GTX 570 with a GTX 260 physX card?

[Lazarus52980]

If you are not running SLI and are only using one card (I have an EVGA GTX 570) is it worth it to add a PhysX card? For now, its just laying around and not being used, so I thought I would put it to use, but I had heard a PhysX card was only useful in an existing SLI setup. Is that true?


I'm locking this thread, it appears to have answered the OP's question sufficiently and is now just becoming yet another physx/physics debate.

Folks I have no problems with there being a physx/physics debate but please create a new thread for it so the venue is correct from the outset.

Moderator Idontcare

 

[happy medium]

no, a gtx570 and gtx260 is a good combo for physx.

 

[Lazarus52980]

Got it. Thank you

 

[rockyjohn]

It should be a great combo. The GTX 260 will provide a lot more power for Physx than you can use, but since you already have it great. It should help you increase some settings considerably.

Just make sure your PSU can handle the extra load though.

 

[RavenSEAL]

Good combo.

 

[medichawk1]

what do you guys think of an older card to work as phyx. I have a 8600gts that im not using. Would this be to old 2 even help.

 

[toyota]

what do you guys think of an older card to work as phyx. I have a 8600gts that im not using. Would this be to old 2 even help.

8600gts is too slow for physx. also it would help if you actually provided much more info such at least your system specs. the level of gpu that is being used for graphics will help determine what level of gpu would be best for dedicated physx.

 

[sticks435]

I kind of have the same question. Gonna upgrade to a 460 or 560, and will then have both a 260 and 8800gts 320 laying around. Which of those 2 would be better for Physx factoring in power consumption, etc?

 

[Rifter]

physx isnt even a big deal. IMO ANY card for physx would be a waste of power.


No thread-crap/thread-derails please.

Thread isn't a "pro vs. con of physx".

Moderator Idontcare

 

[Lonbjerg]

physx isnt even a big deal. IMO ANY card for physx would be a waste of power.

Yeah, GPU physics is such a little deal that only NVIDIA, AMD and Intel are working on this...oh wait...

 

[magomago]

sorry to thread derail, but what about a 8800gt paired with a gtx460? will th e8800gt slow things down? i've noticed in some benchmarks if the physx card is too slow, overall performane will decrease

 

[Aristotelian]

Yeah, GPU physics is such a little deal that only NVIDIA, AMD and Intel are working on this...oh wait...

He said 'PhysX' (by name), not 'GPU physics' part and parcel. Do you see the difference in what he referred to, and what you're referring to? I hope so.

 

[toyota]

sorry to thread derail, but what about a 8800gt paired with a gtx460? will th e8800gt slow things down? i've noticed in some benchmarks if the physx card is too slow, overall performane will decrease

a gtx460 doing graphics with an 8800gt handling physx will be faster than letting the gtx460 do both graphics and physx.

 

[happy medium]

:thumbsup:

a gtx460 doing graphics with an 8800gt handling physx will be faster than letting the gtx460 do both graphics and physx.

Yes another good combo.

 

[Vette73]

Just do fps test before and then add the card. Many times the result is much lowwer frames with very little gain. Now that may be differant per game and how much coding Physx has been done to it.

Anybody seen any recent reviews of Physx to see if lose of frames is still a major concern with the newwer cards/drivers?

 

[medichawk1]

8600gts is too slow for physx. also it would help if you actually provided much more info such at least your system specs. the level of gpu that is being used for graphics will help determine what level of gpu would be best for dedicated physx.

so i have a asus m2n sli deluxe 16x16. amd dual 5600 the card i have now is 450gts 1gb

 

[toyota]

so i have a asus m2n sli deluxe 16x16. amd dual 5600 the card i have now is 450gts 1gb

I would not waste money on a physx card in a system with an Ahtlon 64 5600 and gts450. you probably only own 1 or 2 games at the most that even have available hardware physx and you are missing much anyway.

 

[EdgeOfDetroit]

Which applications actually have a noticeable gain from PhysX? I thought it was still in the smoke-and-mirrors category.

 

[toyota]

Which applications actually have a noticeable gain from PhysX? I thought it was still in the smoke-and-mirrors category.

if you have to ask then it isnt something you need to be worried about anyway.

 

[Dark Shroud]

Which applications actually have a noticeable gain from PhysX? I thought it was still in the smoke-and-mirrors category.

You mean GPU PhysX, which is actually a short list of games. The current big one is Mafia II. Batman AA & Mirrors Edge are a few more titles.

Whether you meant it or not your question is very loaded. GPU PhysX is used for affects right now. Which is a hot topic for heated debate.

 

[SolMiester]

He said 'PhysX' (by name), not 'GPU physics' part and parcel. Do you see the difference in what he referred to, and what you're referring to? I hope so.

eh?, GPU physics is okay, PhysX is not?

 

[Dark Shroud]

eh?, GPU physics is okay, PhysX is not?

That depends, the big complaints about GPU PhysX are

• It's only used for effects and not actual game play.
• It's a big performance hit for little game.
• Is disabled if Nvidia's software detects an AMD card or IGP in the system.

Bullet Physics have been shown running on OpenCL so it will work on any GPU that supports OpenCL. Havok Physics have been used to actually improve game play.

AMD is working with teams from both companies. So it's only a matter of time before Havok is also running on OpenCL or Direct Compute. Meanwhile PhysX limited to just Nvidia cards with no AMD GPU product of any kind in the system. And is a large performance hit for eye candy with little game options.

 

[Lonbjerg]

That depends, the big complaints about GPU PhysX are

• It's only used for effects and not actual game play.
• It's a big performance hit for little game.
• Is disabled if Nvidia's software detects an AMD card or IGP in the system.

Bullet Physics have been shown running on OpenCL so it will work on any GPU that supports OpenCL. Havok Physics have been used to actually improve game play.

AMD is working with teams from both companies. So it's only a matter of time before Havok is also running on OpenCL or Direct Compute. Meanwhile PhysX limited to just Nvidia cards with no AMD GPU product of any kind in the system. And is a large performance hit for eye candy with little game options.

We are talking GPU physics here...right?
Show me.

 

[Nemesis 1]

We are talking GPU physics here...right?
Show me.

Does it really matter one way or another?

OT. So how is the weather I promised you would be getting in your neck of the woods? Per another topic.

 

[Aristotelian]

eh?, GPU physics is okay, PhysX is not?

Read what I was quoting again, bud.