doubt with Physx

[silberdrachi]

I'm a developer too, granted not a game dev, but I understand the points you are both trying to make. PhysX is an enhancement and should be supported if it is available, the reason most games don't support it is simply because they are cheap console ports. Most games that are developed purely for PC or with the PC in mind at the start end up using it.

 

Unfortunately yes this is true, and a good portion of the reason why companies even bother implementing physx components is just because they get extra marketing out of it. The use of PhysX i bet hardly moves units alone, but the fact that NVidia plasters games that use it all over the place gives them extra exposure they might want.

[LukaP]

I'm a developer too, granted not a game dev, but I understand the points you are both trying to make. PhysX is an enhancement and should be supported if it is available, the reason most games don't support it is simply because they are cheap console ports. Most games that are developed purely for PC or with the PC in mind at the start end up using it.

were currently making a pc exclusive game, and we arent using physx. and we wont. because this alienates the market

[Kryptyx]

 

were currently making a pc exclusive game, and we arent using physx. and we wont. because this alienates the market

 

That is just silly though. If I develop an app for Android - it won't work on iOS so should I not develop my app at all or should I develop towards both audiences?

 

Unfortunately yes this is true, and a good portion of the reason why companies even bother implementing physx components is just because they get extra marketing out of it. The use of PhysX i bet hardly moves units alone, but the fact that NVidia plasters games that use it all over the place gives them extra exposure they might want.

 

Marketing is a big part of it, I won't deny that. There is also the fact trailers and demos running physx will look better and entice people as well.

[LukaP]

 

That is just silly though. If I develop an app for Android - it won't work on iOS so should I not develop my app at all or should I develop towards both audiences?

 

this is TOTALLY different. you are now comparing two competing PLATFORMS, not SOLUTIONS. without using physX you get the exact same results with AMD or NV hardware. with using it, you get either bad performance on AMD, or better looks on NV, or both...

[silberdrachi]

That is just silly though. If I develop an app for Android - it won't work on iOS so should I not develop my app at all or should I develop towards both audiences?

 

Totally different situation, unless you're developing on a framework that works on both mobile OS.

 

On one hand you have two totally different platforms and operating systems that you can not code natively for both. It is literally impossible.

 

On the other hand you have two basically the same graphics architectures, that if you dont put in this one "extra" little thing will run the exact same on both.

[Guest Kloaked]

im a game dev, i know what physX does, but from a gaming perspective, its useless until NV allows amd to use it, so we can program more detailed effects with it

Ah. Didn't know that.

As for Nvidia giving their special sauce away to AMD, I would sooner expect Half Life 3 to release.

[Kryptyx]

Okay, fair enough, perhaps a bad analogy... My point is that you should support it when available and turn it off when not. Most front-end web development is based around this where there is a standard that generally works the same across all different browsers (graphics cards) but some offer better performing or enhanced APIs to improve the user experience. If you want the best overall experience, you use of the those browsers - if not, you still get a solid experience just without some of the bells and whistles.

[nokturrduk84]

1) not. only like 10 games support it, and nine of those are crappy simulators

2) yes but buggy

3) amd card, and then run the basic physics that is needed on the cpu. 

10 games? Why do you lie?

Here's full list which support PhysX:

1. Daylight
2. Call of Duty: Ghosts
3. Warframe
4. The Bureau: XCOM Declassified
5. Assassin's Creed IV Black Flag
6. Hawken
7. Depth Hunter
8. Borderlands 2
9. The Secret World
10. Metro: Last Light
11. Planetside 2
12. Batman: Arkham City
13. Deep Black: Reloaded
14. Mafia II
15. Metro 2033
16. Alice: Madness Returns
17. Shattered Horizon
18. Terminator Salvation
19. Batman: Arkham Asylum
20. Darkest of Days
21. Dark Void
22. Mirror's Edge
23. U-WARS
24. Sacred 2: Fallen Angel
25. MKZ
26. Sacred 2: Fallen Angel
27. MKZ
28. Nurien
29. Crazy Machines 2
30. Cryostasis: Sleep of Reason
31. Age of Conan: Hyborian Adventures
32. Landmark

List will be grow by time as new games will be released.

 

Also running PhysX on CPU is a shit idea, which will cause framerate drops.

 

And to the OP... Check the videos @i_build_nanosuits posted & decide yourself if PhysX is needed for you.

Personally for me PhysX are very nice effects & that's why I'll never buy AMD card.

[winningsince1337]

i am building my new gaming pc with an fx-8350 and an AMD R9 285 but when i went into the disadvantages of using an amd card , i found out that physx is a major-ish thing that nvidia cards have and AMD cards do not. os here are my questions

 

1. how important is it? if possible can you give me some video links to show how physx affects display?

2. is it possible to run physx using a dedicated physx card with an AMD  card as your primary gpu

3. if yes, what do you suggest me getting?

 

Step 1: Don't buy an AMD processor

 

Step 2: Put on sunglasses and buy an intel i5 or i7 processor

 

Step 3: Run physx on your baller Intel processor

 

Step 4: Run from all the girls chasing you because you have a superior Intel processor

 

Step 5: Profit.

[Briggsy]

Ah. Didn't know that.

As for Nvidia giving their special sauce away to AMD, I would sooner expect Half Life 3 to release.

 

the problem is that there is no special sauce, but rather dll files that contain hidden/licensed code, and developers usually have to guess how its going to work, and try to optimize their game code around the PhysX API/middleware, rather than adjust the way PhysX works to suit their game.

[winningsince1337]

the problem is that there is no special sauce, but rather dll files that contain hidden/licensed code, and developers usually have to guess how its going to work, and try to optimize their game code around the PhysX API/middleware, rather than adjust the way PhysX works to suit their game.

 

This ^

 

Basically, this is how it works: Jen-Hsun Huang shows up with a paper bag that has a bottle of stuff in it. You give him a bag of cash in exchange and now you have physx in your game. Straight from 2003

[FellTheSky]

the game ive played the most with physx is borderlands 2, and it sucks without it.

I had 6850 crossfire and with physx high i would get less than 15 fps (10 in big battles). I have now a gtx 760 and the lowest i get is 35 on big battles.

Many people say nvidia is bad performance per dollar, i would say it depends on where you live.

I bought my gtx 760 on sale for 200$, but normally r9 280 and gtx 760 are same price. And they both perform the same.

[Guest Kloaked]

the game ive played the most with physx is borderlands 2, and it sucks without it.

I had 6850 crossfire and with physx high i would get less than 15 fps (10 in big battles). I have now a gtx 760 and the lowest i get is 35 on big battles.

Many people say nvidia is bad performance per dollar, i would say it depends on where you live.

I bought my gtx 760 on sale for 200$, but normally r9 280 and gtx 760 are same price. And they both perform the same.

If you run PhysX on your CPU you're gonna have a bad time.

[winningsince1337]

If you run PhysX on your CPU you're gonna have a bad time.

 

This is true, in Metro LL having physx on crapped my frame-rates on several levels with a 4770k. It's just poor optimization because they want you to buy an Nvidia GPU. No lack of power from the processor and I don't think my game play experience was any less for having physx off. If anything it was better due to higher frame rates. IMHO: physx is a gimmicfrom the past that needs to die so a better physics engine can be put onto the CPU load that isn't very taxing these days. Don't by a GPU for physx and don't buy a GPU for Mantle either.

[Guest Kloaked]

Don't by a GPU for physx and don't buy a GPU for Mantle either.

 

I was with you up until here.

 

I don't understand that logic.

 

 

snip

 

Mate, please read other replies before you say something

I already pointed out to Luka there was more than that, but he said he was just simply throwing a number out there.

[SkilledRebuilds]

Physx on the CPU wasn't ever so bad with Physx 1.0, but with their addition of APEXI PhysX, it will cripple on anything but a NV-GPU.

[silberdrachi]

I was with you up until here.

 

I don't understand that logic.

 

Basically, never make your choice of gpu based off proprietary APIs. Because when it comes down to it, only a fraction of games will implement them, and it will never be anything that changes the way games play. There are a lot of other MUCH more major reasons for choosing one side or the other, that are involved in things like actual performance and handling of your environment.

 

When it comes down to it PhysX (and all the other black box graphics APIs, both red and green sides) will never really impact your game at all, and its doubtful you will even notice it in game. And with Mantle, there are pretty much 2 games that support it, and the improvements arent earth shattering.

 

Not to mention these APIs change so frequently, that over a 3 year lifespan of a gpu the whole market can shift.

[I/O]

What do you mean?

10 games?

There's way more than that.

No there is less than that. All popular games with Physx Metro series, BL series, Batman games, Assassins Creed 4 and TW3 http://physxinfo.com/

[Guest Kloaked]

Basically, never make your choice of gpu based off proprietary APIs. Because when it comes down to it, only a fraction of games will implement them, and it will never be anything that changes the way games play. There are a lot of other MUCH more major reasons for choosing one side or the other, that are involved in things like actual performance and handling of your environment.

 

When it comes down to it PhysX (and all the other black box graphics APIs, both red and green sides) will never really impact your game at all, and its doubtful you will even notice it in game. And with Mantle, there are pretty much 2 games that support it, and the improvements arent earth shattering.

 

Not to mention these APIs change so frequently, that over a 3 year lifespan of a gpu the whole market can shift.

 

While I understand that, I think the choice should be made depending on what games you'll be playing and your budget. If you know <game> will be using <api> and you like the effect/gain of <api> then you should buy the card that has the <api>.

I was completely on Linus' side in his CrossSLI build (I forget the name of the video). I think it was an ultimate gaming PC or something and he was making a point that having these exclusive effects and api's on each team are holding back the experience for the consumers. His example was Star Citizen since it's going to use Mantle as well as PhysX and the only hypothetical way to get both was to have at least one card from each GPU vendor (Nvidia or AMD (which obviously doesn't work like he pointed out in his video)).

[I/O]

Physx on the CPU wasn't ever so bad with Physx 1.0, but with their addition of APEXI PhysX, it will cripple on anything but a NV-GPU.

They didn't add Apex Physx they bought it out in like 07. Apex physx has always been nvidia Physx since they bought out Apex.