Borderlands 2 with PhysX runs better on HD 7970 than on Gtx 680!
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]
[QUOTE="PernicioEnigma"]On one hand you have the GTX680 rendering the graphics AND performing the physX calculations, on the other you have the HD 7970 rendering the graphics while a ridiculously expensive CPU does the physX processing, yet it only just comes out on top.04dcarraher
its a good thing that physx can be run on any hardware...barely any games use it and the effects are usually minimal, but now maybe more developers will be more interested in using it, so this is a good thing overall. I want to see how borderlands 2 physics run on a core i7 3770k,should be interesting.
It will be nearly same as an i5. HT does squat as long as the all the cores and 1st threadon each is being mostly used. the 2nd threads are just leftover cpu cycles not being used from the 1st thread. You will need a cpu with more then 4 real cores to see good physx performance.well judging from most of the rsponses here, it seems like physx runs better on cpu's with more cores. Most of AMD's cpus are hex cores and octa cores so you can get pretty good physx performance...unfortunately the cpu itself blows compares to intels. On the other hand, it seems so far that the cheapest intel cpu that can run physx without issue is the $600 intel core i7 3930k
It will be nearly same as an i5. HT does squat as long as the all the cores and 1st threadon each is being mostly used. the 2nd threads are just leftover cpu cycles not being used from the 1st thread. You will need a cpu with more then 4 real cores to see good physx performance.[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]
[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]
its a good thing that physx can be run on any hardware...barely any games use it and the effects are usually minimal, but now maybe more developers will be more interested in using it, so this is a good thing overall. I want to see how borderlands 2 physics run on a core i7 3770k,should be interesting.
blaznwiipspman1
well judging from most of the rsponses here, it seems like physx runs better on cpu's with more cores. Most of AMD's cpus are hex cores and octa cores so you can get pretty good physx performance...unfortunately the cpu itself blows compares to intels. On the other hand, it seems so far that the cheapest intel cpu that can run physx without issue is the $600 intel core i7 3930k
:roll:
So I guess it won't matter in a couple years which gpu you choice as modern cpus will be able to handle physx in games just fine and take the workload off the graphics card.DJ_Headshot
no....physx isn't relevant now, it will be even less relevant in the future.
[QUOTE="DJ_Headshot"]So I guess it won't matter in a couple years which gpu you choice as modern cpus will be able to handle physx in games just fine and take the workload off the graphics card.blaznwiipspman1
no....physx isn't relevant now, it will be even less relevant in the future.
Real time physics will become a real deal in the immersion of video games in the future.Even though today Physx is only a supplement to the normal pre rendered physic engines, it still adds something else to the game. Being how you are, dislikes the idea that Nvidia users have more options in select games with effects with particles,debris,cloth etc.....But saying physx isnt relevant now and or in the future is just plain obtuse. It seems it is relevant because people are talking about it and comparing.i just tried it and physx works, i normally run around 120 fps but with pysx full in fire fights its about 35/70 its actually playable i would have never guessed that physx actually would run on my amd never bothered to look...hence i got an amd build, but this is awesome.. my specs below
Are you using medium or high physX?i just tried it and physx works, i normally run around 120 fps but with pysx full in fire fights its about 35/70 its actually playable i would have never guessed that physx actually would run on my amd never bothered to look...hence i got an amd build, but this is awesome.. my specs below
thundercave01
medium.. i had it on high and it'll run most of the game just fine, but in some fire fights it just stutters to 15 and even 10 fps... but only in the extreme of cases, like when you need to kill 25 bandits in one go, and the only thing you have bullets for is the darn explosive rounds machine gun hahahah
btw nice OC on your ram must have bin a b*tch to get that running..what temps? when ever i OC my ram ,my sound drivers juggle up ''latency''... go figure
[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]
[QUOTE="DJ_Headshot"]So I guess it won't matter in a couple years which gpu you choice as modern cpus will be able to handle physx in games just fine and take the workload off the graphics card.04dcarraher
no....physx isn't relevant now, it will be even less relevant in the future.
Real time physics will become a real deal in the immersion of video games in the future.Even though today Physx is only a supplement to the normal pre rendered physic engines, it still adds something else to the game. Being how you are, dislikes the idea that Nvidia users have more options in select games with effects with particles,debris,cloth etc.....But saying physx isnt relevant now and or in the future is just plain obtuse. It seems it is relevant because people are talking about it and comparing. Physx is a full physics engine, it isn't a supplement, and is used in hundreds and hundreds of games. The fancy hardware accelerated stuff is just an option that can be done in the Physx engine if the developer wants to put in the effort for the fancy effects. Its kinda silly to see people complaining about developers putting in advanced physx in games like Borderlands 2. Borderlands 2 is an Unreal 3 engine game. Unreal 3 uses Physx as its physics engine, every UE3 game made on consoles and PC uses Physx.So, hence Borderlands 2 uses Physx as well, and it doesn't really make any sense for them to change the physics engine. That would be a complicated and costly effort if Epic would have even allowed them to do it, and there is no legitimate reason to do so in the first place So the game uses Physx as the base physics engine. Physx has the option to do hardware accelerated stuff.
Gearbox decides to do this to make some fancy effects just because the software has the option to do so. That isn't Gearbox scorning AMD users or being unreasonably preferenced towards Nvidia. It is just the developer working with the resources they have.
Real time physics will become a real deal in the immersion of video games in the future.Even though today Physx is only a supplement to the normal pre rendered physic engines, it still adds something else to the game. Being how you are, dislikes the idea that Nvidia users have more options in select games with effects with particles,debris,cloth etc.....But saying physx isnt relevant now and or in the future is just plain obtuse. It seems it is relevant because people are talking about it and comparing.[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]
[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]
no....physx isn't relevant now, it will be even less relevant in the future.
ferret-gamer
Physx is a full physics engine, it isn't a supplement, and is used in hundreds and hundreds of games. The fancy hardware accelerated stuff is just an option that can be done in the Physx engine if the developer wants to put in the effort for the fancy effects. Its kinda silly to see people complaining about developers putting in advanced physx in games like Borderlands 2. Borderlands 2 is an Unreal 3 engine game. Unreal 3 uses Physx as its physics engine, every UE3 game made on consoles and PC uses Physx.
So, hence Borderlands 2 uses Physx as well, and it doesn't really make any sense for them to change the physics engine. That would be a complicated and costly effort if Epic would have even allowed them to do it, and there is no legitimate reason to do so in the first place So the game uses Physx as the base physics engine. Physx has the option to do hardware accelerated stuff.
Gearbox decides to do this to make some fancy effects just because the software has the option to do so. That isn't Gearbox scorning AMD users or being unreasonably preferenced towards Nvidia. It is just the developer working with the resources they have.
I know what your saying for some select games, however "Physx" is not used for hundreds of games.
If you have an option to turn physx off its a supplement an extra feature not a full blown real time physics engine used by the game for the base, which is still predetermined animations for physics. Physx is real time calculated physics feature that is not bound by a few limited pre pathed outcomes.
[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]
[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] Real time physics will become a real deal in the immersion of video games in the future.Even though today Physx is only a supplement to the normal pre rendered physic engines, it still adds something else to the game. Being how you are, dislikes the idea that Nvidia users have more options in select games with effects with particles,debris,cloth etc.....But saying physx isnt relevant now and or in the future is just plain obtuse. It seems it is relevant because people are talking about it and comparing.
04dcarraher
Physx is a full physics engine, it isn't a supplement, and is used in hundreds and hundreds of games. The fancy hardware accelerated stuff is just an option that can be done in the Physx engine if the developer wants to put in the effort for the fancy effects. Its kinda silly to see people complaining about developers putting in advanced physx in games like Borderlands 2. Borderlands 2 is an Unreal 3 engine game. Unreal 3 uses Physx as its physics engine, every UE3 game made on consoles and PC uses Physx.
So, hence Borderlands 2 uses Physx as well, and it doesn't really make any sense for them to change the physics engine. That would be a complicated and costly effort if Epic would have even allowed them to do it, and there is no legitimate reason to do so in the first place So the game uses Physx as the base physics engine. Physx has the option to do hardware accelerated stuff.
Gearbox decides to do this to make some fancy effects just because the software has the option to do so. That isn't Gearbox scorning AMD users or being unreasonably preferenced towards Nvidia. It is just the developer working with the resources they have.
I know what your saying for some select games, however "Physx" is not used for hundreds of games.
If you have an option to turn physx off its a supplement an extra feature not a full blown real time physics engine used by the game for the base, which is still predetermined animations for physics. Physx is real time calculated physics feature that is not bound by a few limited pre pathed outcomes.
Physx is a full physics engine and is used in hundreds of games. Heck you could just get a list of Unreal 3 games and there is a couple hundred right here.[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]
Physx is a full physics engine, it isn't a supplement, and is used in hundreds and hundreds of games. The fancy hardware accelerated stuff is just an option that can be done in the Physx engine if the developer wants to put in the effort for the fancy effects. Its kinda silly to see people complaining about developers putting in advanced physx in games like Borderlands 2. Borderlands 2 is an Unreal 3 engine game. Unreal 3 uses Physx as its physics engine, every UE3 game made on consoles and PC uses Physx.
So, hence Borderlands 2 uses Physx as well, and it doesn't really make any sense for them to change the physics engine. That would be a complicated and costly effort if Epic would have even allowed them to do it, and there is no legitimate reason to do so in the first place So the game uses Physx as the base physics engine. Physx has the option to do hardware accelerated stuff.
Gearbox decides to do this to make some fancy effects just because the software has the option to do so. That isn't Gearbox scorning AMD users or being unreasonably preferenced towards Nvidia. It is just the developer working with the resources they have.
ferret-gamer
I know what your saying for some select games, however "Physx" is not used for hundreds of games.
If you have an option to turn physx off its a supplement an extra feature not a full blown real time physics engine used by the game for the base, which is still predetermined animations for physics. Physx is real time calculated physics feature that is not bound by a few limited pre pathed outcomes.
Physx is a full physics engine and is used in hundreds of games. Heck you could just get a list of Unreal 3 games and there is a couple hundred right here. huh? lol.... "Physx" is a Nvidia added on feature to allow real time physics rendering on select effects in the world. Normally you do not see real time rendering in Unreal 3 engine based games. There are only twenty some games that officially have GPU accelerated "Physx" effects and options. All Physx features is not in all Unreal engine 3 games they use the standard pre rendered limited physics its up to the developer to use the middleware . The Physx middleware SDK is provided free to developers as a Physics scheme to implement in their games. This does not mean all things that say PhysX are GPU accelerated even with UT3 engine. In order for the game to take advantage of GPU accelerated PhysX it needs to be coded for by the developer from the beginning. If this is not the case ALL Physics (PhysX) effects will take place on the CPU. This is the case for the majority (probably 90%+) of the titles out there. Which is why we dont see real time physics aka physx in 90% of Unreal engine 3 based games like Mass effects, Borderlands 1, Gears, Bioshock Bulletstorm.[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"][QUOTE="04dcarraher"]Physx is a full physics engine and is used in hundreds of games. Heck you could just get a list of Unreal 3 games and there is a couple hundred right here. huh? lol.... "Physx" is a Nvidia added on feature to allow real time physics rendering on select effects in the world. Normally you do not see real time rendering in Unreal 3 engine based games. There are only twenty some games that officially have GPU accelerated "Physx" effects and options. All Physx features is not in all Unreal engine 3 games they use the standard pre rendered limited physics its up to the developer to use the middleware . The Physx middleware SDK is provided free to developers as a Physics scheme to implement in their games. This does not mean all things that say PhysX are GPU accelerated even with UT3 engine. In order for the game to take advantage of GPU accelerated PhysX it needs to be coded for by the developer from the beginning. If this is not the case ALL Physics (PhysX) effects will take place on the CPU. This is the case for the majority (probably 90%+) of the titles out there. Which is why we dont see real time physics aka physx in 90% of Unreal engine 3 based games like Mass effects, Borderlands 1, Gears, Bioshock Bulletstorm.I know what your saying for some select games, however "Physx" is not used for hundreds of games.
If you have an option to turn physx off its a supplement an extra feature not a full blown real time physics engine used by the game for the base, which is still predetermined animations for physics. Physx is real time calculated physics feature that is not bound by a few limited pre pathed outcomes.
04dcarraher
I'm not talking exclusively about "GPU accelerated "Physx" effects and options" but about Physx as a whole, it is an entire physics engine like Bullet or Havok, the GPU accelerated stuff is just an option the engine can do.
Read Nvidia's own page if you are so stubbornhttp://developer.nvidia.com/physx
"PhysX is a complete physics solution that enables realistic game play, compelling simulations, and dynamic effects. PhysX is a proven top competitor among physics engines and supports all major gaming platforms, from mobile devices and consoles to multicore PC's"
"PhysX has been used inalmost 300 games,with many more currently in development across all major gaming platforms."
Or how about Unreal 3's Feature Page?http://www.unrealengine.com/en/features/physics/"Unreal Engine 3s physics engine is powered by NVIDIAs PhysX"
And most importantly you need to brush up on what a physics engine does. Nothing physics engines do are pre rendered, the whole entire point of them is to calculate simulations in real time. When you are talking about prerendered animations, that is exactly what they are: Animations. Not something from a physics engine.
The calculations physics engines do are a lot more than just particle effects or a building falling over like you seem to think. How exactly do you think the game knows when to stop the character from falling through the floor? Collisions dealth with by the physics engine. What ragdoll or IK effects that procedurally effect skeletal meshes? Dealth with by the Physics engine. Calculating where that grenade bounces, or bullet drop? The Physics engine.
huh? lol.... "Physx" is a Nvidia added on feature to allow real time physics rendering on select effects in the world. Normally you do not see real time rendering in Unreal 3 engine based games. There are only twenty some games that officially have GPU accelerated "Physx" effects and options. All Physx features is not in all Unreal engine 3 games they use the standard pre rendered limited physics its up to the developer to use the middleware . The Physx middleware SDK is provided free to developers as a Physics scheme to implement in their games. This does not mean all things that say PhysX are GPU accelerated even with UT3 engine. In order for the game to take advantage of GPU accelerated PhysX it needs to be coded for by the developer from the beginning. If this is not the case ALL Physics (PhysX) effects will take place on the CPU. This is the case for the majority (probably 90%+) of the titles out there. Which is why we dont see real time physics aka physx in 90% of Unreal engine 3 based games like Mass effects, Borderlands 1, Gears, Bioshock Bulletstorm.[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="ferret-gamer"] Physx is a full physics engine and is used in hundreds of games. Heck you could just get a list of Unreal 3 games and there is a couple hundred right here.ferret-gamer
I'm not talking exclusively about "GPU accelerated "Physx" effects and options" but about Physx as a whole, it is an entire physics engine like Bullet or Havok, the GPU accelerated stuff is just an option the engine can do.
Read Nvidia's own page if you are so stubbornhttp://developer.nvidia.com/physx
"PhysX is a complete physics solution that enables realistic game play, compelling simulations, and dynamic effects. PhysX is a proven top competitor among physics engines and supports all major gaming platforms, from mobile devices and consoles to multicore PC's"
"PhysX has been used inalmost 300 games,with many more currently in development across all major gaming platforms."
Or how about Unreal 3's Feature Page?http://www.unrealengine.com/en/features/physics/"Unreal Engine 3s physics engine is powered by NVIDIAs PhysX"
And most importantly you need to brush up on what a physics engine does. Nothing physics engines do are pre rendered, the whole entire point of them is to calculate simulations in real time. When you are talking about prerendered animations, that is exactly what they are: Animations. Not something from a physics engine.
The calculations physics engines do are a lot more than just particle effects or a building falling over like you seem to think. How exactly do you think the game knows when to stop the character from falling through the floor? Collisions dealth with by the physics engine. What ragdoll or IK effects that procedurally effect skeletal meshes? Dealth with by the Physics engine. Calculating where that grenade bounces, or bullet drop? The Physics engine.
Physx is less of an engine and more of an SDK and API
[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]
[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] huh? lol.... "Physx" is a Nvidia added on feature to allow real time physics rendering on select effects in the world. Normally you do not see real time rendering in Unreal 3 engine based games. There are only twenty some games that officially have GPU accelerated "Physx" effects and options. All Physx features is not in all Unreal engine 3 games they use the standard pre rendered limited physics its up to the developer to use the middleware . The Physx middleware SDK is provided free to developers as a Physics scheme to implement in their games. This does not mean all things that say PhysX are GPU accelerated even with UT3 engine. In order for the game to take advantage of GPU accelerated PhysX it needs to be coded for by the developer from the beginning. If this is not the case ALL Physics (PhysX) effects will take place on the CPU. This is the case for the majority (probably 90%+) of the titles out there. Which is why we dont see real time physics aka physx in 90% of Unreal engine 3 based games like Mass effects, Borderlands 1, Gears, Bioshock Bulletstorm.way2funny
I'm not talking exclusively about "GPU accelerated "Physx" effects and options" but about Physx as a whole, it is an entire physics engine like Bullet or Havok, the GPU accelerated stuff is just an option the engine can do.
Read Nvidia's own page if you are so stubbornhttp://developer.nvidia.com/physx
"PhysX is a complete physics solution that enables realistic game play, compelling simulations, and dynamic effects. PhysX is a proven top competitor among physics engines and supports all major gaming platforms, from mobile devices and consoles to multicore PC's"
"PhysX has been used inalmost 300 games,with many more currently in development across all major gaming platforms."
Or how about Unreal 3's Feature Page?http://www.unrealengine.com/en/features/physics/"Unreal Engine 3s physics engine is powered by NVIDIAs PhysX"
And most importantly you need to brush up on what a physics engine does. Nothing physics engines do are pre rendered, the whole entire point of them is to calculate simulations in real time. When you are talking about prerendered animations, that is exactly what they are: Animations. Not something from a physics engine.
The calculations physics engines do are a lot more than just particle effects or a building falling over like you seem to think. How exactly do you think the game knows when to stop the character from falling through the floor? Collisions dealth with by the physics engine. What ragdoll or IK effects that procedurally effect skeletal meshes? Dealth with by the Physics engine. Calculating where that grenade bounces, or bullet drop? The Physics engine.
Physx is less of an engine and more of an SDK and API
That's kinda just semantics for discussions in forums like these. You can say the same thing about Havok or Bullet but they are always referred to Physics engines most of the time as well.The problem is that normal based physic engines like Havoc or any other non hardware accelerated physics have limited pre determined paths, they are not processed in real time per say and is calculating the same way which Im trying to point out. For example you blow up a wall you will see the same effect over and over while with hardware accelerated physics the effect is totally dependent on the force applied and how many particles and animations are being rendered for the effect independently.
Until processing power is available for real time physics the standard Physx SDK will be no different then from any other non hardware accelerated physics engine.
What you are referring to is a scripted event, an animation. The calculations were done in a different program then set to animate a specific way when triggered. That is something different than game physics. Everything the physic engine actually does is calculated in real time, as i said in my previous post, the whole point of the physic engine is to calcluate simulations for the game. What you are doing is comparing apples and oranges. If you want to compare Havok physics and Physx then compare them, not comparing Physx to an animationThe problem is that normal based physic engines like Havoc or any other non hardware accelerated physics have limited pre determined paths, they are not processed in real time per say and is calculating the same way which Im trying to point out. For example you blow up a wall you will see the same effect over and over while with hardware accelerated physics the effect is totally dependent on the force applied and how many particles and animations are being rendered for the effect independently.
Until processing power is available for real time physics the standard Physx SDK will be no different then from any other non hardware accelerated physics engine.
04dcarraher
The scripts and animations are only as good as the physics engine and the processing power allocated to do so. The effects you see with non hardware accelerated physx or havoc or any other engine are limited to only certain or limited amount of possible outcomes. Physic engines are tied to scripts and the animations of the items/objects in how they interact with the environment when the player is able to interact with the world.
You really use a lot of terms incorrectly, and it is hard to understand what you actually mean. It sounds like you now are apparently talking about how accurate calculations are for various physics objects. Physx possibly making a some more calculations for physics than other engines doesn't make them "prerendered", it just means they are less accurate, but the calculations are still done in real time.The scripts and animations are only as good as the physics engine and the processing power allocated to do so. The effects you see with non hardware accelerated physx or havoc or any other engine are limited to only certain or limited amount of possible outcomes. Physic engines are tied to scripts and the animations of the items.objects in how they interact with the environment when the player is able to interact with the world.
04dcarraher
And again scripted animations don't really have anything to do with the physics engine, stop trying to use them in an argument.
Ever heard of ragdoll physics? their also known as procedural animations.
Yes, procedural animations, the animation and bone position calculations are generated in real time. When something is scripted, the calculations and positions are done beforehand. So again, nothing the physic engines do is prerendered.Ever heard of ragdoll physics? their also known as procedural animations.
04dcarraher
[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]Yes, procedural animations, the animation and bone position calculations are generated in real time. When something is scripted, the calculations and positions are done beforehand. So again, nothing the physic engines do is prerendered. Pre rendered is not the right phrase, possibly predetermined with a select amount options to execute . The physics engine determines when and how an animation is triggered and their are a set amount of outcomes for a certain action. I think the point is that normal physics engines are tied to scripts and the types of animations that are done in game that is suppose to simulate environmental interactions ie gravity,ragdolls, destruction, movement etc. You can see the differences between hardware accelerated physics and typical limited predetermined possibilities in say like in BF:BC. Where the more advanced engine allows more dimensions changing the effect based on more factors.Ever heard of ragdoll physics? their also known as procedural animations.
ferret-gamer
[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]
[QUOTE="DJ_Headshot"]So I guess it won't matter in a couple years which gpu you choice as modern cpus will be able to handle physx in games just fine and take the workload off the graphics card.04dcarraher
no....physx isn't relevant now, it will be even less relevant in the future.
Real time physics will become a real deal in the immersion of video games in the future.Even though today Physx is only a supplement to the normal pre rendered physic engines, it still adds something else to the game. Being how you are, dislikes the idea that Nvidia users have more options in select games with effects with particles,debris,cloth etc.....But saying physx isnt relevant now and or in the future is just plain obtuse. It seems it is relevant because people are talking about it and comparing.Nothing proprietary like physx ever becomes relevant unless the manufacturer has a virtual monopoly in the market.
A dx11 solution is much more likely to become the standard in coming years, barring amd dropping out of the market.
[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]Yes, procedural animations, the animation and bone position calculations are generated in real time. When something is scripted, the calculations and positions are done beforehand. So again, nothing the physic engines do is prerendered.Ever heard of ragdoll physics? their also known as procedural animations.
ferret-gamer
So what your saying is the calculations and positions are known and available before runtime?
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment