nV News Forums

 
 

nV News Forums (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/index.php)
-   NVIDIA GeForce 200 Series (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=60)
-   -   PhysX Benchmarks for 280GTX (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=115957)

bent98 07-07-08 08:41 PM

PhysX Benchmarks for 280GTX
 
I found this article which compares PPU/CPU/FPU benchmarks with UT3 mod pack. It benches the 9800gtx and shows that at higher resolutions game preformance is impacted when handle both 3d and physx on the same card. I am curious if anyone can provide same benchmarks with the G280?

http://techgage.com/article/nvidias_...tatus_report/3

SH64 07-08-08 02:43 AM

Re: PhysX Benchmarks for 280GTX
 
Hmm interesting results .. thanks for the link!!

Ninja Prime 07-08-08 05:00 AM

Re: PhysX Benchmarks for 280GTX
 
This is fairly obvious, although fanboys don't like to admit it. If you use some of the GPU's power for something else, the performance in graphics suffers. You don't see this in Vantage because the Physx test doesnt do anything major with graphics, so it can just go to town with the physics calculations.

When it comes to games however, if you're using 15-20% of your GPU's power for Physx, you're going to lose 15-20% of your graphics horsepower. I suppose as long as GPUs have way more floating point performance than CPUs, and as long as physics takes a sizeable chunk of said calculations, then it makes sense to offload the calculations there rather than the CPU. Don't fool yourself into thinking its free though.

Ninja Prime 07-08-08 05:03 AM

Re: PhysX Benchmarks for 280GTX
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by slaWter (Post 1705139)
10 FPS decrease is not that bad, at least you don't need an additional card anymore!

10 frames of 60 frames is a ~18% loss in performance.

ASUSEN7900GTX 07-08-08 05:22 AM

Re: PhysX Benchmarks for 280GTX
 
seems as a phys x card is stil the better choise this means every time a 280GTX owner plays games like GRAW 1 and 2 they loose some performace to that of some one using a separate phys X card...or am i wrong?

Ninja Prime 07-08-08 05:40 AM

Re: PhysX Benchmarks for 280GTX
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ASUSEN7900GTX (Post 1705152)
seems as a phys x card is stil the better choise this means every time a 280GTX owner plays games like GRAW 1 and 2 they loose some performace to that of some one using a separate phys X card...or am i wrong?

No, thats wrong actually. Only games that support the GPU version of Physx work with GPUs, and the only game that does is Unreal Tournament 3, and even then, only three levels support it, and even then they aren't included with the game, you have to download them. Almost seems like they tried to make it hard, lol.

harl 07-08-08 05:55 AM

Re: PhysX Benchmarks for 280GTX
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ninja Prime (Post 1705141)
10 frames of 60 frames is a ~18% loss in performance.

Yes and from 31 (CPU) fps to 50 (GPU) there is a ~61% of increase ...
(at 1680x1050)

bent98 07-08-08 07:14 AM

Re: PhysX Benchmarks for 280GTX
 
Keep in mind this is all based off a 9800GTX card. Ofcourse there will be a preformance hit with any card, my question still is what is the numbers with a faster card like a 280GTX. Are the pysX benchmarks acceptable a high resolutions. Also what is the impact when you have 2 or 3 cards in sli? I would assume most games will be playable except for Cysis.

With quad core processors, 1000W PSU requirements for GPU its amazing OS, video card drivers, and software developers cant optimize everything to take full advantage of all this power.

Ninja Prime 07-08-08 07:15 AM

Re: PhysX Benchmarks for 280GTX
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by harl (Post 1705164)
Yes and from 31 (CPU) fps to 50 (GPU) there is a ~61% of increase ...
(at 1680x1050)

Check out the one below that, once the GPU is strained the CPU version runs at the same rate.

Ninja Prime 07-08-08 07:24 AM

Re: PhysX Benchmarks for 280GTX
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by slaWter (Post 1705165)
So? 50 frame are still 50 frames, very playable frame rate! I don't care about % values, frame rate values are the real deal.

I don't think you get the point...

18% is a lot, for some people, 18% might be the difference between choppy and not choppy. 18% might be the difference between 4x AA and 8x AA. 18% might be the difference between running at 1600x1200 or having to lower it to 1280x1024. 18% might mean the difference between high settings and very high settings. 18% can mean a lot.

Seems like GPU Physx is horribly inefficent compared to a Physx card's chip, but thats to be expected, though I didn't think it would be that much. However, if this was done on a 9800GTX+, then the GTX 280 might only take half that hit, 9%, since it has twice the floating point power. I say might because I'm not sure if it scales like that, but it seems logical.

spajdr 07-08-08 07:55 AM

Re: PhysX Benchmarks for 280GTX
 
2560x1600 isnt good resolution for single 9800GTX+ anyway, so whoever have 30" to use that resolution also mostly have money to spend it on something better then this card.

Sowk 07-08-08 08:10 AM

Re: PhysX Benchmarks for 280GTX
 
2560x1600 isn't good for any single card... Not even a GTX280.

This is High End SLI territory... 8800 GTX SLI / 260 GTX SLI / 280 GTX SLI

And still not 2 X 9800GTX's because of memory bus limitations.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:08 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.