Batman Arkham City, no physics at all if you don't use physx ?

[cmdrdredd]

nope thats with physx off and I added a screenshot. gpu usage actually goes down with physx on.

I figured it would be the other way around...isn't more work going on when Physx is enabled? It's not a separate GPU for it unless CUDA stuff cannot be seen by monitoring programs.

I wonder if turning off physx, even though it's offloaded would show similar results. Have to try it.

edit: yup...physx off it's in the 90s. It's kind of odd though isn't it? SHouldn't it do the same work with Physx on too?

 

[3DVagabond]

I figured it would be the other way around...isn't more work going on when Physx is enabled? It's not a separate GPU for it unless CUDA stuff cannot be seen by monitoring programs.

I wonder if turning off physx, even though it's offloaded would show similar results. Have to try it.

edit: yup...physx off it's in the 90s. It's kind of odd though isn't it? SHouldn't it do the same work with Physx on too?

N/M read it backwards. Was only kidding anyway.

 

[ocre]

Budget hardware? You think I built this yesterday trying to cut corners? I've had this system for about 3 years, maybe longer. No reason to upgrade so I didn't. Only changed the GPU. Anyone claiming a 3.8Ghz C2Q is slow is quite foolish if you ask me(don't give me a line about bottlekneck SLI/Crossfire cause I'm not running that setup). As I said before and will repeat again. Battlefield 3 doesn't get 10fps and it's one of the best looking games out there. Yeah the engine is better. I'm simply stating that if a company cares about PC gaming, they can make an engine run as efficiently as that. Simply put...they don't care.

I am not meaning to offend you, i am just saying. your playing with a mid range graphics card, old old physx card, 3 generations old CPU and complaining about options that your PC struggle to play. These options take a lot of power and offer little in return, I know this, i dont even have a physx card at all! What i am saying is, you dont have to use them, and stop whining over them all over the place. For what its worth, i currently am using a core 2 as well. Its only a q6600 that i keep at 3.25ghz @ 1.3v. this chip can do 3.7ghhz but the vcore is scary and since i had to buy a new motherboard i leave it at this low vcore.

Here's what I know for a fact and it's not disputable. Battlefield 3 looks better and runs better. Some games that don't look as good have poorer performance. What I'm saying and you don't seem to understand...is there are companies who take PC gaming seriously and those who treat us like an afterthought. Guess who gets my support first?

Thats wonderful. And thats what it is all about. Gaming is about fun and joy. Its a form of entertainment. Buy games will will enjoy, play settings you enjoy. There are different games for different ppl. Different past times and different taste.

Its quite alright you enjoy BF3. Its a great title which all the whole industry sees. Its an achievement that sets a new mark. Batman AC isnt. But many ppl will enjoy batman too, even if you dont.

The gaming industry is always moving. Its evolving with each and every title. There are millions of ways to do things. Thousands of game engines that do their own thing. Some are better suited than others. Some are just crappy. Some move the industry forward, some dont.

 

[toyota]

I figured it would be the other way around...isn't more work going on when Physx is enabled? It's not a separate GPU for it unless CUDA stuff cannot be seen by monitoring programs.

I wonder if turning off physx, even though it's offloaded would show similar results. Have to try it.

edit: yup...physx off it's in the 90s. It's kind of odd though isn't it? SHouldn't it do the same work with Physx on too?

yeah how can gpu usage go down when you are actually pushing it harder? I thought it was just something wrong with physx in this game but the same thing happens in Mafia 2 benchmark too.

I thought about starting a thread but I figured it would be a mess since physx is such a touchy subject.

 

[ocre]

yeah how can gpu usage go down when you are actually pushing it harder? I thought it was just something wrong with physx in this game but the same thing happens in Mafia 2 benchmark too.

I thought about starting a thread but I figured it would be a mess since physx is such a touchy subject.

physx is actually being held back, completely. It cannot push the system harder because its dependency to the CPU. Its consistently waiting on the CPU more than most ppl realize. Nvidia cannot get around this with their current cards and they are addressing it with their new design. Physx will be much much more impressive once the get past this major limitation n.

 

[toyota]

physx is actually being held back, completely. It cannot push the system harder because its dependency to the CPU. Its consistently waiting on the CPU more than most ppl realize. Nvidia cannot get around this with their current cards and they are addressing it with their new design. Physx will be much much more impressive once the get past this major limitation n.

yeah I remember a while back when I was testing the first Batman game that the cpu mattered much more when running physx. a certain member on here that is now banned argued with me about it but it was true. there was even some review I saw a while back that showed you did more cpu power when running physx than you did without it. in other words, a slower cpu became a bottleneck for the gpu much quicker with physx on.

whats odd about this game is that you can actually run hardware physx on the cpu and its perfectly playable. at least on normal it is since I have not tested out high on the cpu. try even normal physx on the cpu in the first Batman game and you would get 20-25 fps.

 

[ocre]

yeah I remember a while back when I was testing the first Batman game that the cpu mattered much more when running physx. a certain member on here that is now banned argued with me about it but it was true. there was even some review I saw a while back that showed you did more cpu power when running physx than you did without it. in other words, a slower cpu became a bottleneck for the gpu much quicker with physx on.

whats odd about this game is that you can actually run hardware physx on the cpu and its perfectly playable. at least on normal it is since I have not tested out high on the cpu. try even normal physx on the cpu in the first Batman game and you would get 20-25 fps.

it may more multithreaded now. Nvidia has been working on cpu physx. improving the code and recompiling. contrary to what some may think Nvidia is not out to get everyone, they arent sitting in their evil chair plotting against PC gamers.

Physx is evolving, slow as it may be its improving. Nvidia isnt about to go bankrupt on making physx a huge priority. Its steadily evolving. They already have quit putting it in so many games because they are well aware of its shortcomings. They put most of the extra resources on developing it further.

So many are fast to pull the trigger. They have no idea how much work it takes for each step of the way. Its not an easy thing. PPl get mad at nvidia and claim sabotage when in all truth, what they are doing is vastly complex. If it wasnt then we would already seen alternatives from open source or even another independent API. I mean doesnt the fact that AMD has no alternative say its at least very very expensive and complex to do.

the hate on nvidia is immature and thoughtless.

 

[BFG10K]

I can see what Seero was saying. But it appears the use of DX is free for indie game developers. A free library to use as you will. This is pretty expected, but i wouldnt say it ends there. A big time developer, making , multimillion dollar per each release is a different story. This doesnt mean they have to pay cash, but they have to get a license. They have to make an agreement. I dont see them releasing titles without M$ involved, where as the indie developer may never be noticed.

Indie developers are no different to "big time developers”. They download the DirectX SDK for free from Microsoft’s website, agree to the same EULA, then start coding and releasing games.

DirectX is a Windows operating system API, no different to Win32, MFC, etc. It’s free to use without royalties or special licensing, regardless of how big the developer is. The notion that Microsoft is making special NDA-laced DirectX contracts for big developers is a fantasy.

 

[ocre]

Indie developers are no different to "big time developers”. They download the DirectX SDK for free from Microsoft’s website, agree to the same EULA, then start coding and releasing games.

DirectX is a Windows operating system API, no different to Win32, MFC, etc. It’s free to use without royalties or special licensing, regardless of how big the developer is. The notion that Microsoft is making special NDA-laced DirectX contracts for big developers is a fantasy.

Perhaps, not yet. My posting was thought invoked and in no way was i saying it is happening. My whole point was M$ invested a lot in this API and have been steadily becoming the most popular. I see them as a corporation that exist to make money. They own it and and want everyone to be aware of this.

To think that microsoft will never take advantage of owning this API is also fantasy.

No one here can tell me why the xbox gets all these exclusive releases first on their system. Why we have to wait on PC to play batman. M$ is a huge corporation with lots of power. Money is only one way this power manifest. Patents and licenses are another.

None of this is saying that they currently use DX as a leverage. But in my opinion if it hasnt happened already, i am completely sure it will one day. You may think M$ will never do anything like that, it makes no difference to me. I am making no claims, just sharing my thoughts.

good day sir

 

[3DVagabond]

Indie developers are no different to "big time developers”. They download the DirectX SDK for free from Microsoft’s website, agree to the same EULA, then start coding and releasing games.

DirectX is a Windows operating system API, no different to Win32, MFC, etc. It’s free to use without royalties or special licensing, regardless of how big the developer is. The notion that Microsoft is making special NDA-laced DirectX contracts for big developers is a fantasy.

Correct. There is but a single DirectX SDK EULA (Actually there are 2 copies in different formats, but they are identical.). It's the same for everyone.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I am not meaning to offend you, i am just saying. your playing with a mid range graphics card, old old physx card, 3 generations old CPU and complaining about options that your PC struggle to play. These options take a lot of power and offer little in return, I know this, i dont even have a physx card at all! What i am saying is, you dont have to use them, and stop whining over them all over the place. For what its worth, i currently am using a core 2 as well. Its only a q6600 that i keep at 3.25ghz @ 1.3v. this chip can do 3.7ghhz but the vcore is scary and since i had to buy a new motherboard i leave it at this low vcore.
.

I'm running my GTX 295 for physx now. For the record...there's a 5fps difference between the 9800GT and GTX 295 in this game's built in benchmark using my hardware setup(only one GPU on the 295 is doing any work). 5fps isn't that much when you're capping vsync all the time in a given title. After reinstalling drivers and all that, I got this game running 50-60fps with physx on high using either card.

 

[ocre]

I'm running my GTX 295 for physx now. For the record...there's a 5fps difference between the 9800GT and GTX 295 in this game's built in benchmark using my hardware setup(only one GPU on the 295 is doing any work). 5fps isn't that much when you're capping vsync all the time in a given title. After reinstalling drivers and all that, I got this game running 50-60fps with physx on high using either card.

wow!!! what a card for physX! does it use both GPUs? Drom what i heard I just dont think the whole card would be faster than a single gpu on. Especially when SLI is cpu dependant on top of physx needing so much from the CPU too.

I dont know but i thought SLI and physx didnt mesh well and it was better running one card for graphics and one for physX. Does it uses both chips on your gtx295 for physx? I didnt know you could do that!! It kinda blows my mind. Do tell if you can run it with both and just one GPU on the 295.

How did you end up with a gtx295 anyway?

 

[Lonbjerg]

Haha, okay guy. I'll just let the brass handle this.

For starters, I don't appreciate my character being attacked inproperly. If you only read a few posts prior to my assumptioned.

Oh well.

Trolls gonna troll, eh?

The only trolling in this thread is against PhysX...just like you did *shrugs*

 

[Lonbjerg]

yeah I remember a while back when I was testing the first Batman game that the cpu mattered much more when running physx. a certain member on here that is now banned argued with me about it but it was true. there was even some review I saw a while back that showed you did more cpu power when running physx than you did without it. in other words, a slower cpu became a bottleneck for the gpu much quicker with physx on.

whats odd about this game is that you can actually run hardware physx on the cpu and its perfectly playable. at least on normal it is since I have not tested out high on the cpu. try even normal physx on the cpu in the first Batman game and you would get 20-25 fps.

Google PhysX SDK 3.0

 

[taltamir]

As far as saying their is no individual negotiation? Are you saying major (cross platform) releases dont have individual negotiations?

A major cross platform release does not negotiate for the windows release. They download the SDK and develop for it.

They do negotiate for the console version, since that requires a license to develop for.

DirectX is a Windows operating system API, no different to Win32, MFC, etc. It’s free to use without royalties or special licensing, regardless of how big the developer is. The notion that Microsoft is making special NDA-laced DirectX contracts for big developers is a fantasy.

Specifically, it is a crazy conspiracy theory.

 

[railven]

The only trolling in this thread is against PhysX...just like you did *shrugs*

I didn't know complimenting the level of physx used in a title and admitting through jump through hoops to get my hybrid physx setup to work JUST so that I can use physx in specific titles equates to "trolling physx."

gotcha. another reading comprehension fail.

 

[Lonbjerg]

I didn't know complimenting the level of physx used in a title and admitting through jump through hoops to get my hybrid physx setup to work JUST so that I can use physx in specific titles equates to "trolling physx."

gotcha. another reading comprehension fail.

So you didn't try and place the blame for the borked Dx11 at PhysX?

Right...:whiste:

 

[railven]

So you didn't try and place the blame for the borked Dx11 at PhysX?

Right...:whiste:

No, I suggested maybe it could help with DX11 performance - ie remove more load off the card for PhysX and thus allow better DX11 performance.

Funny, nVidia themselves said it allows better PhysX performance and I have two forum friends with GTX 580's that can now run PhysX on High where before they'd have to settle for Normal.

I was wrong that it didn't help DX11 performance, but your attempt to wrangle me with the "evils in which you fight" was pathetic and needless.

Like I said before, nice try Unlike you, I'm not agenda driven - I actually enjoyed PhysX in Batman: AC.

 

[Kr@n]

What? When did [... cut ...] or was that the case?

First, my apologies for scheming in this heated discussion.

In Mathematics, some conjectures are widely considered as truths (some are even considered axioms), but have been proven unprovable (i.e. someone actually expressed a mathematical proof showing that the said conjecture could never be proven). Sometime, these conjectures cannot be proved wrong either ... Such conjectures can only be "validated" by experience/observation. (TL/DR : there exists some truth that cannot be proved true and wrongs that cannot be proved wrong ; thus saying "My argument must be true because nobody could prove it wrong" is quite false - and has been proven false ^^).

Secondly, I think the burden of proof is on you, not because your claim is exceptional or whatever, nor because your seemingly more or less wrong than the other side, but just because you seem to have more people discussing your claim than people backing you. That does not make you wrong (nor right FWIW), but it does incline the burden of proof towards you IMO...

Note : I do think your arguments have some merits (at least they are expressed quite well and with good manners, which is much more than the average on the web these days), but the others also have good arguments (and I'm inclined to believe them until I'm proven wrong).

 

[Rifter]

What the hell did this thread degenerate into???????

Oh well, Toasting with some Epic Bread!

 

[apoppin]

What the hell did this thread degenerate into???????

Oh well, Toasting with some Epic Bread!

The usual. As for me, i am actually playing the game.


The game is unreal in S3D in DX11 maxed out 1080p. However, using a single EVGA GTX 560 ti 448 core FTW, slowdowns are completely unacceptable - at other times it is playable.

Word is from inside sources that a patch is imminent that will address the DX11 issues - possibly as early as today.
:whiste:

3D is the best i have seen, so far. And i am using the "old" glasses and 23" display, so far.

As soon as i unbox and take photos, i will set up the Light Boost 27" display and try the new glasses.
---And toss the 560 Ti out for a GTX 590. i want PhysX on high.
^_^

 

[AdamK47]

Jiminy Christmas! It sure would be swell for them to release a patch today.

 

[Carfax83]

Word is from inside sources that a patch is imminent that will address the DX11 issues - possibly as early as today.
:whiste:

Looks like the patch has been leaked early. The "unofficial" patch works, but it doesn't mesh with GFWL so you won't be able to save unless you use an offline account.

It fixes the DX11 performance issue, and the slow launch, among other things.

If the patch was leaked though, it may be that the release is imminent as you say, and it may just be better to wait for the official release.