ATI and Physx

[Wile E]

ah, yes good point - that is the one possibility for those who have the funds to go that way lol.

Could buy used. Or maybe even grab a couple aftermarket air coolers, and use fans with standard plugs.

 

[jhine5588]

Hey man, unfortunately overclocking safely in crossfire mode while using the physX hack is not possible (yet)

I can fan control my 4870X2 through Rivatuner with the PhysX hack. Haven't attempted an overclock as it seems to be running very well as is. BTW, I'm using the 10.1's.



Jeremy

 

[eidairaman1]

No need to overclock? I think you are in the wrong place sir...



This is not correct. I have Windows 7, and I took the second monitor off my main PC and hooked it up to my HTPC. The Nvidia control panel no longer opens even thought I still have the DVI to D-sub adapter hooked up to it.

Well FYI dude, AMD took a few driver releases to perfect Overdrive for the x1950 Pro, when it initially came out the overdrive was unstable with the card (lockups when adjusting etc) well currently overdrive works with the card (Built into Catalyst). I'm saying it will take a few driver releases for them to have a working oc utility for the card. Also I am not in the wrong place either sir, Im just saying at the moment the card has ridiculous performance that it doesn't need to be pushed until better cooling arrives or until competition finally arrives (That's a joke)

 

[Wile E]

Well FYI dude, AMD took a few driver releases to perfect Overdrive for the x1950 Pro, when it initially came out the overdrive was unstable with the card (lockups when adjusting etc) well currently overdrive works with the card (Built into Catalyst). I'm saying it will take a few driver releases for them to have a working oc utility for the card. Also I am not in the wrong place either sir, Im just saying at the moment the card has ridiculous performance that it doesn't need to be pushed until better cooling arrives or until competition finally arrives (That's a joke)

ANd he's just saying OCing is not a matter of need. It's based on a matter of want.

 

[eidairaman1]

Well if he wants to burn the card up, that's on him, i just don't like seeing people waste money ya know. I mean you get a new toy n all and havent let it burn in so to speak u can break it, just like a car, there is a certain amt of time the car has to be operating before the differential can be put through some extreme movements such as sudden acceleration etc.

 

[Wile E]

Well if he wants to burn the card up, that's on him, i just don't like seeing people waste money ya know. I mean you get a new toy n all and havent let it burn in so to speak u can break it, just like a car, there is a certain amt of time the car has to be operating before the differential can be put through some extreme movements such as sudden acceleration etc.

Silicon doesn't need that kind of burn in. Cars need that because there is physical contact between moving parts. You can OC silicon from day one, and the dangers are just the same as waiting to do it.

And if you are against OCing in any capacity, you really are on the wrong forum. lol.

 

[TheMailMan78]

Silicon doesn't need that kind of burn in. Cars need that because there is physical contact between moving parts. You can OC silicon from day one, and the dangers are just the same as waiting to do it.

And if you are against OCing in any capacity, you really are on the wrong forum. lol.

The only exception to what you just said is thermal paste. That in fact takes time to cure correctly if its aftermarket.

 

[Wile E]

The only exception to what you just said is thermal paste. That in fact takes time to cure correctly if its aftermarket.

Not MX-2 (and a whole slew of others).

 

[nt300]

Nvidia PhysX is a dead duck once DX11 becomes mainstream.

 

[blkhogan]

Silicon doesn't need that kind of burn in. Cars need that because there is physical contact between moving parts. You can OC silicon from day one, and the dangers are just the same as waiting to do it.

And if you are against OCing in any capacity, you really are on the wrong forum. lol.

I fully agree with this. Ive done it both ways for years, kinda a obsession of mine. :shadedshu I was always taught to 'break a system in slowly'. Start with one thing, test it, then move on to the next component. Now, I mostly build on AMD/ATI platforms, so I dont know how applies to Intel based CPU's or Nvidia based GPU's But doing either of the 2 ways never netted a better result. I feel its more of a personal choice in the way we choose to break our rigs in.

 

[TheMailMan78]

Not MX-2 (and a whole slew of others).

Your right. I guess its just me that likes to "bake" a while before I "fry"

 

[t_ski]

Nvidia PhysX is a dead duck once DX11 becomes mainstream.

NT300, where's the thread of you "wife" pics?

 

[Tweak-2-]

Sorry if i sound common , but from my research i'v learned that physX is not going to be so popular anymore , the future now is open CL , unlike physX open CL allows for more than just 20% cpu usage and it also allows better communication between GPU and CPU , iv attached a image of the new RC 2 8.70 driver with open CL support ( ps you dont need it for open CL but it has Open CL and open GL extensions added into the driver ) , all you need to do is install you favorite driver and then install the RC 2 8.70 into it , check my 2D , 3D driver and open GL driver are all newer , personally the 9.12 driver worked better for me because the 10.1 driver removed textures in my grid game as well as flicker a line now and then on the top of my screen , kinda annoying , i'm using the hd 4870x2 , my hd 5970 broke ,, waiting for a return Hence stock is limited at the moment, ( hd 4870x2 with top bios and vold mod ) . i ran a bench on the CPU from GPU caps , called 1 million particle rendering ( by OpenCL 1.0) , it uses 70 % of the CPU unlike physX 25% , ( PS for those of you playing dirt and cant put post processing on high , ( this is DX11 els the game runs dx 9 ) then uninstall the driver gamer OSD , the onscreen display cant adress DX 11 and then doesnt allow the game to use it , it allso removes tessellation on heaven DX 11 bench , took me some time to fix this but just uninstall OSD and CCC then reinstall CCC , post processing can be on high on any range HD 5xxx card )

 

[Tweak-2-]

 

[Tweak-2-]

oke sorry about the double posting my stupid picture doesn't want to display

 

[Zubasa]

oke sorry about the double posting my stupid picture doesn't want to display

Use the delete button, it is your friend

 

[Tweak-2-]

http://www.techpowerup.org/upload.php

http://img.techpowerup.org/100208/HD 4870x2 RC2 8.7316.jpg

maby a link works , if now MOD plz look into this GRRRRRRR i'v used this method for like ever

 

[Tweak-2-]

The image is 800KB and 1680x1050 like all my other ones i upload any ideas guys ?

 

[Tweak-2-]

never mind thanx for fixing it dude !!! here

had to make it small for sum reason

 

[Wile E]

OpenCL, DirectCompute, and DX11 doesn't automatically mean the end of Physx. OpenGL never killed off DirectX. Physx is just software. It can be ported to run on other platforms, if they so choose. There is even Physx that is cpu based, like Havok. Physx has the bonus of fully functional, well documented, and relatively easy to use Developer's Tools as well.

I think the future of Physx depend solely on how nVidia pushes it. I think if they port it to DirectCompute or OpenCL, it fully opens the API up to the current market.

 

[nt300]

I think the future of Physx depend solely on how nVidia pushes it. I think if they port it to DirectCompute or OpenCL, it fully opens the API up to the current market.

That is where Nvidia went way wrong.
Nvidia buys Ageia to prevent both Intel & ATI from freely using Ageia's PhysX. (NVIDIA ADMIT THIS, THEY WANT MONEY) Nvidia wanted some sort of licensing payoff this is why both Intel and ATI told them where to go. Havok is free & open for anybody to use where as Nvidia's PhysX can only be used with Nvidia's cards. Even developers have to pay off Nvidia some sort of fee to use PhysX.

If Nvidia wasn’t so greedy they would have had both ATI & Intel using PhysX and game developers would have pushed it into many more games.

How to correct this confusion? By eliminating Nvidia’s PhysX completely and pushing forward an open standard called Havok Physics. This is where DX11 comes in, Nvidia is going to have a very hard time selling there version of PhysX once DX11 becomes mainstream.

 

[Wile E]

That is where Nvidia went way wrong.
Nvidia buys Ageia to prevent both Intel & ATI from freely using Ageia's PhysX. (NVIDIA ADMIT THIS, THEY WANT MONEY) Nvidia wanted some sort of licensing payoff this is why both Intel and ATI told them where to go. Havok is free & open for anybody to use where as Nvidia's PhysX can only be used with Nvidia's cards. Even developers have to pay off Nvidia some sort of fee to use PhysX.

If Nvidia wasn’t so greedy they would have had both ATI & Intel using PhysX and game developers would have pushed it into many more games.

How to correct this confusion? By eliminating Nvidia’s PhysX completely and pushing forward an open standard called Havok Physics. This is where DX11 comes in, Nvidia is going to have a very hard time selling there version of PhysX once DX11 becomes mainstream.

Developers don't have to pay a dime to use Physx. And nVidia said that ATI is more than welcome to write drivers that can use Physx without licensing fees. ATI declined to do so. Both companies are at fault for this crap.

 

[Tweak-2-]

got it

 

[nt300]

Tweak-2-, what program are you using? GPUz or something? I see OpenCL in that pick.

Developers don't have to pay a dime to use Physx. And nVidia said that ATI is more than welcome to write drivers that can use Physx without licensing fees. ATI declined to do so. Both companies are at fault for this crap.

The very fact Nvidia disabling PhysX when an ATI card is present is enough to conclude Nvidia is not taking this type of PhysX seriously enough. Once DX11 hits game developers hard, you will see then weaving away from Nvidia's PhysX while strengthening there relationship with Intel’s Havok.

Intel and AMD seem to have come to an arrangement that both CPU and GPU will benefit from Havok’s improvements not just in gaming but in High Def video playback and so forth. I just need to find that link

 

[TheMailMan78]

Developers don't have to pay a dime to use Physx. And nVidia said that ATI is more than welcome to write drivers that can use Physx without licensing fees. ATI declined to do so. Both companies are at fault for this crap.

That doesn't make any sense man. Why would a company buy another company out then turn around and give the spoils to its competition?