People give PhysX crap because its only accelerated through CUDA API which only works if you have a certain type of GPU.
I just wanted to revisit this statement because I learned something today.
TressFX isn't even included in the PS3 or Xbox360 versions of the game.
PhysX works on both consoles, as well as the Wii and WiiU.
PhysX works on more hardware than TressFX, so your argument doesn't make any sense.
Look at your system specs, and maybe try the new beta drivers from NVidia that boost performance in Tomb Raider with TressFX by about 60% on average.
Also TressFX is DirectCompute accelerated. your GTX660ti like my 680 but even worse are weak with DirectCompute which is why performance is hit so hard with it enabled. :shadedshu
It isn't just about performance.
If the performance was terrible but the effect was actually good I wouldn't have a problem with it.
But her hair looks like a bunch of shit spaghetti stuck on her head.
No one wants that.
And simply rendering hair should not take that much directcompute power.
Midrange cards should be able to handle that.
Now if TressFX was used for explosions and a lot of things going on on screen then it could use a lot of directcompute power, but it isn't.
It is being used on hair so it shouldn't be using any directcompute power at all.
And everyone said that developers would start to use physics to improve games once a standard was released that worked on both nVidia and AMD, but obviously that didn't happen.
Developers were giving something that works on both and they decided it was best used to render hair.
Not all the cool stuff that it could have been used for.
Not destructible environments or explosions, no, they used it to render hair, and did a shitty job at it too.