• 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.

Borderlands 2 PhysX Demo

I've always been a fan of realistic physics in games. Makes them a lot more realistic. When I'm in a game, in the heat of battle, I probably don't care. But, the rest of the time, I like seeing the extra little things. They are noticed. Sure, the implementation still isn't 100% (why blankets hanging all the time!? REALLY?!) and only on certain objects. I would love to see a Red Faction with PhysX sometime. Fully destructible environment, great graphics, realistic physics... It has potential, I just haven't seen a great use of it yet. Very interesting and a definitely positive effect on the game, but it almost comes off as tech demos that a real addition to the game.
 
Damn no edit: My post isn't a negative towards PhysX. I love it. I want a cheap NVIDIA card just so I can run it. I just don't think it's reached it's prime yet.
 
Every time I see a demo like this of PhysX I think "Who would want something that looks so obviously unrealistic?" The explosive in-air debris in this demo looks just as if it happened underwater and the debris is being carried away in waves! Can't get anymore unrealistic than that. IMO, it's awful. It's almost but not quite as gimmicky as the horrid cartoon animation used in this game. Ugh.

I don't know...being charitable, maybe if I was 10.....?

Nah....;) Don't think so.
 
Looks great, can't wait to disable it to get a solid framerate in surround :D
 
ikarinokami said:
most of the people in this thread are idiot. unlike AMD Nvidia acually tries to help its customers and wants to gain new customers. So it spends time and money helping developers use its products. This is what competent companies do, Nvidia is one, AMD is not, that simple.

Intel also help companies with havok implementation, again intel competent company, Amd is not.
Click to expand...

Proper use of captialization? Nope. Punctuation? Nope. Pluralization? Nope. Sentence structure and phrasing? Nope.

Calls other people idiot(s)? Yep.

Excuse me while I don't take your opinion seriously.

This PhysX argument has been hashed over multiple times in the past. PhysX is inferior to other physics libraries, NVIDIA is an amoral company for forcing it on the community, and it really makes no difference in the end so nobody really cares.
 
A few years ago wasnt Physx still using x87 (Not a commonly used standard anymore) to hobble the performance of Physx on modern CPUs? In their updates did they ever stop intentionally crippling physics processing on anything not using single threaded inefficient x87?

Didn't really keep up with this one, it might not be the case anymore.
 
Half the AMD fanboys are crying over them using PhysX, and the other half is saying the effects aren't worth it. So... do you want special effects or not? I bet half of you play games with bright skins and maximum picmip anyway. Next you'll be complaining that you actually have to use electricity to power a PC. Sheesh. :rolleyes:
 
Phoenix333 said:
Half the AMD fanboys are crying over them using PhysX, and the other half is saying the effects aren't worth it. So... do you want special effects or not? I bet half of you play games with bright skins and maximum picmip anyway. Next you'll be complaining that you actually have to use electricity to power a PC. Sheesh. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I don't get it either. I can understand the AMD users being upset that they don't get to use the stuff in game. The people whining about how it looks, not being realistic, are deluded. OK, it isn't super realistic, but pretty much everything in games isn't realistic anyway. So WTF? The game should look cool. Much of the time PhysX stuff makes the game look cooler. Sometimes it's overdone, probably to help showcase some differences further promoting it's use, but whatever.
 
Lol @ all the butthurt amd owners!

Oh man, I'm so glad I changed teams this time around, that looks amazing. Suck it up and buy a 660ti you whiners.


Hehe...just fucking with you amd guys. ;)
 
Dan_D said:
I don't get it either. I can understand the AMD users being upset that they don't get to use the stuff in game. The people whining about how it looks, not being realistic, are deluded. OK, it isn't super realistic, but pretty much everything in games isn't realistic anyway. So WTF? The game should look cool. Much of the time PhysX stuff makes the game look cooler. Sometimes it's overdone, probably to help showcase some differences further promoting it's use, but whatever.
Click to expand...

Physx changes way more visually than different AA types. Yet people whine when games don't have FXCGQAAx16 AA...:D
 
Goty said:
Proper use of captialization? Nope. Punctuation? Nope. Pluralization? Nope. Sentence structure and phrasing? Nope.

Calls other people idiot(s)? Yep.

Excuse me while I don't take your opinion seriously.
Click to expand...

Other than calling people idiots, which was probably unnecessary, he's pretty much right about everything else.
 
DeathPrincess said:
Physx changes way more visually than different AA types. Yet people whine when games don't have FXCGQAAx16 AA...:D
Click to expand...

It can. I don't think PhysX changed all that much in Arkham Asylum aside from adding papers and some breakable tiles into the mix for the most part. However the PhysX effects in the Scarecrow dream sequences were pretty amazing I thought. All the bricks flying around and assembling into shape, etc. You didn't get that without PhysX.

I didn't play Arkham City with PhysX so I can't speak to that. I've been meaning to since getting dual GTX 680's in SLI.
 
Ur_Mom said:
I would love to see a Red Faction with PhysX sometime. Fully destructible environment, great graphics, realistic physics....
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, never gonna happen. After the appalling sales of RF: Armageddon, Volition have officially canned the Red Faction IP. Sadly, they went full retard with a linear gameplay direction.. Should never go full retard.

As for the PhysX effects in Borderlands 2, I just hope it is optimized and bug free. Most PhysX games I've seen haven't really been up to scratch in the performance arena but I've got high hopes for B2.

Personally, I think the effects adds nice visual stimulation even if it doesn't affect gameplay at all.

Did anyone else notice the colors and lighting looked much richer on the GTX hardware also?
 
I don't get the butthurt. Looks pretty nice if you ask me.
 
Anyone know if there is a way to get physx running on a system with both in. I havent really followed it but remeber running it back in the 4870 days. Have a 6950 and a 9800GTX and no money anymore :-(
 
3 things:

1. feeling better about my pre-order

2. BLands 1 is going to look lackluster when I replay it :(

3. is my 460 going to keep up?
 
Proprietary APIs like Physx should never be used unless they offer a distinct advantage over other options and I haven't seen anything that convinces me it's any better than Havok. It also seems like Nvidia is more interested in making games worse for those with AMD GPUs than than making games better for those with Nvidia GPUs. I'm sure many will write me off as being an AMD fanboy but the reality is that I felt the same way when I bought my last Nvidia card and while Physx did go in the list of cons for Nvidia my primary concerns were price and performance and Nvidia was the better value.
 
well I won't write you off as a fanboy but I will say that as an nVidia customer please allow me t speak for myself and I feel that nVidia is making my games better :)
 
mope54 said:
well I won't write you off as a fanboy but I will say that as an nVidia customer please allow me t speak for myself and I feel that nVidia is making my games better :)
Click to expand...

Sometimes they do. I've only seen a couple of titles where I thought the PhysX was a benefit. And even then not always worth the performance hit.
 
mope54 said:
well I won't write you off as a fanboy but I will say that as an nVidia customer please allow me t speak for myself and I feel that nVidia is making my games better :)
Click to expand...

You're certainly entitled to have your own opinion on the matter, I just disagree.
 
Dan_D said:
Sometimes they do. I've only seen a couple of titles where I thought the PhysX was a benefit. And even then not always worth the performance hit.
Click to expand...
I agree with what you're saying here I just feel it's a different thing from claiming that nVidia is actively making AMD users have a worse experience than if nothing happened at all at the expense of nVidia customers.

I mean, if AMD customers feel left out or don't see any benefit from PhysX that's one thing. If I, as an nVidia customer, don't feel like PhysX gives me anything that's another thing too.

But I don't feel it's fair for AMD customers to speak for nVidia customers' behalf and claim that nVidia isn't catering to us when they spend extra development dollars for nVidia specific tricks, tweaks, charades or whatnot.
 
I liked the end where the explosion formed a skull + crossbones.

But nearly all this shit is just artificially limited. There's no reason why there should be literally nothing in some of the CPU shots. Yeah, I completely believe that the engine is completely incapable of managing some sparks from gunfire outside of it being GPU accelerated.
 
In my case, I am a [H]ardware fanboi, I like all my gear to run at 100%, so B2 with PhsyX will make good use of my new GTX 680 + my old GTX 460. Cant wait to see what it does in real game play.

Now I just have to find a game that will do that and max out my new Xeon 6 Core :)
 
mope54 said:
when they spend extra development dollars for nVidia specific tricks, tweaks, charades or whatnot.
Click to expand...

They don't. They pay devs to program extra graphical features that can be performed on any graphics hardware, and to simply brand it as something "special" or "specific" to NVIDIA hardware. Yes, NVIDIA users get a game with niftier effects that won't show up on other hardware - but that's an artificially imposed thing. It's not something "special" that the NVIDIA hardware is capable of that other hardware is not. The performance hit you get in most PhysX games is a testament to that. If PhysX were some actual, "special", hardware-based thing, it would mean "free" graphical effects. But no, there is a performance hit. If you were to enable it for an AMD-based solution, you'd get the same thing. All PhysX is, is nifty effects that could run on either companys' hardware, but is branded for and programmed to run specifically on NVIDIA hardware. It's an advertisement, plain and simple. But you are correct - it does give NVIDIA users extra features. It's an artificial advantage, that's all.
 
you guys should make your opinions known to AMD that you're willing to pay extra for them to go sit down with developers and help them out...unless you're not willing to pay extra

if you're not willing, who pays for the developers to use havok or bullet?
 
I wanted to try a 670 card so I got hold of an Asus. I had been running a MSI 6990. In reality the 6990 was about 1000 points faster in Vantage. As far as Crash and Burn PhysX both cards were equal. I liked the 670 but gained nothing. It is quieter and runs cooler.
 
whiz187 said:
I wanted to try a 670 card so I got hold of an Asus. I had been running a MSI 6990. In reality the 6990 was about 1000 points faster in Vantage. As far as Crash and Burn PhysX both cards were equal. I liked the 670 but gained nothing. It is quieter and runs cooler.
Click to expand...

You do realize that 3D Mark means jack shit right? The numbers it spits out are pretty much arbitrary. They don't translate into anything and the benchmark is synthetic. It doesn't use an actual game engine. in other words: It's not useful diagnostically, as other programs check system stability better, and it's numbers are totally meaningless. Useless is another word for it.
 
Also last generations dual GPU card is about as fast as this generations step down from the top single GPU card. That's not too bad.
 
mope54 said:
I agree with what you're saying here I just feel it's a different thing from claiming that nVidia is actively making AMD users have a worse experience than if nothing happened at all at the expense of nVidia customers.

I mean, if AMD customers feel left out or don't see any benefit from PhysX that's one thing. If I, as an nVidia customer, don't feel like PhysX gives me anything that's another thing too.

But I don't feel it's fair for AMD customers to speak for nVidia customers' behalf and claim that nVidia isn't catering to us when they spend extra development dollars for nVidia specific tricks, tweaks, charades or whatnot.
Click to expand...

While I think it's underhanded for Nvidia to pay developers to use a proprietary physics API there's more to it than just that, in addition you have Nvidia crippling CPU based Physx by using x87 code and doing shady things with tessellation in TWIMTBP games. The overused tessellation in games like Hawx 2 and Crysis 2 is actually what I was thinking of when I made the comment about Nvidia wanting to make things worse for AMD users more than they want to make things better for Nvidia users since it hurt performance for Nvidia cards as well but it hurt performance much more on AMD cards.
 
Why is it every time I watch one of these videos I get the feeling Nvidia is telling me to go fornicate myself?

Just so happens the last Nvidia card I bought was a 8800 GTS640. So I can't even hack in PhysX. Meanwhile, two of the four cores of my CPU are giving each other the dutch rudder or something. They can't be arsed to do physics calculations.
 
i have never been impressed by physx.

I dunno where some of you folks are saying Amd doesn't help develop games, they do. They have been doing good as of late, not so much in the past.
 
Honestly, they've been showing the same stuff since ~2008: flowy banners, ludicrous amounts of debris, etc. It's even less impressive now.
 
It looks like every other physx demo I have ever seen, and will likely play like it too (AKA make no real difference and have frustrating stuttering during gameplay).

Nvidia really needs to just port the API to OpenCL and make it a standard that works for free on AMD cards. License it off in consoles, they'd make more money anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top