LAN_deRf_HAI don't even think those effects are worth the performance hit.

There really is no performance hit from the PhysX calculations with any decent GTX500/400 graphics card. There is a graphical performance hit from the extra particles that have to rendered. Deciding if that performance hit is worth it is up to the user, just like decididing if the performance hit from AA is worth it, because in the end it is all just unneed eyecandy.

LAN_deRf_HAJust about every physx simulation I've seen has seemed like it belonged in a low res phone game. The simulations are all comprised of balls and it's pretty bad when you can actually tell that by looking at it. The ball count is always just too low. Looks awful.

The simulations have nothing to do with it, the games look really damn good. And I don't know what simulations you've been looking at, but some of the PhysX ones I've seen look damn good. In fact, I think the only one I remember with balls in it was from way back in the begining of PhysX, maybe even before nVidia bought the technology. Most of the demos now show of either the soft body effect, the fluid/smoke effects, or the cloth effects. None have balls in them...:confused:

newtekie1The simulations have nothing to do with it, the games look really damn good. And I don't know what simulations you've been looking at, but some of the PhysX ones I've seen look damn good. In fact, I think the only one I remember with balls in it was from way back in the begining of PhysX, maybe even before nVidia bought the technology. Most of the demos now show of either the soft body effect, the fluid/smoke effects, or the cloth effects. None have balls in them...:confused:

You don't understand. Those are still using balls, they just don't appear as balls. You can see it really clearly in that Alice example when she's walking through the oil. It looks awful, not realistic or detailed. You can actually see the balls getting kicked up and bouncing around, doesn't behave as a liquid at all. It's like someone dropped marbles on the floor. Hell in that game every instance looks like some tacked on effect that doesn't belong, but that's an issue for most physx games. Scaling up in quality to say a blockbuster effect in maya water is still essentially just a bunch of tiny balls with special magnetism and weight properties, only they're so numerous it looks quite a bit better. In all physx simulations the ball count is just too low, that's why I equated it to low resolution. It really is like low resolution physics.

As for the performance. In games that use is sparingly like UT3 there's actually a performance gain, but once it's taken advantage of like those custom UT3 maps with tornados and what not there's a pretty noticeable penalty.

Nvidia gots balls!

LAN_deRf_HAYou don't understand. Those are still using balls, they just don't appear as balls. You can see it really clearly in that Alice example when she's walking through the oil. It looks awful, not realistic or detailed. You can actually see the balls getting kicked up and bouncing around, doesn't behave as a liquid at all. It's like someone dropped marbles on the floor. Hell in that game every instance looks like some tacked on effect that doesn't belong, but that's an issue for most physx games. Scaling up in quality to say a blockbuster effect in maya water is still essentially just a bunch of tiny balls with special magnetism and weight properties, only they're so numerous it looks quite a bit better. In all physx simulations the ball count is just too low, that's why I equated it to low resolution. It really is like low resolution physics.

As for the performance. In games that use is sparingly like UT3 there's actually a performance gain, but once it's taken advantage of like those custom UT3 maps with tornados and what not there's a pretty noticeable penalty.

Actually, it behaves exactly like a liquid. Liquids form dropplets when in the air, and when it hits the ground it pools, that is exactly what it is doing in the Alice demo. I don't know what to tell you, but that is how fluids react. If you don't like it, I guess go take it up with mother nature...:rolleyes:

And again, the penelty isn't from PhysX, it is from the extra graphical rendering required to render all the extra objects on the screen.

Yay my GTX460 is getting a free name upgrade! :D:laugh:

WarraWarraBuilding a new I7-2600k p67 desktop and need some advice.
Been away from desktop parts for a while so stupid question.

I am concerned that the ati 6970-2gb or 580gtx would not be enough to run basic games at 1440x900~1080p and I see this IGP equivalent video card GTX560 that is the same as the GTX560ti and people are still able to play games and still buying this card ??

Why would anyone want to buy this card ? :confused:

I am lost, is the ATI6970 then overkill or is the games falling behind the technology ?

$250~$350 budget.

GTX560 = IGP equivalent? What?

The GTX560 is a mid-high end card, and many, many times more powerful than any IGP.

The 6950 and 580 are flagship single GPU parts, and, as is often the case with such parts, overkill for most purposes.

If you want 1440*900 gameplay a GTX550 would be fine. If you want 1080p gameplay a GTX560 would be fine.