A physx question

[shoota]

Yes I know another physx question. I've read a ton of discussions but I'm getting conflicting info.
I currently have an i7-950, hd 5830, win7.
I have a 9800gt laying around.
I just got metro 2033 and i'm getting around 28fps which stinks.
Will adding the 9800gt to the system help the fps or not?
If so, what's the proper way of installing the drivers to get it functioning correctly?
Thanks!

[slaveondope]

Metro is heavily gpu bond so no a 9800gt will not help much if any.
Lower your settings, it's the new Crysis.
You can fold on that 9800 though

[shoota]

do you mean cpu bound? cuz if it's gpu bound then wouldn't adding more gpu help fps?

[Ket]

Either add another 5830, or overclock your existing 5830, I'd do the latter first as at stock the 5830 is pants.

[slaveondope]

do you mean cpu bound? cuz if it's gpu bound then wouldn't adding more gpu help fps?

GPU bound, physx doesnt help process the images it helps with physics calculations like cloth in the wind, bouncing particles from bullets etc.

Another 58xxin crossfire would help but as Ket said overclock your current card first though the gains will be small yet again.
Turn HDR bloom off, main thing with Metro is its a memory hog at high res. and detail.

[shoota]

Alright thanks guys. I oc'ed it to 900 core and 1300 memory and got about 4-5 more fps out of it. I haven't seen it go under 28 fps since so that will do for me as it's plenty playable. thanks again

[Nikolasz]

You got good cpu, maybe enable physx for cpu or physx for 9800gt so you got free gpu math on primary gpu. Check your fps
(no auto mode, idunno im just guessing here coz im playing older games )

[Frag Maniac]

...maybe enable physx for cpu...

No such thing as "Physx for cpu", PhysX is physics done by the GPU.

[Chickenman]

No such thing as "Physx for cpu", PhysX is physics done by the GPU.

Nvidia would have you believe through their interface that they can route that PhysX information to the cpu.



Don't know if it's actually what happens but it's certainly what is implied.

[Ket]

Theres no reason why PhysX couldn't be put onto the CPU, thats how it was done for years anyway so theres no reason to think otherwise.

[Nikolasz]

No such thing as "Physx for cpu", PhysX is physics done by the GPU.

Nvidia in gpu contol panel got wich hardware you want Physx to be as; auto mode or gpu mode or cpu mode.

I try that and i set Physx for 8600gts(physics done by this spesific GPU) while primary gpu was 9800gtx

And please if i don't play newest games, that does not meen i dot try them!

cpu vs gpu Physx
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cnp97EaW68

[Frag Maniac]

What I'm saying is it's really a throwback to the original way physics were done on the CPU when in that mode. The word "PhysX" being applied to physics on the CPU is really a misnomer on their part, and from what I've seen it doesn't work nearly as well as being done via a PhysX capable GPU (the video you linked to verifies it). In fact comparisons only show they optimized it to run far better on a GPU than CPU.

It's kinda redundant they even offer such a feature. I think the only reason they did is to try and appease those whom are upset they can't see PhysX without adding a separate Nvidia card dedicated to it, or buying a PhysX capable high end card, and it's a half ass attempt at best. PhysX may go through CUDA cores, but it's still just enhanced physics. The only thing that really ever made it "PhysX" was doing it through a PhysX card, then through the GPU when Nvidia took it over.