Sunday, July 20th 2008

GPU PhysX Doesn't get you to 3DMark Vantage Hall of Fame Anymore

With NVIDIA releasing their GeForce PhysX drivers, users of the PhysX accelerating GeForce cards were at an advantage over their Radeon counterparts, reason being that in a certain CPU test routine of the 3DMark Vantage benchmark, the physics processing abilities of the computer are tested, and since the physics API used happens to be PhysX, users of GeForce get higher scores despite not having a physics processor device such as an Ageia PhysX card. This differs from a real-life scenario where a GeForce accelerator does both graphics and physics and the overhead of physics processing affects the graphics processing abilities.

The relation of GPU acceleration for gaining higher 3DMark scores in physics tests has been controversial to say the least. Futuremark has now decided to update its Hall of Fame to exclude all results using PhysX on a GPU, simply because this was not how they intended it to work. It has also been updated to organise the results better for easier comparison. You will be able to use GPU physics processing to get a 3DMark score, you will not be able to make it to the Hall of Fame using it. You can use an Ageia PhysX card to assist your 3DMark score to make it to the Hall of Fame, as that's how Futuremark intended PhysX processing scores to assist your final scores.Source: NordicHardware
Add your own comment

62 Comments on GPU PhysX Doesn't get you to 3DMark Vantage Hall of Fame Anymore

#1
[I.R.A]_FBi
i guess that answers damultas questions
Posted on Reply
#2
exodusprime1337
that is the stupidest shit ever. once again futuremark comes out with a way to uneven the scores. All because it's not an ageia physx processor the scores don't count, what a crock of shit. The fact of the matter is that amd cards are unable to do the physx processing on they're own so now the whole lot has to suffer cause amd cards just can't cut it anymore. Bullshit
Posted on Reply
#3
Cold Storm
Battosai
Well, all you gotta do now is use the tweaker that Guru3d has and turn it off when you bench.. Well, it was fun as it lasted.. lol :toast:
Posted on Reply
#4
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
by: [I.R.A]_FBi
i guess that answers damultas questions
He's versed with it. I saw that convo on XS yesterday, now he's after getting himself an Ageia card. Wonder how he squeezes in 3x 9800 GTX + a PhysX card.
Posted on Reply
#6
ghost101
by: exodusprime1337
that is the stupidest shit ever. once again futuremark comes out with a way to uneven the scores. All because it's not an ageia physx processor the scores don't count, what a crock of shit. The fact of the matter is that amd cards are unable to do the physx processing on they're own so now the whole lot has to suffer cause amd cards just can't cut it anymore. Bullshit
No its because nvidia had more money and effectively bought the performance crown in this benchmark. If I was involved with futuremark, i'd be pissed as well. If AMD had the money, the scenario could have been the other way around. How does this tell me which card is actually better?
Posted on Reply
#7
Hayder_Master
thank god , that what i am say in nvidia physics support thread , and i remember some members make me wrong and they say i am troll too much , i hope they read this thread and i say now i am right and they are wrong
Posted on Reply
#8
exodusprime1337
it tells which on is better because this card that i have does physx and amd's cards don't, which is not my problem, i pay foir performance and my 2 8800gts's beat out most crossfire 4870??
Posted on Reply
#9
Kursah
by: ghost101
No its because nvidia had more money and effectively bought the performance crown in this benchmark. If I was involved with futuremark, i'd be pissed as well. If AMD had the money, the scenario could have been the other way around. How does this tell me which card is actually better?
Hopefully looking at more than just a benchmark score! :D :laugh:

Okay this is good and great, but if FM knew that GPU PhysX was going to happen, maybe even had it available to them? Why not make a test for it that is actually supportive of the technology of PhysX while Rendering to give more accurate results for starters...

So it makes one's score fair as long as they went out and purchased an Ageia PhysX card then? LoL...I'm sorry but maybe FM should've kept this program under wraps until they knew better what was going to happen with NV's and AMD's technologies that have been more recently released...

Really as long as my games look and play good on my rig, PhysX on or off....Vantage scores don't bother me at all...I feel bad for the world that feeds off of bench scores if this has those communities up in arms...Yeah I agree NV kinda bullied it's way in this, but if they have the technology, might as well use it! Claimed unfair or not, it's nice to to see for consumers using PhysX enabeled cards I'm sure...and hell now they can go check out much more entertaining pieces of software called games that support physx and hopefully use it TWIWMTBP!

Interesting story, not suprising, I jus thope AMD can get some official physx too so fanboi's stop pissing and moaning and FM can then update Vantange so the PhysX test is "more fair" to both companies' cards! lol...:roll:

:toast:
Posted on Reply
#10
Ryethe
by: exodusprime1337
that is the stupidest shit ever. once again futuremark comes out with a way to uneven the scores. All because it's not an ageia physx processor the scores don't count, what a crock of shit. The fact of the matter is that amd cards are unable to do the physx processing on they're own so now the whole lot has to suffer cause amd cards just can't cut it anymore. Bullshit
If you read the article you'll see that they cut support for it because it's a scenario that is unrealistic. There is no game out there where your GPU will go unused for graphics and will still be used for physics. That just isn't realistic. Over on Hardforums, there was a post where someone compared the fps of a game using a 9800 gtx without Physx support, with Physx support and then with an Ageia add in card. The results were basically that Physx support on the GPU had no effect on actual fps since the graphics card was already saturated doing the graphics.

My main point is that I think you should expect to see CUDA support back in 3dMark in the future, just that it will be used in a graphics intensive scene where the score only gets bumped if your card is truly powerful and can handle doing graphics and physics at the same time.
Posted on Reply
#11
erocker
by: exodusprime1337
that is the stupidest shit ever. once again futuremark comes out with a way to uneven the scores. All because it's not an ageia physx processor the scores don't count, what a crock of shit. The fact of the matter is that amd cards are unable to do the physx processing on they're own so now the whole lot has to suffer cause amd cards just can't cut it anymore. Bullshit
You don't seem to understand. ATi cards are perfectly capable of doing physX, there are just no drivers for it. Besides, it's a benchmark! You still have PhysX processing with your card for games. Isn't that what matters?
Posted on Reply
#12
Darknova
by: erocker
You don't seem to understand. ATi cards are perfectly capable of doing physX, there are just no drivers for it. Besides, it's a benchmark! You still have PhysX processing with your card for games. Isn't that what matters?
+1 I couldn't care less about making it into the "hall of fame", all it gets me is world-wide renown for doing nothing more than benching constantly :P

I'm happy with my 4870, VERY happy with it. Just because an nvidia card gets more in a benchmark because of PhysX enabled drivers doesn't really mean anything. the 4870 IS capable of PhysX, there are just no drivers.

You can understand Futuremarks reasoning, but you can also understand nvidia owners frustrations. *shrugs* either way, isn't it real world performance than matters?
Posted on Reply
#13
mrw1986
by: exodusprime1337
it tells which on is better because this card that i have does physx and amd's cards don't, which is not my problem, i pay foir performance and my 2 8800gts's beat out most crossfire 4870??
No they don't. 8800GTS is trash compared to 4870.
Posted on Reply
#14

Damn straight - you're an idiot if you think it should be otherwise!
Posted on Edit | Reply
#15
[I.R.A]_FBi
reason for this:

real world scenario, i am playing a game, so gpu gettting used for gpu stuff, but the gpu cant give its all to physx therefore i dont get the same effect like when i have a synthetic bench running when everything may be evalutaed independently
Posted on Reply
#16
Psychoholic
LOL, i was waiting for someone to point out the obvious here :)

by: mrw1986
No they don't. 8800GTS is trash compared to 4870.
Posted on Reply
#17
Solaris17
Creator Solaris Utility DVD
hahah in your face ppl who told me my physx card wasnt good for anything
Posted on Reply
#18
EastCoasthandle
Source
NVIDIA's GPU PhysX was launched in the middle of summer and most of FM's staff are on holidays (Most people are here in Finland). Tero said timing couldn't have been worse but they have updated filtering system coming up which will handle the runs which are not following Futuremark's guidelines.

When I asked more specific about NVIDIA's GPU PhysX, he confirmed that it won't be allowed. (Since Vantage's CPU test 2 is designed to measure CPU physics calculations and it is clearly stated in the rules that GPU or driver can't affect the result significantly).

So from now on if you want to run offical 3DMark result or Hall of Fame result with NVIDIA gfx you have to use Futuremark approved WHQL driver and do not install NVIDIA PhysX System Software.
That settles that...
Since they had to alter their filtering system to prevent scores from one brand of video cards (do to not following Futuremark's guidelines) this can be considered grounds for cheating. This may take a few days before we see the removal of all invalid scores.
Posted on Reply
#19
Bytor
by: exodusprime1337
that is the stupidest shit ever. once again futuremark comes out with a way to uneven the scores. All because it's not an ageia physx processor the scores don't count, what a crock of shit. The fact of the matter is that amd cards are unable to do the physx processing on they're own so now the whole lot has to suffer cause amd cards just can't cut it anymore. Bullshit
lolzzzz
Posted on Reply
#20
Megasty
by: exodusprime1337
that is the stupidest shit ever. once again futuremark comes out with a way to uneven the scores. All because it's not an ageia physx processor the scores don't count, what a crock of shit. The fact of the matter is that amd cards are unable to do the physx processing on they're own so now the whole lot has to suffer cause amd cards just can't cut it anymore. Bullshit
by: exodusprime1337
it tells which on is better because this card that i have does physx and amd's cards don't, which is not my problem, i pay foir performance and my 2 8800gts's beat out most crossfire 4870??
Plz ignore the bloody nonsense :rolleyes:

Back on topic:

My experience with the early PhysX software hasn't been too rewarding at all. Enabling it with both the 280 & 260 slows both cards down a bit in games. It might be great for benching but its doing nothing for gaming as of yet. The decreases can be anywhere from 5 to 10 fps. Its not that much of a hit with these cards since they're fast enough to deal with it anyway, but its still pretty apparent.
Posted on Reply
#21
Bytor
I have a Asus P1 PhysX card in the closet and hoping there will be a time where I can pull it out and install it with my ATI cards and have it make a diff. in games...
Posted on Reply
#22
Kursah
by: Megasty
Plz ignore the bloody nonsense :rolleyes:

My experience with the early PhysX software hasn't been to rewarding at all. Enabling it with both the 280 & 260 slows both cards down a bit in games. It might be great for benching but its doing nothing for gaming as of yet. The decreases can be anywhere from 5 to 10 fps. Its not that much of a hit with these cards since they're fast enough to deal with it anyway, but its still pretty apparent.
Yeah it's gotta be a hit though...it's not like there's a seperate PPU on the GTX 2xx cards or anything...and having the GPU crunch even more numbers from a game has to take it's toll somewhere. I can only image what'd happen to performance on my 9600GT!!! :roll:

But it is still promising if games can be created to use PhysX, and whether AMD or NV, enable it, drop a few FPS for an increase in PhysX effects...depending on what resolution one games at, 5-10FPS may not even be noticable or missed. Maybe they can introduce a PhysX performance level that adjusts in 3 steps, and/or scales depending on the stress and monitored performance during gameplay? I dunno what adverse affects could be, but I would assume some wonky physx and sporatic FPS changes...but who knows.

Still promising tech on both sides, hopefully something good comes of it in the future! :toast:
Posted on Reply
#23
boogah
haha good way to get people who want hall of fame to go out n buy physx card ^___~
Posted on Reply
#24
mullered07
by: exodusprime1337
it tells which on is better because this card that i have does physx and amd's cards don't, which is not my problem, i pay foir performance and my 2 8800gts's beat out most crossfire 4870??
proof of that i want to see
Posted on Reply
#25
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
by: mullered07
proof of that i want to see
I think he means that his 2x 8800 GTS + score increase due to PhysX > 2x HD4870 ?
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment