1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Multi-threaded Physx. Will this end current Physx?

Discussion in 'Graphics Cards' started by EastCoasthandle, Mar 25, 2010.

  1. EastCoasthandle

    EastCoasthandle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,889 (1.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,505
    Pure PhysxInfo.com Fluidmark 1.2 will be released soon showing how well Phsyx works when multithreading optimizations are enabled. Results are below:

    [​IMG]

    From the graph a Q9400 is able to out pace a GTX275 using the multithreaded optimizations for Physx. However when 2 GPUs are used they out pace both. However, when mult-core physx is off the results are far less. Currently it's is believed that the current version of physx doesn't use this. This only adds to the speculation that the current version of Physx gimps CPUs.
     
    sttubs says thanks.
  2. Solaris17

    Solaris17 Creator Solaris Utility DVD

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    17,263 (5.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,600
    Location:
    Florida
    how does it not already use multithreaded physx if it uses a graphics cards shaders which are like hundreds of mini cores? I think they mean that software physx isnt muli threaded and only uses one CPU core. Which i would believe. But I do not buy those performance numbers. maybe it does scale and increase dramatically if its enabled for CPU's. but i seriously doubt they could outpace a grfx card. Unless that is some kind of poisoned graph were they attempt to run software and not hardware physx on a GPU?
     
  3. digibucc

    digibucc

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    Messages:
    4,923 (2.49/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,493
    well the score is giving way to much of an increase solely based on PHYSx capability. no games use physx to the extent that that much more power would really do anything. yet.hopefully, never.

    physx is a horrible money ploy. i wish nvidia would just go standard with physics, so no more games would require it to make leaves float or something simple.
     
  4. EastCoasthandle

    EastCoasthandle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,889 (1.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,505
    The multi-threaded optimizations didn't come from nv. It's coming from Fluidmark, the maker of Fluidmark 1.2 (soon to be released).

    The people at Fluidmark are claiming that their version of Physx will utilize all 4 cores (multithreaded optimizations). In the example below 100%.
    [​IMG]
     
    digibucc says thanks.
  5. Fitseries3

    Fitseries3 Eleet Hardware Junkie

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2007
    Messages:
    15,509 (6.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,107
    Location:
    Republic of Texas
    cant wait to see how this does on my machine once i get it runnin. :D
     
  6. DrPepper

    DrPepper The Doctor is in the house

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Messages:
    7,483 (3.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    813
    Location:
    Scotland (It rains alot)
    Holy f'n shit. I want to see that too.
     
  7. AhokZYashA

    AhokZYashA

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2008
    Messages:
    1,145 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    152
    i want to see that...
    must be fckin awesome numbers.
     
  8. DirectorC

    DirectorC New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2009
    Messages:
    1,624 (0.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    268
    Location:
    Florizy
    No?
     
  9. dr emulator (madmax)

    dr emulator (madmax)

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    Messages:
    2,241 (1.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    176
    Location:
    the uk that's all you need to know ;)
    well i'm seriously considering buying something like a 3850 pci with my x58 ud7 and then seeing what problems people run into with this card,
    why ?
    well i keep seeing niggly problems with the 5870 that need sorting and the hd3850 isn't that bad of a card, it runs well enough on this old gal
    (ye ye i know i only have agp for now)and the i7 will give me the core processing power i need so i wait with baited breath:D
     
  10. dr emulator (madmax)

    dr emulator (madmax)

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    Messages:
    2,241 (1.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    176
    Location:
    the uk that's all you need to know ;)
    shocked.gif no :shadedshu
     
    Fitseries3 says thanks.
  11. JATownes

    JATownes

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,832 (0.84/day)
    Thanks Received:
    442
    Location:
    Texas
  12. Fitseries3

    Fitseries3 Eleet Hardware Junkie

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2007
    Messages:
    15,509 (6.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,107
    Location:
    Republic of Texas
    just makin sure.

    :toast:

    not that i'd get upset about it if it was.
     
  13. bobzilla2009 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2009
    Messages:
    455 (0.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    39
    current physX never even took off :) you can't end what didn't begin.
     
  14. EastCoasthandle

    EastCoasthandle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,889 (1.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,505
    Take a look at the CPU results. That's why I asked the question. If you examine it, the CPU results are higher the the non multithreaded GPU results.
     
  15. GotNoRice

    GotNoRice New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Messages:
    126 (0.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    57
    Location:
    Pleasant Hill, CA
    You know, I was lucky enough to have the opportunity to work with Ageia back in 2006 before the original PPU was even released and what was interesting is that back then the PhysX engine was very multi-threaded. I recall running a demo and having it easily max out all 4 virtual cores of the Dual-Xeon rig I was running at the time (dual processors each with HT). And when I got my Q6600 in 2007 it could max out all of those cores as well. The PhysX engine was designed from the very beginning to run well on the CPU.

    It was only after Nvidia bought Ageia that the PhysX engine magically lost it's ability to take advantage of more than one core :rolleyes:
     
    dracus, nt300, human_error and 5 others say thanks.
  16. KainXS

    KainXS

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,601 (2.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    502
    well of course, gotta make money some how you know.

    if a C2Q can do that, I can't even guess what a I7 would do.
     
  17. EastCoasthandle

    EastCoasthandle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,889 (1.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,505
    Very interesting post from GotNoRice indeed.
     
  18. JATownes

    JATownes

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,832 (0.84/day)
    Thanks Received:
    442
    Location:
    Texas
    Interesting read regarding NVidia removing multi-threading from Phsyx:

    “Our PhysX SDK API is designed such that thread control is done explicitly by the application developer, not by the SDK functions themselves. One of the best examples is 3DMarkVantage, which can use 12 threads while running in software-only PhysX. This can easily be tested by anyone with a multi-core CPU system and a PhysX-capable GeForce GPU. This level of multi-core support and programming methodology has not changed since day one. And to anticipate another ridiculous claim, it would be nonsense to say we ‘tuned’ PhysX multi-core support for this case.”


    http://news.softpedia.com/news/NVIDIA-Challenges-AMD-s-Claims-Concerning-PhysX-132681.shtml

    Thought you all might be interested.
     
  19. EastCoasthandle

    EastCoasthandle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,889 (1.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,505
    Which game using physx allow for over 90% consistent CPU usage on all 4 cores? Notice I didn't ask for 100%.
     
  20. RejZoR

    RejZoR

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,738 (1.29/day)
    Thanks Received:
    977
    Location:
    Europe/Slovenia
    So, from the chart, C2Q 9400 is faster than GTX 275 when it comes to hardware PhysX capabilities.
    No wonder they are blocking multithreading in games, imagine what would a Core i7 920 and above do to the poor NVIDIA... but in the end, it's a lame and sad attempt to cripple anything non NVIDIA.
    Sigh...
     
  21. Zubasa

    Zubasa

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    3,980 (1.35/day)
    Thanks Received:
    457
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Even worst, anything that can run on a C2Q might as well also run on a $100 Athlon II X4. ;)
    The Athlon II might need higher clocks, but you get the idea.
     
  22. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,373 (11.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,681
    i should add this to my other PhysX thread...
     
  23. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    Tell the game devs to stop being lazy.

    And these graphs prove not a damn thing. How do we know multi-threaded Fluidmark was optimized properly to take advantage of the cpu plus a single card? Could be a simple programmer's mistake.

    Short version = Need more data.
     
  24. shevanel

    shevanel New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    3,479 (1.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    406
    Location:
    Leesburg, FL
    can the fluidmark guys legally do this?

    how would this affect real world use if the driver isnt written to allow mulithreaded physx?

    I wouldnt doubt if nvidia botches the cpu from being able to use more than one core.
     
  25. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,373 (11.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,681
    itsp ossible they picked a task physX can accelrate, and then just wrote their own multithreaded code to do that task - not using physX itself, just doing the same task on a CPU.
     
    shevanel says thanks.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page