PhysX - CPU or GPU?

[Pickelhaube]

I have:

AMD FX-8370 (OC - 4.5GHz)

GTX 760 SC ACX (EVGA)

 

Should I dedicated PhysX to the CPU or GPU for greater performance?

 

 Thanks

 

 (Also, really soon, I'm getting a GTX 970)

[Godlygamer23]

GPU is your best bet and you'll get Advanced PhysX as well. CPU only supports normal PhysX.

[comicsansms]

GPUs as PhysX cards do nothing in lots of games. They also don't get make your games run better. Just keep your 760 as a spare GPU.

[typographie]

Probably the GPU, but I suppose you could try it both ways and see if it seems to work better one way or the other.

 

With a GTX 760, I suspect you might get more consistent performance with PhysX completely off in many games. It tends to kinda hammer performance even on Nvidia GPUs at times.

[QueenDemetria]

2 minutes ago, RektSkrubs said:

I have:

AMD FX-8370 (OC - 4.5GHz)

GTX 760 SC ACX (EVGA)

 

Should I dedicated PhysX to the CPU or GPU for greater performance?

 Thanks

 (Also, really soon, I'm getting a GTX 970)

I usually have it set to auto.

[Chronical93]

I know on my Pc, If I dedicate it to the CPU with V-sync on I get 30fps max, but If I dedicate It to my GPU I get 60fps. Note tho I'm running on a bit of a dated laptop. So I would say GPU.

[El Diablo]

i was also wandering this

 

i would say always have it on the gpu

 

im assuming the nvidia cards have a seperate physx asic on the gpu die

 

if they dont then switch depending on if your gpu/cu is geting maxed

 

however there is no way currently we can tell if a cpu or gpu is getting maxed, we get a percentage that gives us a summary of the whole chip die.. so its not accurate.. but yep,,

 

no idea  keep it on the gpu if nvidia cards have a physx asic

[Godlygamer23]

Just now, El Diablo said:

i was also wandering this

 

i would say always have it on the gpu

 

im assuming the nvidia cards have a seperate physx asic on the gpu die

It's processed by the CUDA cores.

[El Diablo]

1 minute ago, Godlygamer23 said:

It's processed by the CUDA cores.

why

[Godlygamer23]

1 minute ago, El Diablo said:

why

Why not? There are thousands of CUDA cores(760 has 1152 at its disposal). GPUs are designed to do things in parallel, and that means it would be a great choice to process physics on.

[xAcid9]

FX CPUs already suffered from poor IPC so why you want to add more load to hammer core 0? 

 

 

[Praesi]

CPU needs to work its Ass off to handle PhysX and your Performance will suffer. The GPU should handle it. If its to weak, i would disable PhysX.

[El Diablo]

On 29/02/2016 at 6:34 AM, Godlygamer23 said:

Why not? There are thousands of CUDA cores(760 has 1152 at its disposal). GPUs are designed to do things in parallel, and that means it would be a great choice to process physics on.

But that meens its using up resources that could be used to render other stuff

 

doesnt the physicx take up quite a huge chunk due to it compiling the games A.I

 

thats a muthaf'n big task

 

im no expert though so yea

[Necrodead]

2 hours ago, El Diablo said:

But that meens its using up resources that could be used to render other stuff

 

doesnt the physicx take up quite a huge chunk due to it compiling the games A.I

 

thats a muthaf'n big task

 

im no expert though so yea

Physx is not AI, it is the physics calculations in regards to nvidia physx technology. There are only a handful of games that use it, batman and borderlands, and now fallout 4. Stuff like chunks of dirt or ice, flowing newspapers in batman, etc.

It may slow your system down a tad in games that use it, but not by a lot. If you put it on the cpu though, it goes way slower. Nvidia nerfed cpu performance so you can only really use nvidia gpu's to run it now.