$100 for physix video card.

How well do you think an 8600GTS 256MB will do as a physx card? I have a buddy who wants to use it as a physx but they only have 32 shaders. This is paired with a GTX570 SSC.
 
It will be a huge bottleneck in any modern game (like newer than 2007). He is better off NOT using it
 
YamahaAlex37 said:
Maybe if your talking about a single card that can handle graphics and PhysX, but for a separate dedicated PhysX card I think there are lots of choices under $100
Click to expand...

True. But it still begs the question of why? As previous users have stated, so few games support physx, so unless ur favorite game supports it, or you have lots of money to blow(which inst the case if ur looking for a sub $100 card), I see no reason to even mess with it.
 
Maybe just some of the games he likes support it and he does NOT have alot of money to blow.....I think that describes MANY more people.....
 
I have a dedicated Physics card in a system that I'm not using anymore. These damn new motherboards just don't have enough room or slots!!!! :D

ASUS PHYSXP1/128M/GRAW/A PhysX Processing Unit 128MB 128-bit GDDR3 PCI PhysX P1 Ghost Recon Edition Physics Card
Bought it at Newegg.com 6/12/2006 for $291.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121015

PM me if still interested.
 
I have the same card....they are worth about $40 now (if you are lucky). Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.....a 9800 GT will blow it out of the water. At least I got my Ageia card for only $160 :( lol
 
scook9 said:
I have the same card....they are worth about $40 now (if you are lucky). Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.....a 9800 GT will blow it out of the water. At least I got my Ageia card for only $160 :( lol
Click to expand...

The card is worth what someone is willing to pay for it. ;)
 
If you have a spare 8600gt laying around sure, it does decently. My 9500gt (roughly the same thing) handles physX fairly well. High apex is playable in mafia 2 except in HEAVY HEAVY scenarios, then medium works well. But my 460 handles it better by itself, I wouldn't buy anything less then a 9800gt for it...
 
Coresair said:
If you have a spare 8600gt laying around sure, it does decently. My 9500gt (roughly the same thing) handles physX fairly well. High apex is playable in mafia 2 except in HEAVY HEAVY scenarios, then medium works well. But my 460 handles it better by itself, I wouldn't buy anything less then a 9800gt for it...
Click to expand...

Were you directing this post at me? If a 9500GT can handle medium physx then why not use a 8600GTS so it will atleast take a little load off the main card. I don't know much about physx at all so I'm learning :).
 
While taking the main load off the main card, if it is too slow at performing the PhysX operations it can hold up the graphics card while it waits for the PhysX result

Just having a dedicated PhysX card is not always beneficial for this reason. You need a card that performs above a certain threshold or it can still hurt your performance
 
scook9 said:
While taking the main load off the main card, if it is too slow at performing the PhysX operations it can hold up the graphics card while it waits for the PhysX result

Just having a dedicated PhysX card is not always beneficial for this reason. You need a card that performs above a certain threshold or it can still hurt your performance
Click to expand...

This is true. In Batman, even going from a GTX275 to a GTX285 as a dedicated PhysX card increased framerates a bit, even with just a 5770 for graphics. HD5770 bottlenecked by 9800GT for PhysX

A dedicated PhysX card will take some load off your main card and allow it to handle the graphics more quickly, but it'll have to wait for the PhysX card to do its processing. If your dedicated PhysX card isn't at least as good as your main card's PhysX performance while doing both graphics and PhysX, then the dedicated card won't result in improvement.

I'm not saying you need a GTX580 just for PhysX. With my 5870 at 1920x1080, my 9800GT for PhysX gives me 100fps average and 60fps minimum in Batman. 60Hz vsync means that's plenty for me. However, if you have a tri-SLI GTX580 system, don't expect to buy an old $20 budget card and think it'll improve things.

It's a matter of finding the best value - the card that's good enough for your needs (now and possibly in the future) for the lowest price. You personally might be ok with a super-cheap PhysX card that won't let you get above 55fps, simply because it's so cheap. Or you might be willing to drop the big bucks on a GTX580 just for PhysX, to guarantee that you're not bottlenecking anything. PhysX scales well, so generally buying any better (more, faster shaders) card will give you an improvement in PhysX. It just comes down to what it's worth to you for those extra frames from a faster card.
 
Ah ok so you need to get a better physx card the better your dedicated card gets because your main card relies on your physx card to get the job done on time or faster or the dedicated card will be waiting for the slower card resulting in a bottleneck. Ok thanks for all the help and info I guess if going to go physx with a good dedicated card the physx card will also have to be pretty good in itsself.
 
I wouldn't spend a boatload on a Physx card, no matter what you do. Mirror's Edge and Batman: AA benefited greatly from Physx, they really did look great, but there are so few games out there that actually use it that it is hard to say "yeah, get a card just for Physx" unless you can get it for cheap.

I had an old 8800GT laying around that I used along with a GTX 285 for Physx in Mirror's Edge. It looked fantastic, but if I didn't already have that 8800GT then I wouldn't have spent money on a piece of hardware to make just one or two games look better, you know?
 
I meant decent for the price. 9800 GT is entry level physx card and by entry, it's the first in line. I remember reading, I think someone from [H] personally tested a bunch of video card and concluded that a GTX 260 was the sweet spot. That was months ago and the article you linked seems to be more recent. Wow a gtx 285 as a physx card, man graphics power goes by fast.
 
How much processing is Physics used in games? Shouldn't it be a very small percentage so that you won't need an extra video card to do the processing?
 
Nvidea based 9800 cards would be the best bang for your buck period! Thats if you just plan on using it for PhysX.
 
Used GTX260 for $100 on Amazon.com right now. Get it while it's hot: http://www.amazon.com/Geforce-GTX26...OHRU/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1297338953&sr=8-7

I'm using a GTX260 as a PhysX card for my HD5850, and it's working great. Keep in mind, you can use a secondary graphics card for more than just PhysX. As an example, I offload HD video decoding to my GTX260, allowing me to view 1080p h.264 without hitting my CPU or main GPU at all (using CoreAVC as my codec, since it supports GPU decoding using CUDA).

You could also start Folding for the [H]orde with it ;)

Edit: GTS450 might be a better option, it's only $20 more but it's smaller, uses less power, runs cooler and quieter. Only 192 SP's instead of 216, but the benefits probably outweigh the slight performance drop: http://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-...RNBM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1297339390&sr=8-1
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Enjoying said:
Why don't you get a USED GTX 260/216 cores? They go under 100 now.
Click to expand...
Because a GeForce GTX260 pulls 25w idle / 182w load, where as the similarly performing GeForce GTS450 only pulls 18w idle / 106w load.

That reduction in power consumption means a few things; for starters, the GTS450 only needs one PCIe 6-pin auxiliary power connector (the GTX260 requires two), it throws out significantly less heat, and the card is physically a lot shorter (it wont have any problem fitting in small cases like the GTX260 does).

If you can get a GTX260 for super-cheap, go for it...but a GTS450 really does seem to be a better choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top