PhysX officially sucks.

[Ninja Prime]

According to polls: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3558

IMO NV should abandon it and focus more on the graphics end.

[john19055]

I don't think it sucks ,I just would not base buying my video card on it since the game has to be coded for it.But it does work if the game supports it.I voted for (Marginal; PhysX is a bonus if a game I like supports it) like a lot of people did.

[lee63]

It hardly sucks..I use it in Cryostasis and it works great.

Just not that many games support it right now....that's all.

[CaptNKILL]

While I wouldn't sacrifice a ton of performance to get a Physx capable card, I definitely consider it a factor when choosing a graphics card.

A non-physx capable graphics card would have to be significantly faster than the competition for me to buy it. Simply because I'm the kind of person who wants the whole package if I'm going to spend money on an upgrade.

I'm not going to buy a $500 graphics card that can't show me the best visuals in the latest games if another $500 graphics card can.

If no decent games use Physx over the course of the next year then my stance will change, but I think Cryostasis alone is a game worth upgrading for.

However, if ATI puts out a card that is 20% faster than an nvidia card in the same price range I'd pass on Physx for the time being.

[Ninja Prime]

Originally Posted by lee63

It hardly sucks..I use it in Cryostasis and it works great.

Just not that many games support it right now....that's all.

I think thats the point. They spent over a year and millions so that some crappy feature could work great in your one game. Should have spent millions and the same time making something significantly better than the 4870.

[trivium nate]

phsyx suxs!!!

[henrybravo]

What a great thread.

[crainger]

I think PhysX is ok.

[jlippo]

I wonder how much different results would be without the 43% of people who do not have physX cabaple cards.

I'm quite certain that team which is responsible for PhysX implementation, doesn't take that much more resources in comparison to any other Cuda project within nvidia.

[nekrosoft13]

Originally Posted by Ninja Prime

I think thats the point. They spent over a year and millions so that some crappy feature could work great in your one game. Should have spent millions and the same time making something significantly better than the 4870.

[Dreamweavernoob]

Originally Posted by Ninja Prime

I think thats the point. They spent over a year and millions so that some crappy feature could work great in your one game. Should have spent millions and the same time making something significantly better than the 4870.

Thats not using the noggin.

Okay, so it would mean we would have slightly faster cards on the market now.



So what.



What the PC industry needs is revolution not evolution. Whilst granted that physx is a bit gimmicky atm, anything that gets away from the drudgery of just increasing clock speeds etc is a big plus in my book.


In fairness I cant fault nvidia in this respect. At least they have been pushing 3d, CUDA, physx etc.

[jolle]

Originally Posted by Ninja Prime

I think thats the point. They spent over a year and millions so that some crappy feature could work great in your one game. Should have spent millions and the same time making something significantly better than the 4870.

Well, they started paving the way for GPU accelerated physics.
Gotta start somewhere, now we have Havok with OpenCL support around the corner, and that might force NV to open up PhysX for everyone by porting it to OpenCL aswell, and then we´ll prolly see GPU assisted physics becoming more mainstream with both PhysX and Havok offering the feature, and can be run on any DX10 GPU.

So looking at the longterm, not really a wasted effort, not yet anyway.