Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I don't know about the 9800GT or the 9600GT, though my roommate just recently built his new computer which has an I7 2.66 (not over clocked) and the 9800GTX. Mirror's Edge, which uses PhysX was crashing like crazy (like every 5 minutes) on his computer.
The fix he found on a forum someplace was to disable PhysX (I'm not sure what it uses in leu of PhysX).
Sorry, I'm no gaming nor video card expert, but just letting you know of my roommate's experience with PhysX and one of those cards. With that said, I would never not get the GTX if I was building a top of the line gaming machine. The GTX is still regarded by many as the best nvidia card for gaming (without going SLI of course).
EDIT:
He was using Vista 64bit, and later 7 64 bit, both did it.
It's not and that test is not apple to apple thus the results are deceiving.
But that's not the point you were trying to make.
I agree with that but you tried to use that test to prove that a 9600 is enough for Physx when it's not.
But that's not the point you were trying to make.
I agree with that but you tried to use that test to prove that a 9600 is enough for Physx when it's not.
9600 is more than enough for ANY PhysX enabled game curently on the market, why? Because 9600 gives you at least twice the performance of an Ageia PPU. But Anything lower than 64 stream processors is not that good.
9600 is more than enough for ANY PhysX enabled game curently on the market, why? Because 9600 gives you at least twice the performance of an Ageia PPU. But Anything lower than 64 stream processors is not that good.
Let me clear up my post above, as for stand alone/dedicated PhysX card I mean. Not a GPU and PhysX. If a person wants to run both he/she needs 9800GTX+ or above. But for PhysX only, a dedicated PhysX card, 9600 is capable handling any enabled PhysX game on the market (which there aren't that many...)
If you want the most performance it's not enough, not even a high o/c one. Then factor in the resolution.
If by "most performance" you mean 3000 FPS and big e penis then yes. Knock yourself out!
Show me ONE game that will not work "oh so well" with 9600GT standalone PhysX (reference nVidia design not some basement crap by Sparkle...) Not including UT3 maps, that shit was poorly and forgotten coded in a first place.
100 or so forgotten games you mean like warmonger?
We talking about Physics not Graphics so High settings don't play any role here...
Let me clear up my post above, as for stand alone/dedicated PhysX card I mean. Not a GPU and PhysX. If a person wants to run both he/she needs 9800GTX+ or above. But for PhysX only, a dedicated PhysX card, 9600 is capable handling any enabled PhysX game on the market (which there aren't that many...)
So now your at 30fps and your telling me to get my shit straight?
nVidia list huh... so ammm.... Mass Effect got PhysX? and the game like Heavy Rain which is fucking exclusive PS3 game? Yeah you are genius alright. 90% of those games are software PhysX and got nothing to do with the argument, half of those are freeware that no one plays or cares and useless to bring up to the table, not to mention half of those games are a dead beat, canceled or are in "Duke Nukem Forever" development.
There are only hand full of HARDWARE PHYSX enabled games right now. My point still stands.
Alright, forget about Cryostasis... pretend we don't know this game. Show me one (lets say heavy) Hardware PhysX enabled game that 9600 will not handle. If you can, I'll agree with your statement.
2.If you have say a GTX280 then a Physx intensive game or demo will perform better by letting the 280 do Physx compared to the 9600gt trying to do so
3.I think you're just wasting money, but ok.
You have a 280GTX, why can't that do physX for you..... I don't think you need a dedicated card.
I do know my 9600 could not beat a 280 under the same settings. When a 280 was changed for physx, fps increased.
If you think differently then prove the thread wrong and post it there.
Yes, you do that sir, I can't wait! "put an end to this discussion."Let me see what I can try over the weekend to put and end to this discussion.
Show me one (lets say heavy) Hardware PhysX enabled game that 9600 will not handle.
I never said the 280gtx would be a monster kill.First of all... I was not proving anything on topic of "enough" or not enough, i was simply proving that 280 GTX is not all "monster kill" when it comes to Graphics + Physics.
Second. Why do you assume that 9600 GT is not enough for the current "hand full" Hardware PhysX enabled games?