Go Back   nV News Forums > Graphics Card Forums > NVIDIA GeForce 200 Series

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-23-09, 10:08 AM   #1
DiscipleDOC
 
DiscipleDOC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Alabama, Planet Earth
Posts: 5,993
Default A question for the Graphics Gurus

What's better for PhysX--2 GTX 285, or one GTX 285, and other 285 dedicated to PhysX?
DiscipleDOC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-09, 10:45 AM   #2
Redeemed
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 17,982
Default Re: A question for the Graphics Gurus

Oooh... that's a good one.

I guess a lot depends on what resolution you play at. At 1680x1050, my single GTX260 could play Crysis all at Very High, with no AA. Framerate never dipped below 25, which for me was playable.

So if you have a GTX285, I'm sure running them in SLi while have PhysX enabled wont hurt. Only real way to find out is to test each, of course. But I'd just rock SLi and leave PhysX enabled. What *should* happen is the card with the least work load takes over PhysX effects. Should have no impact on framerate.

Good question though.
Redeemed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-09, 11:02 AM   #3
Maverick123w
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,841
Send a message via AIM to Maverick123w
Default Re: A question for the Graphics Gurus

I'm just taking a stab at the dark and saying that the dedicated physx gpu will be the significantly faster option. Like I said though just a guess.

Edit: Btw man, very nice rig.
Maverick123w is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-09, 11:07 AM   #4
bob saget
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver, originally Russia
Posts: 23,134
Send a message via MSN to bob saget Send a message via Yahoo to bob saget
Default Re: A question for the Graphics Gurus

crapload of people have asked this question, maybe sticky?
And I don't even know the answer
bob saget is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-09, 11:10 AM   #5
jolle
Registered User
 
jolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,804
Default Re: A question for the Graphics Gurus

having one GTX 285 dedicated for physX is probably huge waste though.
A cheaper card would suffice, and unless you play only PhysX powered games, with GPU support at that, itŽd be idle most of the time.
(cant remember the last time I played a game with GPU support)

IŽd guess youŽd get more bang for the buck running em in SLI.
Or using a GTX285 for rendering and a cheaper card for PhysX.
__________________
Q6700, Abit X38 QuadGT, 8Gb (4x 2GB) OCZ Reaper DDR2 1066MHz, Gainward GTX 285 1Gb, X-Fi XtremeMusic
jolle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-09, 11:11 AM   #6
Redeemed
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 17,982
Default Re: A question for the Graphics Gurus

Significantly faster? I don't know- I think what resolution DOC's gaming at is the determining factor, and what is the minimal acceptable framerate in his opinion.

I'd venture a single GTX285 is plenty for 1680x1050. But I'm betting he games at 1920x1200... so that might be a bit much for a single 285. Thus, running SLi will allow him to have sustained framerates that are acceptable, and the one card with the lightest work load just does PhysX.

Kind of a hard call, not having tinkered with such myself. I'm under the impression though that a single GTX285 is over kill for dedicated physX- no game out can fully use the card just for PhysX. Hence why keeping SLi and just enabling GPU accelerated PhysX is probably the best option... all just a guess though.
Redeemed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-09, 11:29 AM   #7
Maverick123w
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,841
Send a message via AIM to Maverick123w
Default Re: A question for the Graphics Gurus

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redeemed View Post
Significantly faster? I don't know- I think what resolution DOC's gaming at is the determining factor, and what is the minimal acceptable framerate in his opinion.

I'd venture a single GTX285 is plenty for 1680x1050. But I'm betting he games at 1920x1200... so that might be a bit much for a single 285. Thus, running SLi will allow him to have sustained framerates that are acceptable, and the one card with the lightest work load just does PhysX.

Kind of a hard call, not having tinkered with such myself. I'm under the impression though that a single GTX285 is over kill for dedicated physX- no game out can fully use the card just for PhysX. Hence why keeping SLi and just enabling GPU accelerated PhysX is probably the best option... all just a guess though.
I agree that a single gtx285 is over kill for physx, but from what I've seen having a dedicated physx card seems much faster than not having one. Maybe I missed a review where they tested physx with sli but I didn't think it helped much.
Maverick123w is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-09, 11:35 AM   #8
Revs
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 6,365
Default Re: A question for the Graphics Gurus

If the choice is either two 285's in SLi doing gfx and PhysX or a single 285 doing gfx and another doing PhysX then I'd say the the SLi option would be better, probably by a long way.

PhysX doesn't require that much power, so a 285 purely for PhysX is pretty major overkill. You would have much more benefit using both in SLi and letting PhysX take whatever power it needs to do it's thing. Basically what you're asking is; will the demands of PhysX make two cards in SLi running gfx and PhysX slower than a single card just running gfx? No, not by a long shot .

Of course SLi + PhysX (3 cards) with something like a 9600/9800GT dedicated to PhysX is the best way to go, but a lack of room on the mobo is an issue for many.

Another thing to think about is just altering the settings for the rare occasion you play a PhysX enabled game.

Hope that made sense
Revs is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 11-23-09, 11:58 AM   #9
DiscipleDOC
 
DiscipleDOC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Alabama, Planet Earth
Posts: 5,993
Default Re: A question for the Graphics Gurus

Thanks for the replies, and yes, I agree that this should be a sticky.

I do have an extra 260 that I probably can put in as a dedicated PhysX card, but I want to hold on on that before I do that. Not only that, I would have to make some arrangements to get my third card to have the necessary power.


Anyway, keep up the discussion...this is very interesting.
DiscipleDOC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-09, 08:21 PM   #10
Dr.Nick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,044
Default Re: A question for the Graphics Gurus

sli without doubt, even when playing batman. However a dedicated physx card is very nice to have also
__________________
i7 920@4.03|asus p6t7ws|6gb ocz|gtx580oc sli|x-fi fatality|x25m+12tb|enermax 1kw|dell u3011 & 2405fpw
Dr.Nick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-09, 10:44 PM   #11
shilk
Registered User
 
shilk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: California
Posts: 913
Default Re: A question for the Graphics Gurus

Quote:
Originally Posted by jolle View Post
having one GTX 285 dedicated for physX is probably huge waste though.
A cheaper card would suffice, and unless you play only PhysX powered games, with GPU support at that, itŽd be idle most of the time.
(cant remember the last time I played a game with GPU support)

IŽd guess youŽd get more bang for the buck running em in SLI.
Or using a GTX285 for rendering and a cheaper card for PhysX.
My thoughts exactly. Although I'm only running a cheap 9600 GT in SLi, they have no problems what so ever with PhysX. With Batman: AA, I was able to run it on high with no issues — most of the time.

Having both 285 cards in SLi would be perfectly fine. And the PhysX performance would be great.
shilk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-09, 03:31 AM   #12
Revs
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 6,365
Default Re: A question for the Graphics Gurus

Quote:
Originally Posted by abtomat74 View Post
I don't remember where I booked the article, but I seem to recall reading about a 9600gt or thereabouts being more than is needed for any physx usage, if not the perfect card.

Here is one of the articles from the other thread in case you missed it:
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/...ance/page5.asp
You're right, I read the same article. The conclusion was that there was no gain to be had from anything over a 9600GT, which is why I got one myself .
Revs is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:37 PM.


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