• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Awesome new NVIDIA PhysX technology Demo

all I am seeing is enable that thing and make the game fps lower than 20-30fps....

use GPU to calculate physics while game graphic itself is still GPU limited, that is the most stupidest thing I have ever seen......

this demo just show how failure a GPU physics in a modern and future gaming..........
 
shansoft said:
all I am seeing is enable that thing and make the game fps lower than 20-30fps....

use GPU to calculate physics while game graphic itself is still GPU limited, that is the most stupidest thing I have ever seen......

this demo just show how failure a GPU physics in a modern and future gaming..........
Click to expand...

All im seeing is awesome new stuff that my old 9600GT worth a whopping $50 bucks that I already have can do while my GTX260 does all the graphics.... Ohh and no FPS loss..

Sounds like a win to me.
 
Ogre67 said:
All im seeing is awesome new stuff that my old 9600GT worth a whopping $50 bucks that I already have can do while my GTX260 does all the graphics.... Ohh and no FPS loss..

Sounds like a win to me.
Click to expand...
you are losing fps compared to running the game with those effects completely off. your 9600gt being dedicated to physx just helps offset some of that loss.
 
The 9600GT would be doing the physx calculations while the GTX260 does the frame rendering.

And what does it matter if the FPS is still playable? Anything over 40-60 is wasted anyway.
 
And don't we all lose frames when turning on AA and AF or are you guys running with everything off so that you get huge FPS for bragging rights?
 
shaolin95 said:
And don't we all lose frames when turning on AA and AF or are you guys running with everything off so that you get huge FPS for bragging rights?
Click to expand...
That's a good point. If people enable AA and AF for improved IQ and the cost of FPS, why not do the same for PhysX?
 
shaolin95 said:
And don't we all lose frames when turning on AA and AF or are you guys running with everything off so that you get huge FPS for bragging rights?
Click to expand...
As Gordon Gekko might put it: "I got massive FPS... it was better than sex." :p
 
Wait a minute... Terminator Salvation got PhysX support?!?!? If it is so I'm gona put a 9600GT that I got yesterday to use!
 
I did not know it had Phsyx but now I must check it out to put my 9800gtx+ to some more use after Mirror's Edge and Cryostatis.


PS If someone knows how to make CellFactor use the GPU please PM me as Ive never been able to get it to work.
 
More emphasis on cloth/smoke/particles. :p

In the scene at 2:25, a soldier is crouching behind a concrete barrier wall while being fired upon. Large pieces of the wall are being blown into the air with every shot, yet it didn't appear as though the wall was actually losing any mass whatsoever. So all they're doing is adding more particles. I would've liked to have seen the shots chipping away at the wall until it finally was cut in two, killing the soldier who was using it for cover. THAT is where GPU bases physics should be heading, IMO. It would add new depths of strategy to both the attacker and the defender if they have to consider if a person is behind cover and what type of cover. Simply tossing more pieces of debris around or having cloth flapping in the breeze doesn't do much for me.
 
As with any technology, it takes to mature and have programmers use it for something more than eye candy...we have been here before guys so it shouldnt be a surprise.
 
shaolin95 said:
And don't we all lose frames when turning on AA and AF or are you guys running with everything off so that you get huge FPS for bragging rights?
Click to expand...

bigdogchris said:
That's a good point. If people enable AA and AF for improved IQ and the cost of FPS, why not do the same for PhysX?
Click to expand...
you guys completely missed the simple point. that is that the performance hit when using Physx effects just isnt worth it to many of us. no different than many of us not using 16x AA becasue its usually not worth it either.
 
We can say you are kind of missing the point too then...just like AA for some, this is a matter of opinions and preferences.
I can't say physx are worthless nor AA is worthless just because I don't like it or don't feel the performance hit is worth it.
We go through this with pretty much every game when we start playing with settings to reach the right compromise of Candy and FPS dont we?
Right Compromise = my personal goal or preference of course.
Regards
 
Why showcase such a turd of a game or even waste the time on PhysX for TS?

The waves demo looked impressive at first look but I noticed lots of repetition in the wave patterns. The smoke demo was just plain lame. Almost looked like someone was swirling some motor oil in water.
 
I kind of ask myself that question when I see so many crappy Bluray movies coming out when some of the best ones are nowhere to be found. :-(
My only hope is that its at least a start.
 
shaolin95 said:
We can say you are kind of missing the point too then...just like AA for some, this is a matter of opinions and preferences.
I can't say physx are worthless nor AA is worthless just because I don't like it or don't feel the performance hit is worth it.
We go through this with pretty much every game when we start playing with settings to reach the right compromise of Candy and FPS dont we?
Right Compromise = my personal goal or preference of course.
Regards
Click to expand...
miss what point? someone said they were not losing any fps with using Physx and I pointed out that they indeed are as opposed to not using those effects in the first place. no one is arguing that its up to the individual to make the choice to use or not.
 
i dont enable any AA because i dont have $300-600 to spend on gfx sollutions. :( and i dont have physx. im so oft. :( still get decent fps is most games though. played through crysis on the rig in my sig and thoroughly enjoyed it! once i graduate and get buckets of money dumped on me i will get the most ridiculous rig though. my gf will hate me cuz itll extend our car loan by 3 years. :)
 
shaolin95 said:
As with any technology, it takes to mature and have programmers use it for something more than eye candy...we have been here before guys so it shouldnt be a surprise.
Click to expand...

I know. Actually, it would have been a surprise if the programmers had used it as I described. PhysX programmers keep going for the big visual "Wow!" factor instead of the more subtle, yet ultimately more rewarding real-life 'cause & effect' physics that so many of us keep asking for.

Eventually they'll catch on that it's what we want Physx to be used for that actually sells the games, not the particles/cloth/smoke effects they seem so fond of.
 
Agreed. I guess they want to make sure people notice they used the effects by over doing it.
 
cesium666 said:
the smoke demo fucking sucked
Click to expand...

Nicely put.
Your point has no merit unless you state how it fucking sucked.

Maybe it isnt realistic to real life, maybe it is.
It looks really good and certainly good enough for realistic looking effects for most of the populace.
I would like to see those smoke effects in game.

Overall I dont think the tech demo showcased much.
The effects are nice though but as others have pointed out, the main thing we from Physics now is more interactivity.
As also pointed out it is very early days for PhysX (and other enhanced Physics support) so I'm sure better interaction coming :)
 
Nice to see even the monster machine(s) they're using can come to a complete standstill on the high motion/high particle scenes... seems like today's developers are always trying to write code that won't play adequately on hardware for 2-3 more generations. Bleh...
 
Guys, really you been here for a long time. Are you really that surprised or just bored?
This is what happens with EVERY advanced in technology...heck, I still to remember the time when people used to claim 32bit color didn't look any better than 16 and wasn't worth the performance hit! lol
 
Last edited:
Creig said:
I know. Actually, it would have been a surprise if the programmers had used it as I described. PhysX programmers keep going for the big visual "Wow!" factor instead of the more subtle, yet ultimately more rewarding real-life 'cause & effect' physics that so many of us keep asking for.

Eventually they'll catch on that it's what we want Physx to be used for that actually sells the games, not the particles/cloth/smoke effects they seem so fond of.
Click to expand...

The particles/cloth/smoke/water/fire/hair effects are very important and should be focused on. In non real time rendering, these effects are truly devastating in terms of performance and are usually a big problem in the path to achieve realistic animation.

Having the ability to finally see these effects in real time is a big improvement and they'll continue to get better. In time these effects (which are eye candy only now) will be used for gameplay impact. But games don't come out when we want them to. They take time to make.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top