Monday, October 5th 2009

Hack Released to Enable PhysX on Windows 7 with ATI GPU Present

For NVIDIA's PhysX technology, it has been a roller-coaster ride since NVIDIA's acquisition of the technology, and its makers. As much as PhysX quickly became one of the important selling-points of NVIDIA's consumer graphics line GeForce, it also had its small share of controversy, linked to market dynamics more than anything. With the technology's port to the GeForce GPU, enthusiasts fancied having the freedom of choice with a primary GPU that is dedicated to rendering 3D graphics, and a second GPU that is just about powerful to assign as a dedicated PhysX GPU.

Although having a powerful ATI Radeon GPU aided by a less-powerful NVIDIA GeForce GPU for PhysX was possible on Windows XP, the succeeding Windows Vista restricted this, by making sure two active display drivers couldn't coexist. Windows 7 removed this restriction, but before you could rejoice, NVIDIA quickly released a driver-level code with its 186 series drivers, that disables NVIDIA PhysX altogether when a GPU from another vendor is coexisting and enabled, even an IGP for that matter. If that wasn't bizarre enough, with the latest drivers, you can't even pair an Ageia PhysX PPU card with an ATI Radeon GPU going about its business. To the rescue comes a soft-modder's nifty bit of software that overrides this restriction from NVIDIA's drivers, so you can use dedicated GeForce PhysX cards on machines with ATI Radeon primary GPUs again. The corrective driver patch comes from tech portal NGOHQ.com community member GenL.

The patch, which you can download here, has been successful so far going by community members' feedback. It lays to rest any argument NVIDIA would like to make about how using dedicated PhysX cards with primary GPUs of your choice (which happen to be an ATI Radeon) would be the end of the world, other than of course, market-dynamics.

Speaking of which, here's NVIDIA's statement on why dedicated PhysX accelerators ought not to work with GPUs from other vendors: "PhysX is an open software standard any company can freely develop hardware or software that supports it. NVIDIA supports GPU accelerated PhysX on NVIDIA GPUs while using NVIDIA GPUs for graphics. NVIDIA performs extensive Engineering, Development, and QA work that makes PhysX a great experience for customers. For a variety of reasons - some development expense some quality assurance and some business reasons NVIDIA will not support GPU accelerated Physx with NVIDIA GPUs while GPU rendering is happening on non- NVIDIA GPUs."Source: NGOHQ
Add your own comment

111 Comments on Hack Released to Enable PhysX on Windows 7 with ATI GPU Present

#1
Dixxhead
WHAT!?

Not only could you not pair an Nvidia Card with ATI, but they also restricted use of a dedicated PhysX PPU-Card in combination with an ATI-GPU?!

That's seriously wrong if you ask me, makes me pissed just thinking about it, even though it doesn't concern me as a Laptop user. :slap:

Shouldn't this be illegal altogehter? I mean, who told me I will not be able to use my PhysX Card on my ATI because some sinister corporation thinks it's smart to get more money out this way.
Posted on Reply
#2
leonard_222003
PP Mguire said:
Nobody is forcing you to buy anything. And your post just proved mine, and a few others points. If PhysX is such crap then why are people wanting to get that extra NV card to use PhysX then huh? :roll:

And you pay the extra price for the extra performance. Its as simple as that. I see alot of bitching about Nvidia for nothing and alot of hate for nothing. The same kinda people will pay a grand for an Intel i7 Xtreme processor but will bitch about paying 100 extra bucks for a better performing Nvidia gpu. All the people complaining that have i7 CPUs in your case should just shut up because your all being hypocrits. If you wanna bitch over Nvidias +5 FPS then put an AMD rig in there and buy an ATI card since its cheaper for only ~5fps less.
What people are concerned is if Physx becomes a standard , not the count on my fingers games that are available now with physx.
What if physx will be available in most future games and Ati's can't do the effects ? it could be a problem for the people who bought one or two 5870's.
Why do you think only about people who buy core i7 and expensive stuff ? some people like me wich have only a E5200 and 4850 bitch about Nvidia's dirty strategy too , Batman looks better on a 8800GTS than on a 4870x2 or 5870 wich are wayyy faster , i guess we can leave hardcore hardware out but the 4850/4870 user wants some AA in batman , and physx if they can ( not really physx but the extra effects that come bundled with "physx" ).


Some people say only Ati users bitch about this ( true ) , and some say only Nvidia users come to defend the evil company like this.
You have to know Nvidia is doing this only because they don't have a DX11 card , everybody knows this , if they wanted to be so bad with the competition they could've done this anytime , also , that super monster that some fans applauded ( GT 300 FERMI or something ) doesn't really exists in a working state for a presentation.
I wouldn't pick on this if not for the deceveing manner in wich they presented Fermi , look some numbers about a super card we are gonna launch , look it's in my hand now , take some pictures , now really you thought this was the real thing , no , it's just a mock up , what ???
So in the end we look at the show " Nvidia will do anything to stop people from buying a 5850/5870 ".
Posted on Reply
#4
EnergyFX
Steevo said:
This thread will be some NV users battling to the end for their green goblin juice, ATI users laughing about the clever way a driver can be minpulated to defeat the joke the lock out was anyway. The people who don't know or care and don't use it will shrug and either get pissed at NV for the crap they pull, or just leave the thread.



So, someone is in the lead already with defending NV, others are following up with the "why ATI sucks" arguments, red users are already laughing and some are preparing for another heated battle of red VS green.
Personally, I prefer NV over ATI... always have... But even with that said, I am all for everyone getting the use out of their hardware. I'm glad for the hack... good for those that can make use of it. I don't have much respect for NV trying to hoard the cookies here, especially when folks way back when bought the Ageia cards. That is total BS to impliment drivers that disable that hardware just because NV wants to poke ATI in the eye.
Posted on Reply
#5
EnergyFX
Dixxhead said:
WHAT!?

Not only could you not pair an Nvidia Card with ATI, but they also restricted use of a dedicated PhysX PPU-Card in combination with an ATI-GPU?!

That's seriously wrong if you ask me, makes me pissed just thinking about it, even though it doesn't concern me as a Laptop user. :slap:

Shouldn't this be illegal altogehter? I mean, who told me I will not be able to use my PhysX Card on my ATI because some sinister corporation thinks it's smart to get more money out this way.
I sense a class action lawsuit attempt in the future. ATI should spearhead it :laugh::laugh:
Posted on Reply
#6
Ghiltanas
I think physx can't be the future, we need a very open system for the phisycs, that can be used by everyone.
Posted on Reply
#7
Dixxhead
Ghiltanas said:
I think physx can't be the future, we need a very open system for the phisycs, that can be used by everyone.
Come GPGPU with DX11, come Havok or a new Physics-Engine with GPU-Support/Acceleration. I could almost bet on it.

That is, if Nvidia is not smart enough to share (e.g. sell) this license to other manufacturers; effectivly making it usable by everyone (consumer).
Posted on Reply
#8
theubersmurf
Ghiltanas said:
I think physx can't be the future, we need a very open system for the phisycs, that can be used by everyone.
Dixxhead said:
Come GPGPU with DX11, come Havok or a new Physics-Engine with GPU-Support/Acceleration. I could almost bet on it.

That is, if Nvidia is not smart enough to share (e.g. sell) this license to other manufacturers; effectivly making it usable by everyone (consumer).
AMD is trying to get an open physics standard going. here
Posted on Reply
#9
Ghiltanas
theubersmurf said:
AMD is trying to get an open physics standard going. here
i knew it, and the good thing is ati partnered with Intel (havok is used by a lot of games, if i'm not wrong). The problem of ati could be the marketing; it's very important, now it's time to use it
Posted on Reply
#10
PP Mguire
leonard_222003 said:
What people are concerned is if Physx becomes a standard , not the count on my fingers games that are available now with physx.
What if physx will be available in most future games and Ati's can't do the effects ? it could be a problem for the people who bought one or two 5870's.
Why do you think only about people who buy core i7 and expensive stuff ? some people like me wich have only a E5200 and 4850 bitch about Nvidia's dirty strategy too , Batman looks better on a 8800GTS than on a 4870x2 or 5870 wich are wayyy faster , i guess we can leave hardcore hardware out but the 4850/4870 user wants some AA in batman , and physx if they can ( not really physx but the extra effects that come bundled with "physx" ).


Some people say only Ati users bitch about this ( true ) , and some say only Nvidia users come to defend the evil company like this.
You have to know Nvidia is doing this only because they don't have a DX11 card , everybody knows this , if they wanted to be so bad with the competition they could've done this anytime , also , that super monster that some fans applauded ( GT 300 FERMI or something ) doesn't really exists in a working state for a presentation.
I wouldn't pick on this if not for the deceveing manner in wich they presented Fermi , look some numbers about a super card we are gonna launch , look it's in my hand now , take some pictures , now really you thought this was the real thing , no , it's just a mock up , what ???
So in the end we look at the show " Nvidia will do anything to stop people from buying a 5850/5870 ".
My argument wasnt for PhysX but for his price argument on NV GPUs.

As for what your saying, i agree that what they are doing is wrong with PhysX but my (and quite a few others) point still stands. If PhysX is not such a big deal and its gonna go down the toilet then why are so many ATI users complaining about it?
Posted on Reply
#11
theubersmurf
Ghiltanas said:
i knew it, and the good thing is ati partnered with Intel (havok is used by a lot of games, if i'm not wrong). The problem of ati could be the marketing; it's very important, now it's time to use it
Havok is older, but I think physx is gaining ground to the point where it's almost as common, it may even be as common now. Somehow I don't think Bethesda and Valve are going to rework their engines for physx, but you never know. IMO the entire situation got screwed up when both Havok and Ageia allowed themselves to be bought. Like I said before, I'd rather it be that both Havok and Ageia licensed their APIs to both ATI and invida, and the use of them was application controlled. A simple "Enable GPU physics" in the video options would probably been a way to implement either easily had that happened, but now they're both proprietary, and money, being money, is in the way of consumers actually getting what they want and being happy. Yay money. Hopefully an open standard will take hold, as someone else mentioned, with directx compute and OpenCL around, the idea that there wouldn't be some kind of open source Physics seems almost far fetched, getting developers to choose it is another story though.
Posted on Reply
#12
pr0n Inspector
W.T.F.
Just because a third party controls the standard doesn't make it an "open" standard.
Posted on Reply
#13
TheMailMan78
Big Member
PP Mguire said:
If PhysX is not such a big deal and its gonna go down the toilet then why are so many ATI users complaining about it?
Because Nvidia f*#ked with Batman. Nobody messes with "The Bat" and EVERYONE knows Batman is an ATI fanboy.



Anyway Physx is proprietary to Nvidia. If the tables were turned Nvidiots would be doing the same thing. Also as I said before Physx currently does nothing for the game that Havok cannot do but because of TWIMTBP program some developers take money over product quality.

There lies the hate for Physx.

Personally I would like Physx to be open to both ATI and Intel. Why? Because Nvidia would still hold the advantage of being the owner of the intellectual property thus developing its hardware/software to run it best PLUS it wouldn't alienate the rest of the world. It really is a "win, win" for everyone.
Posted on Reply
#14
mdm-adph
TheMailMan78 said:
Personally I would like Physx to be open to both ATI and Intel. Why? Because Nvidia would still hold the advantage of being the owner of the intellectual property thus developing its hardware/software to run it best PLUS it wouldn't alienate the rest of the world. It really is a "win, win" for everyone.
I really don't see how every single PhysX game running better on Nvidia hardware is "win, win" for everyone. :wtf: Feel free to explain, though.

IMO, what would be best is for Nvidia to opensource the PhysX code -- that way, ATI could contribute to it as well, and it wouldn't work any better on either Nvidia OR ATI hardware. It would just work great for all. :D
Posted on Reply
#15
InnocentCriminal
Resident Grammar Amender
If nVIDIA did make it Opensource, which they won't, and if PhysX actually started to outperform nVIDIA on ATi cards - man, they would be pissed! It's not outside the realm of possibility - hence why it isn't Opensource.
Posted on Reply
#16
mdm-adph
InnocentCriminal said:
If nVIDIA did make it Opensource, which they won't, and if PhysX actually started to outperform nVIDIA on ATi cards - man, they would be pissed! It's not outside the realm of possibility - hence why it isn't Opensource.
If it was made opensource, that wouldn't happen. :laugh: And even if somehow a full release of the hypothetical opensource PhysX did make it to release, at least you'd be able to step back through the code to see exactly how it was performing better on Nvidia hardware, and then ATI could take appropriate measures to fix it.

It's that kind of transparency that makes opensource so great.
Posted on Reply
#17
Wile E
Power User
Why the hell would they want to open source their code? I sure as hell wouldn't. I'd make it free to use maybe, but not give away the source. That's asking too much.

All they would have to do is port it to OpenCL instead of only CUDA. There, problem solved.
Posted on Reply
#18
Ghiltanas
theubersmurf said:
...but now they're both proprietary, and money, being money, is in the way of consumers actually getting what they want and being happy. Yay money....
you struck the target, and maybe you've also right, when you tell havok it's not a valid alternative.
now i wait to see what will ati bring out whit pixelux partnership
Posted on Reply
#19
theubersmurf
pr0n Inspector said:
W.T.F.
Just because a third party controls the standard doesn't make it an "open" standard.
If you're talking about bullet physics, it's license is under the zlib license. look here. It's not the GNU public license, but it's similarly available to anyone.
Posted on Reply
#20
Scrizz
Ghiltanas said:
you struck the target, and maybe you've also right, when you tell havok it's not a valid alternative.
now i wait to see what will ati bring out whit pixelux partnership
but for havok you don't need special hardware
Posted on Reply
#21
CrackerJack
Will someone plz summit some screenies I want to see the difference having Physx (ATI Main/Nvida PhysX)
Posted on Reply
#22
theubersmurf
Here's a video of mirror's edge with and without physx enbaled, physx adds a lot to the title. link.
Posted on Reply
#23
dir_d
theubersmurf said:
Here's a video of mirror's edge with and without physx enbaled, physx adds a lot to the title. link.
I really hope some developer gets the balls and does this with DX11 and they get rid of Physx all together. Or atleast have that with DX11 and also maybe Physx for the DX10 option.
Posted on Reply
#24
CrackerJack
theubersmurf said:
Here's a video of mirror's edge with and without physx enbaled, physx adds a lot to the title. link.
I see the visual difference, but performance i see barely any. But i guess that's whole point of PhysX anyway.
Posted on Reply
#25
theubersmurf
CrackerJack said:
I see the visual difference, but performance i see barely any. But i guess that's whole point of PhysX anyway.
Pretty much, if physx is intrisic to the engine, so far people have kept the hardware requirements low so you can run it on your cpu without it being overloaded, like the unreal engine. But yeah, that's pretty much added effects. I have to admit I liked it when I played mirror's edge...I played it with physx disabled and it's sort of a mediocre title without it. But that's my feeling about it.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment