /w LS
    640GB Western Digital SE16 7200RPM SATA II 16MB Cache - Corsair HX 620W Modular PSU - Cooler Master Stacker 832
    Auzen 7.1 X-Plosion - Zalman ZM-DS4F - Sennheiser HD212 Pro - Edifier M2600



    Custom Water Cooling
    Dtek Fusion Extreme CPU Block - Swiftech MCR-220 - Swiftech MCP655-B - Swiftech MCRES-MICRO Reservior - 7/16" ID x 5/8" OD Tubings
    Dual Thermaltake A2018s 120mm Blue LED Smart fans.


    www.mni-photography.site88.net

  3. #253
    Nerdy Powerlifter
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Down in the Bayou
    Posts
    4,553
    Luka, I ran lighthouse....

    Here's the skinny.

    I decided not to do any screenshots (forgot, I don't feel like uploading anything now.). I blew up all the barrels I could find. My ram usage never went above 2.76 gigs. My frames suffered tremendously. As I would shoot the barrels, my frames dropped from 55 substantially as I played until I was getting 5 frames / sec. I don't see the memory leak you are talking about. How much ram was used while playing lighthouse?
    You must [not] advance.


    Current Rig: i7 4790k @ stock (**** TIM!) , Zotac GTX 1080 WC'd 2214mhz core / 5528mhz Mem, Asus z-97 Deluxe

    Heatware

  4. #254
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    466
    Quote Originally Posted by Sly Fox View Post
    So... The sum of this topic is you get to lose FPS by doing physics on the GPU and leave the CPU to just idle away.

    Amazing technology this is, I'd like to thank Nvidia... The $400 that bought my card back in the day... The academy...

    Yeah, what a joke, Intel+Havok plz.
    It's a bit too soon to actually rate what this can do (esp on a leaked beta driver). Potentially (and theoretically) it can mean that you have a physix card with your graphics card. With a beast like the 280GTX and future multi core gpu's (seems to be where it's heading) i doubt very much that many cpu's or games for that matter can REALLY utilise the entire gpu. So set aside some of it and let it offload some calcualtions off the cpu.

    I think the older gens will struggle with it, but the newest and future gens may make it work.

    The main thing is that this is a 'nice addition'. Just remember that nvidia users aren't having to upgrade or pay for this...

    Let's wait and see.

  5. #255
    Nerdy Powerlifter
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Down in the Bayou
    Posts
    4,553
    Quote Originally Posted by takamishanoku View Post
    It's a bit too soon to actually rate what this can do (esp on a leaked beta driver). Potentially (and theoretically) it can mean that you have a physix card with your graphics card. With a beast like the 280GTX and future multi core gpu's (seems to be where it's heading) i doubt very much that many cpu's or games for that matter can REALLY utilise the entire gpu. So set aside some of it and let it offload some calcualtions off the cpu.

    I think the older gens will struggle with it, but the newest and future gens may make it work.

    The main thing is that this is a 'nice addition'. Just remember that nvidia users aren't having to upgrade or pay for this...

    Let's wait and see.
    I agree. I'm just discussing my experiences with this driver. I do see potential in this, espeically with multi gpu/multicard set ups.
    You must [not] advance.


    Current Rig: i7 4790k @ stock (**** TIM!) , Zotac GTX 1080 WC'd 2214mhz core / 5528mhz Mem, Asus z-97 Deluxe

    Heatware

  6. #256
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,356
    I could see it being useful if the cards had some sort of integrated PhysX CPU that shares the RAM and just works along with the card.

    That seems like a solid idea to me, but this... Current implementation just seems flawed. Why not just use your CPU for physics? It has nothing better to do in games these days.

  7. #257
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Grande Prairie, AB, CAN
    Posts
    6,140
    Quote Originally Posted by fireice2 View Post
    I guess no one else is interested in using a separate GPU as a physx card....
    I should be able to do one tomorrow or tuesday.

  8. #258
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    466
    Quote Originally Posted by Sly Fox View Post
    I could see it being useful if the cards had some sort of integrated PhysX CPU that shares the RAM and just works along with the card.

    That seems like a solid idea to me, but this... Current implementation just seems flawed. Why not just use your CPU for physics? It has nothing better to do in games these days.

    Doesn't the vantage physix bench show that CPU's are just plain too slow though? We aren't talking about P4 here. Q6600 are getting slaughtered with any gfx card, almost (fps) 10x.

  9. #259
    Xtreme Guru adamsleath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    3,803
    my frames dropped from 55 substantially as I played until I was getting 5 frames / sec
    bummer, so apart from an artificial score, it doesnt really work?
    i7 3610QM 1.2-3.2GHz

  10. #260
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Miami Beach
    Posts
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by fireice2 View Post
    I guess no one else is interested in using a separate GPU as a physx card....
    I am planing to buy one 9800GTX+ for physX

  11. #261
    Xtreme Guru adamsleath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    3,803
    wouldnt a cheapo separate physx card do it just as well?

    buy one 9800GTX+ for physX
    underutilised if it's just doing physx...?
    i7 3610QM 1.2-3.2GHz

  12. #262
    The Doctor Warboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kansas City, MO
    Posts
    2,597
    Quote Originally Posted by adamsleath View Post
    wouldnt a cheapo separate physx card do it just as well?

    underutilised if it's just doing physx...?
    Well Then, Physics and Folding?
    My Rig can do EpicFLOPs, Can yours?
    Once this baby hits 88 TeraFLOPs, You're going to see some serious $@#%....

    Build XT7 is currently active.
    Current OS Systems: Windows 10 64bit

  13. #263
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    866
    Quote Originally Posted by Sly Fox View Post
    I could see it being useful if the cards had some sort of integrated PhysX CPU that shares the RAM and just works along with the card.

    That seems like a solid idea to me, but this... Current implementation just seems flawed. Why not just use your CPU for physics? It has nothing better to do in games these days.
    your missing that this really isnt meant for a single GPU thing, you can do that if you want, but its obvious your gonna take a frame hit. Its more meant for the multi GPU setups, both on one card and in multi card setup. Why is everyone so surprised it takes a huge performance hit on a single GPU, i mean, Nvidia is good but they cant work miracles.
    This post above was delayed 90 times by Nvidia. Cause that's their thing, thats what they do.
    This Announcement of the delayed post above has been brought to you by Nvidia Inc.

    RIGGY
    case:Antec 1200
    MB: XFX Nforce 750I SLI 72D9
    CPU:E8400 (1651/4x9) 3712.48
    MEM:4gb Gskill DDR21000 (5-5-5-15)
    GPU: NVIDIA GTX260 EVGA SSC (X2 in SLI) both 652/1403
    PS:Corsair 650TX
    OS: Windows 7 64-bit Ultimate
    --Cooling--
    5x120mm 1x200mm
    Zalman 9700LED
    Displays: Samsung LN32B650/Samsung 2243BWX/samsung P2350


  14. #264
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Synthetickiller View Post
    Luka, I ran lighthouse....

    Here's the skinny.

    I decided not to do any screenshots (forgot, I don't feel like uploading anything now.). I blew up all the barrels I could find. My ram usage never went above 2.76 gigs. My frames suffered tremendously. As I would shoot the barrels, my frames dropped from 55 substantially as I played until I was getting 5 frames / sec. I don't see the memory leak you are talking about. How much ram was used while playing lighthouse?
    I assumed there was a memory leak because of extreme ram usage, guess I was wrong about it

    I have 2GB ram and set a 4GB page file, it used 1.8GB physical+2,6GB page file, if my rivatuner readings are correct, while playing lighthouse.

    I really can't see what the problem is, the weird thing is that it also happens without the physx driver installed, so I would assume something is not working correctly with current PhysX GPU driver + UT3 PhysX maps, hope some kind of fix comes soon.

    I think the best thing now is to wait to see if something new comes out from nVidia's labs in order to re-test this issues and hopefuly get a solution...

    About PhysX on GPU vs CPU, I think Vantage scores speak from themselves, so anyone claiming physics should be done on CPU, maybe should look at them with open eyes and re-think the whole picture...

    I'll see if tomorrow I can make some more testing with different PhysX versions, in order to know if GPU Physx are working or not (I really don't think so, I just want to get a confirmation about it...)
    Are we there yet?

  15. #265
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    696
    Quote Originally Posted by adamsleath View Post
    wouldnt a cheapo separate physx card do it just as well?

    underutilised if it's just doing physx...?
    One midrange+ gpu will outperform the PhysX cards performance-wise.

  16. #266
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    341
    Quote Originally Posted by Sr7 View Post
    One midrange+ gpu will outperform the PhysX cards performance-wise.
    I hope some benchmarks using PhysX will show exactly that, but none has so far. Does Vantage allow for multiple benchmarks using the free version, yet?

  17. #267
    Xtreme Owner Charles Wirth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    11,656
    Single GTX280 kills skulltrail with physx ppu installed in Vantage Entry.

    Skulltrail with ppu 33796

    GTX 280 alone 53394 (no ppu installed)
    Intel 9990XE @ 5.1Ghz
    ASUS Rampage VI Extreme Omega
    GTX 2080 ti Galax Hall of Fame
    64GB Galax Hall of Fame
    Intel Optane
    Platimax 1245W

    Intel 3175X
    Asus Dominus Extreme
    GRX 1080ti Galax Hall of Fame
    96GB Patriot Steel
    Intel Optane 900P RAID

  18. #268
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    AU
    Posts
    510
    Quote Originally Posted by BobyTT View Post
    I am planing to buy one 9800GTX+ for physX
    I have a GTX280 as primary card. If i buy a 9800GTX will the 9800GTX work for physics if i have a Intel chipset.

  19. #269
    Xtreme Enthusiast Kai Robinson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    831
    Could this be where nVidia's integrated chipsets come into play? The ones with unified architecture, that is....have the onboard GPU doing the PhysX and the main GPU doing its job?

    Main Rig

    Intel Core i7-2600K (SLB8W, E0 Stepping) @ 4.6Ghz (4.6x100), Corsair H80i AIO Cooler
    MSI Z77A GD-65 Gaming (MS-7551), v25 BIOS
    Kingston HyperX 16GB (2x8GB) PC3-19200 Kit (HX24C11BRK2/16-OC) @ 1.5v, 11-13-13-30 Timings (1:8 Ratio)
    8GB MSI Radeon R9 390X (1080 Mhz Core, 6000 Mhz Memory)
    NZXT H440 Case with NZXT Hue+ Installed
    24" Dell U2412HM (1920x1200, e-IPS panel)
    1 x 500GB Samsung 850 EVO (Boot & Install)
    1 x 2Tb Hitachi 7K2000 in External Enclosure (Scratch Disk)


    Entertainment Setup

    Samsung Series 6 37" 1080p TV
    Gigabyte GA-J1800N-D2H based media PC, Mini ITX Case, Blu-Ray Drive
    Netgear ReadyNAS104 w/4x2TB Toshiba DTACA200's for 5.8TB Volume size

    I refuse to participate in any debate with creationists because doing so would give them the "oxygen of respectability" that they want.
    Creationists don't mind being beaten in an argument. What matters to them is that I give them recognition by bothering to argue with them in public.

  20. #270
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    341
    Quote Originally Posted by FUGGER View Post
    Single GTX280 kills skulltrail with physx ppu installed in Vantage Entry.

    Skulltrail with ppu 33796

    GTX 280 alone 53394 (no ppu installed)
    Good to know

    How does the same setup do, with the PhysX GPU driver and no PhysX PPU? Just curious

  21. #271
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3,691
    Quote Originally Posted by Seraphiel View Post
    Good to know

    How does the same setup do, with the PhysX GPU driver and no PhysX PPU? Just curious
    The 53k score was without the PhysX PPU.
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon2ky
    "dammit kyle what's with the 30 second sex lately?" "Sorry sweetie, I overclocked my nuts and they haven't been stable since"
    Quote Originally Posted by trinibwoy View Post
    I don't think his backside has internet access.
    Quote Originally Posted by n00b 0f l337 View Post
    Hey I just met you
    And this is crazy
    But I'm on bath salts
    And your face looks tasty

  22. #272
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    3,410
    hi guys

    for GTX280 + Windows Vista 64bit its only the 177.39 + PhysX driver 8.06.12 right??


    with 177.35 also works??


    regards
    Last edited by mascaras; 06-23-2008 at 03:40 AM.

    [Review] Core i7 920 & UD5 » Here!! « .....[Review] XFX GTX260 216SP Black Edition » Here!! «
    [Review] ASUS HD4870X2 TOP » Here!! «
    .....[Review] EVGA 750i SLi FTW » Here!! «
    [Review] BFG 9800GTX 512MB » Here!! « .....[Review] Geforce 9800GX2 1GB » Here!! «
    [Review] EVGA GTX280 1GB GDDR3 » Here!! « .....[Review] Powercolor HD4870 512MB GDDR5 » Here!! «

  23. #273
    Xtreme Enthusiast Kai Robinson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    831
    Its working for me with the 177.35's...

    Main Rig

    Intel Core i7-2600K (SLB8W, E0 Stepping) @ 4.6Ghz (4.6x100), Corsair H80i AIO Cooler
    MSI Z77A GD-65 Gaming (MS-7551), v25 BIOS
    Kingston HyperX 16GB (2x8GB) PC3-19200 Kit (HX24C11BRK2/16-OC) @ 1.5v, 11-13-13-30 Timings (1:8 Ratio)
    8GB MSI Radeon R9 390X (1080 Mhz Core, 6000 Mhz Memory)
    NZXT H440 Case with NZXT Hue+ Installed
    24" Dell U2412HM (1920x1200, e-IPS panel)
    1 x 500GB Samsung 850 EVO (Boot & Install)
    1 x 2Tb Hitachi 7K2000 in External Enclosure (Scratch Disk)


    Entertainment Setup

    Samsung Series 6 37" 1080p TV
    Gigabyte GA-J1800N-D2H based media PC, Mini ITX Case, Blu-Ray Drive
    Netgear ReadyNAS104 w/4x2TB Toshiba DTACA200's for 5.8TB Volume size

    I refuse to participate in any debate with creationists because doing so would give them the "oxygen of respectability" that they want.
    Creationists don't mind being beaten in an argument. What matters to them is that I give them recognition by bothering to argue with them in public.

  24. #274
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Kai Robinson View Post
    Its working for me with the 177.35's...
    I think 177.39 are a bit better than 177.35. (at least my GPU score has raised 64 points LOL...)
    Are we there yet?

  25. #275
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,247
    so everybody is speaking about using two cards from which one is doing the physx and the other the graphics. is it really that seperated? or is it more like both cards do physx and graphics?

    until now i didn't see an indication of how it'll be done. blame me if i missed something... ;P
    1. Asus P5Q-E / Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 @~3612 MHz (8,5x425) / 2x2GB OCZ Platinum XTC (PC2-8000U, CL5) / EVGA GeForce GTX 570 / Crucial M4 128GB, WD Caviar Blue 640GB, WD Caviar SE16 320GB, WD Caviar SE 160GB / be quiet! Dark Power Pro P7 550W / Thermaltake Tsunami VA3000BWA / LG L227WT / Teufel Concept E Magnum 5.1 // SysProfile


    2. Asus A8N-SLI / AMD Athlon 64 4000+ @~2640 MHz (12x220) / 1024 MB Corsair CMX TwinX 3200C2, 2.5-3-3-6 1T / Club3D GeForce 7800GT @463/1120 MHz / Crucial M4 64GB, Hitachi Deskstar 40GB / be quiet! Blackline P5 470W

Page 11 of 15 FirstFirst ... 891011121314 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •