Hawken, holy gpu physx!

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ShadowVVL

Senior member
May 1, 2010
758
0
71
Hey at least you can use your 260 as a dedicated PhysX PPU when you upgrade Make sure you're using either medium or none for PhysX, stay clear of the monster!

Yeah I think that is what I will do.

I ran that with physx on but not the high physx setting I may try that on the sp training later.

@ ShadowVVL You got owned because of poor frame-rate or something else?

Not sure, but I think it was cause just suck atm lol
 
Last edited:

Lonbjerg

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2009
4,419
0
0
Chill man, I can't believe people can be so fond of smoke and debris

Its not that, the poster tries to acuse me of being someone else..as a cheap exit-stragety from his own lies...that is what is wrong.
 

SirPauly

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2009
5,187
1
0
No your missing the point because moving beyond scripted does not automatically mean it will be better and you said interaction which physx! has very little of since CellFactor.

Sure it has -- particles collide and are effected -- much more dynamic!
 

ShadowVVL

Senior member
May 1, 2010
758
0
71
did another run at 1380x760 I think it was, this time with quality at med and my fps was at 68 and cpu was about 70-85% so yeah its gpu limited.

I also couldn't select high physx.
 

SirPauly

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2009
5,187
1
0
well A : It's not proprietary


D did I mention it's not proprietary ?

Imho,

So is Havok. The division, fragmentation and chaos is really not from the PhysX middleware over-all though but the Cuda API the GPU component uses.

AMD can license Cuda!

nVidia can port to OpenCL or DirectCompute!
 

ShadowVVL

Senior member
May 1, 2010
758
0
71
I did one last run at 1920x1080 with ultra settings and got 31fps which is better then my 1920x1080 with high settings which only managed 26.
 

railven

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2010
6,604
561
126
Your belief that it is false isn't a meaningful fact.




If you don't wish for people to note the similarities between your trolling styles, change it.

Me thinks you may have hit close to home, thus the threat. I've watched him get in on it with tons of forum posters, some going off the edge with rude comments, I don't recall him openly saying he was reporting them.

Interesting...
 

BallaTheFeared

Diamond Member
Nov 15, 2010
8,115
0
71
It is output to the screen. It doesn't go beyond that. So it doesn't go beyond graphics.

So we have a fundamental disagreement, you enjoy 1995 graphics and link it as a comparison, others enjoy consoles, and then there are us elitist who have PC's to play with cutting edge technology.

Neither is right or wrong, seems silly there was ever an argument involving you in a PhysX thread.

I'm just glad we could hear your opinion on the matter and sort out how you came to it. I assume you'll be going now, allowing the rest of us to discuss modern technology and gaming correct?
 

DominionSeraph

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2009
8,386
32
91
Me thinks you may have hit close to home, thus the threat. I've watched him get in on it with tons of forum posters, some going off the edge with rude comments, I don't recall him openly saying he was reporting them.

Interesting...

He's just an aspie who thinks that an argument is defined by its most ignorant participant, and so trolls by endless pedantry to try to make himself the center of it: "If you don't dance to every one of my calls for you to support your position down to first principles, my position of ignorance wins. (And if I don't like the terms, I'll just redefine them, because the only point here is for me to end up thinking I've 'won'. All else falls to that principle.)"

Took me 5 minutes to call it, I dropped him, and he has no other modes to gracefully fall back on. He can't support that he has value, so if his trolling fails to find trollbait, he's stuck with whining and complaining.
 
Last edited:

Lonbjerg

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2009
4,419
0
0
LOL.
A poster makes a false claim.
Get called on it.
Tries to deflect by blamining me of being someone else.
Asked for ducumentation several times...cannot delivered.

And now poster think he "dropped" me LOL

Ah the World of AMD defense...outside reality

We ar now back to the level of "My CPU can do Graphics just fine" back in the day when GPU came out.

So making a false claim, unable to back it up...is "dropping" someone.....hillarious!

On a side note:

I have notcied a sad trend here.
When ever a certain Group dosn't like the facts...they go for the poster...an decalre Victory...ah the AMD support team is funny...but sad.
 

Lonbjerg

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2009
4,419
0
0
Personally glad to see Havok talk up GPU Physics again -- Havok was very vocal about GPU Physics and its potential back in 2006.

That is because even Havok knew that the CPU isn't able to bring the next step.

NVIDIA knows it.
Intel knows it
AMD knows it.

Only people that seem to deny it...are AMD fans.
 

SirPauly

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2009
5,187
1
0
Then tell me, what does PhysX do in Hawken besides graphical effects?

imho,

Made possible through advances in physics!

More advances in physics may improve fidelity, realism, immersion, interaction and hopefully the holy grail -- redefine game-play!
 

DominionSeraph

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2009
8,386
32
91
So we have a fundamental disagreement, you enjoy 1995 graphics and link it as a comparison, others enjoy consoles, and then there are us elitist who have PC's to play with cutting edge technology.

If you want to play with the technology, feel free to program in PhysX. That has nothing to do with the current discussion, which is whether a game developer getting paid to leave out superior effects in favor of proprietary gimmicks is good for gaming.

If this was something for which only PhysX was suited, it would be different. But crappy debris effects and particle light effects? We've had that forever. Why do you now need a dedicated GTX 650 Ti for an inferior version?
You'd be screaming your head off if a developer left these effects out of the main game to release it as $15 Day 1 DLC. Yet somehow it's ok to leave out and put the price for entry as a $150 dedicated card?
 
Last edited:

railven

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2010
6,604
561
126
He's just an aspie who thinks that an argument is defined by its most ignorant participant, and so trolls by endless pedantry to try to make himself the center of it: "If you don't dance to every one of my calls to for you to support your position down to first principles, my position of ignorance wins. (And if I don't like the terms, I'll just redefine them, because the only point here is for me to end up thinking I've 'won'. All else falls to that principle.)"

Took me 5 minutes to call it, I dropped him, and he has no other modes to gracefully fall back on. He can't support that he has value, so if his trolling fails to find trollbait, he's stuck with whining and complaining.

I've noticed that. You worded it so elegantly as well, I'd have just said "don't feed the trolls." Haha.
 

Lonbjerg

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2009
4,419
0
0
Claim:
The effects in Hawken have been done before, and done better, without PhysX.


Evidence for that claim:


Now WHO is trolling?

But nice the see the red defense force going back to trusted tactics:
Ad hominem...to hide the facts when not in favour of AMD ^^
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |