Which GPU for dedicated Physx?

[!TIMMY!]

Ok, so I have a 8800GT and want to pop in a cheap Nvidia card to do all the Phsyx work in a multi-gpu set up. I have XP so don't need the work around. I can't find any reviews that compare how different cards handle physx when paired with the same more powerful card.

So what is the worst card I could get without sacrificing any physx performance?

I have been looking at the 9500GT 256mb as it has a silent cooling solution.

 

[Diablo]

I didn't know this option was available yet, I thought we had to wait for the forceware 180 drivers to come out. I think that the more powerful card, the more difference you will see.

If it turns out you cna have any card in there (8000 upwards) then I will opt for an albatron 8600GT PCI.

A 9500GT should be enough, then again I don't think there has been much study in this area.

 

[!TIMMY!]

ive done a bit of research and im worried that the 9500gt wont cut it, so i am looking at a 8800GT 256mb.

 

[Rastalovich]

Is there any difference to getting another 8+ series card, and getting a pci PhysX card ?

 

[!TIMMY!]

i have read that a 8600GT is about 4 x faster at physx than a physx card.

 

[Rastalovich]

ooo interesting I don`t know of any physx benchies, linky !

 

[!TIMMY!]

Link 1

Cant find the link for the ppu against an Nvidia GPU.

But I did find this which tests a 4850 as the main card and a number of nvidia cards for physx i think.

 

[Rastalovich]

Meh, neither of them show anything about another gfxcard being better than a aegia card.

 

[!TIMMY!]

Ye, Cant find it right now. Will look again later.

 

[rrjwilson]

Meh, neither of them show anything about another gfxcard being better than a aegia card.

Ageia cards were no better than a CPU at doing tasks (single events strung together no matter how quickly). GPUs (ATi & Havok or nVidia & CUDA) use proprietary language to do PhysX calculation on a truely multithreaded system (stream processors).

It's like saying I could build a PC faster than 5 people building the same PC, just not possible.

After watching a UT3 demo with PhysX enabled using a Ageia card I was keen to DL the pack for myself and try with my SLI 8800GTXs and not only was it higher FPS @ higher resolution but the extra detail meant it looked WAY better.

Ageia card is only good for a very small lacquered mousemat in my opinion now, Sorry.

 

[Rastalovich]

See this is it. I`ve heard that b4.

The Aegia cards "got the physx done" - which is their job.

Now as to a cpu or gpu doing it "better" (better than doing the job ?) - I`ve seen no evidence. No1 has produced any realtime bench of it or anything. How do u do better than getting the job done ?

I`ve heard lots of "oo gpu or cpu is better than using an aegia card" - explain how ? or the statement is just a throw out.

There`d be no point in a cpu_core or a gpu doing physx calculations faster, if there is no requirement to do it faster.

 

[Toxcity]

FPS Raster!

I have heard lots of this "GPU is better for PhysX" but I have also heard lots about "PhysX card is better".

Now I can only speculate that a dedicated GPU will blow the PhysX card out the water. More processors a faster bus speed so and on. I have been playing UT3 with hardware PhysX and the FPS has increased considerably after telling the driver to use my GPU.

 

[Rastalovich]

From what fps to what fps when switching from Aegia+Gpu to Gpu only ? Aside from anything else that doesn`t even look logical. That`s equiv to asking ur gfxcard to do 2 jobs instead of 1 and being faster.

 

[SwaleSmith]

sorry fpr the dumb question, but in theory terms as the 180 drivers aren't outa and the feature hasn't been completely confirmed, nut what on earth would you benefit over an agiea card vs a 8600gt for example.

p.s thought the gtx280 had physics built in, me personaly I cannot see any difference