a little warning about gtx 480 and dedicated physx cards

[CaptNKILL]

Originally Posted by saturnotaku

What drivers are you using, Cap?

197.75

Strangely, I don't recall having to use a modded INF to get both cards working, but in the nvidia control panel it says both cards are in fact using 197.75.

[snowmanwithahat]

Alot of you guys aren't considering the scenario where the game you're playing is actually stressful enough to occupy all of your graphics power.... that's where a physx card comes in handy.


Using the physx screensaver (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_2Klve_2VQ) I get IDENTICAL frame-rates on my GTX 285 and when i have physx running on my 9800 GTX.

Now, I loaded up F@H on my GTX 285, 100% gpu utilization. I started the physx screensaver with my 285 doing the physx calculations. It's not powerful enough to handle full load from F@H and graphics and the physx.

I repeated the same thing with F@H on my GTX 285, 100% load, but had physx running on my 9800 GTX. I was capped at 60 fps during the benchmark. The 285 could handle F@H while rendering the (extremely simple) graphics. Allowing the 9800 GTX to handle all of the graphics work.

You guys with the 480's in SLI. Try and run metro 2033 at 2560x1600 with AA / AF, benchmark it, then run the same thing again with a dedicated physx card. I can guarantee that you'll see the benefit of a physx card when your graphics solution starts to hit a wall.

... granted I don't know if the 480's will even choke with metro 2033 at that res, but people saying they see no improvement are looking at the wrong facts because no matter how you try and slice it, ever, you'll see a benefit from physx. Whether it's worth the heat / power is another story



@ Eltigre88 - It's because he's limited by the physx card.... it's too "weak" to power physx at a rate where it keeps up with how fast (in the best case, no graphical load) a faster gpu can do it.... You have to realize a physx card just normalizes the work load by spreading it out among 2 gpus (by 'it' I mean the tasks required, physx and graphics). It will raise the mins and certainly can lower the max's too if the physx card can't process physx only time-frames as fast as the main card.
- The only time you'd never see this happen is when you're using 2 GTX 480's for example (not in SLI). The Max should never be lower when using phsyx on a dedicated card (when the 2 cards are matching). UNLESS your motherboard drops to an 8x pci-e slot then it's possible to see a lower max.... currently i'm running 8x/8x for my GTX 285 / 9800 GTX setup and I haven't seen any negative impact because of it.

It's all just math... stop and think about it and it'll make sense

[snowmanwithahat]

Originally Posted by slaWter

It shouldn't matter but apparently it does.

Yes I use PhysX and I like it. But there's no need for a dedicated card IMO.

It does matter. Window's needs to have DirectX rendering available on that card even though a monitor isn't hooked up. Consider my case where I have an external hooked to my 9800 GTX it has to render things with the card and use it for physx.

Consider playing Metro 2033 in windowed mode (if it has one)... what do you think would happen if I had a GTX 480 and dragged it from my monitor on the 480 to the 9800 GTX, while in DX11 mode.... no one knows, dividing by 0, can't happen. That's why it forces the lowest common DX mode available.

By using a card as a dedicated physx card that means you're dedicated all physx activity to that card.... not dedicated that card to physx. It still can, and will render video if you hooked up a monitor to it.

[Slytat]

Originally Posted by snowmanwithahat

It does matter. Window's needs to have DirectX rendering available on that card even though a monitor isn't hooked up. Consider my case where I have an external hooked to my 9800 GTX it has to render things with the card and use it for physx.

Consider playing Metro 2033 in windowed mode (if it has one)... what do you think would happen if I had a GTX 480 and dragged it from my monitor on the 480 to the 9800 GTX, while in DX11 mode.... no one knows, dividing by 0, can't happen. That's why it forces the lowest common DX mode available.

By using a card as a dedicated physx card that means you're dedicated all physx activity to that card.... not dedicated that card to physx. It still can, and will render video if you hooked up a monitor to it.

Maybe at crazy resolutions/AA settings it does, I can't confirm or deny that. I was commenting on my own situation.

The added power/heat etc isn't worth it for me, I've yet to play anything that will tax the 480SLI/980x combo.

PS : We both said there is no need for one, we never said it didn't help. I don't mean to try and discredit what you've said as you have more experience with it than I do. I just wanted to reiterate that I think we (slawter and I) were saying that we don't see a need for them, not necessarily that there is no need for them period. Sometimes things don't come across as concisely as I'd like them to on the Interwebz .

[saturnotaku]

Originally Posted by Slytat

The added power/heat etc isn't worth it for me, I've yet to play anything that will tax the 480SLI/980x combo.

And I think that's part of the point he was trying to make as well. You both have 480 SLI setups, which shouldn't be taxed by most any game. Having a dedicated PhysX card is more beneficial to those of us with single GPU setups, especially if you're not rolling a Fermi as your primary.

[Slytat]

Originally Posted by saturnotaku

And I think that's part of the point he was trying to make as well. You both have 480 SLI setups, which shouldn't be taxed by most any game. Having a dedicated PhysX card is more beneficial to those of us with single GPU setups, especially if you're not rolling a Fermi as your primary.

I realize that now, that's why I corrected what I said. Sometimes things just don't come across properly on the web

It's all good

[snowmanwithahat]

Originally Posted by Slytat

Sometimes things just don't come across properly on the web

Yeh.... I think now I realize that all I did was just re-state what you already knew. I hate it when people argue over the same thing lol.

It does seem a shame (I'm sure i'm not the only one that's noticed) that even though a card's destined for physx use, it still stays clocked at 3d clock speeds 24/7. I really wish they'd work on that and let it clock down until needed. That might help alot with the keeping the power consumption and heat down.

[wysiwyg]

i have one 480 doing the graphics and one 9600 doing physx on my pc, now im confused! should i let my 480 do it all or should i get a better card for physx

also i didnt install any drivers for my 9600 just the 480 but nvidia control panel still saw the 9600

[saturnotaku]

Originally Posted by snowmanwithahat

Yeh.... I think now I realize that all I did was just re-state what you already knew. I hate it when people argue over the same thing lol.

Group hug!

It does seem a shame (I'm sure i'm not the only one that's noticed) that even though a card's destined for physx use, it still stays clocked at 3d clock speeds 24/7. I really wish they'd work on that and let it clock down until needed. That might help alot with the keeping the power consumption and heat down.

That's why I use this as my PhysX card. Designed for low power output, you can see it doesn't require external power. Yet it still has a full 112 SPUs, which is right in the sweet spot for Physx performance.

[Eltigre88]

Originally Posted by snowmanwithahat

Yeh.... I think now I realize that all I did was just re-state what you already knew. I hate it when people argue over the same thing lol.

It does seem a shame (I'm sure i'm not the only one that's noticed) that even though a card's destined for physx use, it still stays clocked at 3d clock speeds 24/7. I really wish they'd work on that and let it clock down until needed. That might help alot with the keeping the power consumption and heat down.

You could underclock it with MSI afterburner or EVGA percision which would consume less power......

[wysiwyg]

cant find that in the uk

how would that compare to me using my zotac 9600? for physx

[Eltigre88]

Originally Posted by wysiwyg

i have one 480 doing the graphics and one 9600 doing physx on my pc, now im confused! should i let my 480 do it all or should i get a better card for physx

also i didnt install any drivers for my 9600 just the 480 but nvidia control panel still saw the 9600

I thought the 9600 would not post as a Physx card due to it only has 48 Stream Processors: ? and recommended is 96.....