¿GTX 780 or SLI GTX 760? (For 3D-Vision 1080P)
  2 / 4    
¿When is the launch of new videocard with Maxwell architecture of nvidia? ¿This year?
¿When is the launch of new videocard with Maxwell architecture of nvidia? ¿This year?

#16
Posted 08/06/2013 05:12 PM   
http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2013/03/19/nvidia-ceo-updates-nvidias-roadmap/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYJ1-XQzHx4
[I know this isnt related to authors post] Physx stand alone "card" sounds insane to me. Maybe 1 or 2 games will benefit from that in a year. IF you buy both of them. Id personally sell whatever card it is and use towards next upgrade. Physx is cool and all but its often down right silly. Basing a system off of it sounds insane to me. Batman was good because it was subtle. Fog effects, debree in wind, thats stuffs awesome and adds to it. I kind of doubt you needed a physx card for it unless your system was borderline based on specs used in game. Borderlands 2, silly physx worked with game so its like an exception to the rule. Any other game I wouldnt mind dropping it. Its like 200% multiplier where its "effect" is just too much or barely used in game. Not saying its bad or anything but I dunno. It doesnt really change the game imo. Things like Anti-Aliasing/ Tessellation are more important to me personally and are generally less costly. I know I kind of went off topic at the mention of physx cards, but they kind of drive me insane. Nvidia realized physx is a wanted feature and rather then allow developers to add realism to scenes. Due to the profit they ask developers to go ape sh*t with it. [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VafzR7JqO2I[/url] Physx used to be a tool to add to the immersion... [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0xRJt8rcmY[/url]
[I know this isnt related to authors post]
Physx stand alone "card" sounds insane to me. Maybe 1 or 2 games will benefit from that in a year. IF you buy both of them. Id personally sell whatever card it is and use towards next upgrade.

Physx is cool and all but its often down right silly. Basing a system off of it sounds insane to me. Batman was good because it was subtle. Fog effects, debree in wind, thats stuffs awesome and adds to it. I kind of doubt you needed a physx card for it unless your system was borderline based on specs used in game. Borderlands 2, silly physx worked with game so its like an exception to the rule.
Any other game I wouldnt mind dropping it. Its like 200% multiplier where its "effect" is just too much or barely used in game. Not saying its bad or anything but I dunno. It doesnt really change the game imo.
Things like Anti-Aliasing/ Tessellation are more important to me personally and are generally less costly.

I know I kind of went off topic at the mention of physx cards, but they kind of drive me insane. Nvidia realized physx is a wanted feature and rather then allow developers to add realism to scenes. Due to the profit they ask developers to go ape sh*t with it.
" rel="nofollow" target = "_blank">

Physx used to be a tool to add to the immersion...
" rel="nofollow" target = "_blank">

Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com

If you like one of my helixmod patches and want to donate. Can send to me through paypal - eqzitara@yahoo.com

#18
Posted 08/06/2013 11:43 PM   
[quote="Pirateguybrush"]Physx works fine on one or two cards, you don't need a dedicated physx card. Buying a 780 with the view of adding a second one in a year or two isn't a bad idea either.[/quote]That is true, it works fine with either single card, SLI, or CPU. But, it does impact your performance. Run the Metro LL benchmark with and without PhysX enabled. You get that performance back if you use an add-in card. In MetroLL, single GTX580, this example has minimum go from 30 to 47. See: [url]http://physxinfo.com/news/11443/gpu-physx-in-metro-last-light/[/url] [img]http://physxinfo.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/metro_ll_bench.png[/img] It can make a difference, but clearly it's not the defining reason to buy a card. I'm just arguing that it's not something to dismiss out of hand either.
Pirateguybrush said:Physx works fine on one or two cards, you don't need a dedicated physx card.

Buying a 780 with the view of adding a second one in a year or two isn't a bad idea either.
That is true, it works fine with either single card, SLI, or CPU.

But, it does impact your performance. Run the Metro LL benchmark with and without PhysX enabled. You get that performance back if you use an add-in card. In MetroLL, single GTX580, this example has minimum go from 30 to 47. See:

http://physxinfo.com/news/11443/gpu-physx-in-metro-last-light/

Image


It can make a difference, but clearly it's not the defining reason to buy a card. I'm just arguing that it's not something to dismiss out of hand either.

Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers

#19
Posted 08/07/2013 12:15 AM   
Well Metro Last Light is by far "worse case scenario". While I do have my problems/biased with the direction it uses physx. We cant deny it goes VERY heavy on it and the game itself is.... not the most optimized.
Well Metro Last Light is by far "worse case scenario". While I do have my problems/biased with the direction it uses physx. We cant deny it goes VERY heavy on it and the game itself is.... not the most optimized.

Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com

If you like one of my helixmod patches and want to donate. Can send to me through paypal - eqzitara@yahoo.com

#20
Posted 08/07/2013 12:26 AM   
[quote="bo3b"][quote="Pirateguybrush"]Physx works fine on one or two cards, you don't need a dedicated physx card. Buying a 780 with the view of adding a second one in a year or two isn't a bad idea either.[/quote]That is true, it works fine with either single card, SLI, or CPU. But, it does impact your performance. Run the Metro LL benchmark with and without PhysX enabled. You get that performance back if you use an add-in card. In MetroLL, single GTX580, this example has minimum go from 30 to 47. See: [url]http://physxinfo.com/news/11443/gpu-physx-in-metro-last-light/[/url] [img]http://physxinfo.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/metro_ll_bench.png[/img] It can make a difference, but clearly it's not the defining reason to buy a card. I'm just arguing that it's not something to dismiss out of hand either.[/quote] You know what I never understood exactly ? For example I have 2 GPUs and I run SLI...How will that alter my performance? Like in the above chart? or lower... Hmm I guess at some point I will need to make a test;)) But I was hoping to find someone who knows more on this topic.
bo3b said:
Pirateguybrush said:Physx works fine on one or two cards, you don't need a dedicated physx card.

Buying a 780 with the view of adding a second one in a year or two isn't a bad idea either.
That is true, it works fine with either single card, SLI, or CPU.

But, it does impact your performance. Run the Metro LL benchmark with and without PhysX enabled. You get that performance back if you use an add-in card. In MetroLL, single GTX580, this example has minimum go from 30 to 47. See:

http://physxinfo.com/news/11443/gpu-physx-in-metro-last-light/

Image


It can make a difference, but clearly it's not the defining reason to buy a card. I'm just arguing that it's not something to dismiss out of hand either.


You know what I never understood exactly ?
For example I have 2 GPUs and I run SLI...How will that alter my performance? Like in the above chart? or lower... Hmm I guess at some point I will need to make a test;)) But I was hoping to find someone who knows more on this topic.

1x Palit RTX 2080Ti Pro Gaming OC(watercooled and overclocked to hell)
3x 3D Vision Ready Asus VG278HE monitors (5760x1080).
Intel i9 9900K (overclocked to 5.3 and watercooled ofc).
Asus Maximus XI Hero Mobo.
16 GB Team Group T-Force Dark Pro DDR4 @ 3600.
Lots of Disks:
- Raid 0 - 256GB Sandisk Extreme SSD.
- Raid 0 - WD Black - 2TB.
- SanDisk SSD PLUS 480 GB.
- Intel 760p 256GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD.
Creative Sound Blaster Z.
Windows 10 x64 Pro.
etc


My website with my fixes and OpenGL to 3D Vision wrapper:
http://3dsurroundgaming.com

(If you like some of the stuff that I've done and want to donate something, you can do it with PayPal at tavyhome@gmail.com)

#21
Posted 08/07/2013 12:30 AM   
SLI will split performance by however "effective" the game/sli profile allows it. So non-sli might cause 30 fps dip but sli may cause only a 19 fps dip. I dont think you will ever find an accurate answer just cause it depends on the game. According to nvidia the 30 FPS would come only out of the physx card if you have one. So it wouldnt even touch the other cards as long as gpu is good enough. TBH, I havent seen many good benchmarks of physx cards to know if its 100% effective. People tend to just stick in an old card and hope for the best based on what they were told. CPU will be effected equally regardless though. What I always wonder was like.. SLI pros beat cons obviously. But you stick in a third card for physx right? Like its not in use unless it needs to be but wouldnt three cards in use at same time at least effect performance a bit due to bandwidth? Like all three are going through motherboard. I cant imagine its 100% effective.
SLI will split performance by however "effective" the game/sli profile allows it.
So non-sli might cause 30 fps dip but sli may cause only a 19 fps dip.

I dont think you will ever find an accurate answer just cause it depends on the game. According to nvidia the 30 FPS would come only out of the physx card if you have one. So it wouldnt even touch the other cards as long as gpu is good enough. TBH, I havent seen many good benchmarks of physx cards to know if its 100% effective. People tend to just stick in an old card and hope for the best based on what they were told.

CPU will be effected equally regardless though.


What I always wonder was like..
SLI pros beat cons obviously. But you stick in a third card for physx right? Like its not in use unless it needs to be but wouldnt three cards in use at same time at least effect performance a bit due to bandwidth? Like all three are going through motherboard. I cant imagine its 100% effective.

Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com

If you like one of my helixmod patches and want to donate. Can send to me through paypal - eqzitara@yahoo.com

#22
Posted 08/07/2013 12:44 AM   
[quote="helifax"]You know what I never understood exactly ? For example I have 2 GPUs and I run SLI...How will that alter my performance? Like in the above chart? or lower... Hmm I guess at some point I will need to make a test;)) But I was hoping to find someone who knows more on this topic.[/quote]Yeah, no one ever runs SLI tests like this, and especially no 3D benchmarks. I should probably start my own blog for testing this way, because I'm always interested. I'll try this later today using the built-in benchmark, now that SLI is working correctly in MetroLL. [quote="eqzitara"][I know this isnt related to authors post] Physx stand alone "card" sounds insane to me. Maybe 1 or 2 games will benefit from that in a year. IF you buy both of them. Id personally sell whatever card it is and use towards next upgrade. Physx is cool and all but its often down right silly. Basing a system off of it sounds insane to me. Batman was good because it was subtle. Fog effects, debree in wind, thats stuffs awesome and adds to it. I kind of doubt you needed a physx card for it unless your system was borderline based on specs used in game. Borderlands 2, silly physx worked with game so its like an exception to the rule. Any other game I wouldnt mind dropping it. Its like 200% multiplier where its "effect" is just too much or barely used in game. Not saying its bad or anything but I dunno. It doesnt really change the game imo. Things like Anti-Aliasing/ Tessellation are more important to me personally and are generally less costly. I know I kind of went off topic at the mention of physx cards, but they kind of drive me insane. [/quote]I don't disagree with anything you say here. PhysX is a 'nice to have', not a requirement in general. For me personally, I definitely want it, and by contrast, I don't care at all about Tesselation because I cannot see the difference. With PhysX, I see stuff explode, smoke that is otherwise missing, fragments of glass that stay around instead of disappear, and hence it's much more compelling to me. Buying a card only for PhysX? No way in hell. But if I've upgraded, and have my old card lying around, definitely. I know I should sell the damn thing, but I also know that's just not going to happen. I brought up PhysX because it's something to personally consider whenever you buy a card. If you care, think about it, if you don't, don't worry about it. MetroLL is definitely worst/best case for using PhysX, but it's a game I care about and I definitely want the enhanced effects. Now for our OP, leomen, his list of games does not presently include PhysX heavy games. Maybe, maybe, Witcher 3 when it comes out.
helifax said:You know what I never understood exactly ?
For example I have 2 GPUs and I run SLI...How will that alter my performance? Like in the above chart? or lower... Hmm I guess at some point I will need to make a test;)) But I was hoping to find someone who knows more on this topic.
Yeah, no one ever runs SLI tests like this, and especially no 3D benchmarks. I should probably start my own blog for testing this way, because I'm always interested.

I'll try this later today using the built-in benchmark, now that SLI is working correctly in MetroLL.

eqzitara said:[I know this isnt related to authors post]
Physx stand alone "card" sounds insane to me. Maybe 1 or 2 games will benefit from that in a year. IF you buy both of them. Id personally sell whatever card it is and use towards next upgrade.

Physx is cool and all but its often down right silly. Basing a system off of it sounds insane to me. Batman was good because it was subtle. Fog effects, debree in wind, thats stuffs awesome and adds to it. I kind of doubt you needed a physx card for it unless your system was borderline based on specs used in game. Borderlands 2, silly physx worked with game so its like an exception to the rule.
Any other game I wouldnt mind dropping it. Its like 200% multiplier where its "effect" is just too much or barely used in game. Not saying its bad or anything but I dunno. It doesnt really change the game imo.
Things like Anti-Aliasing/ Tessellation are more important to me personally and are generally less costly.

I know I kind of went off topic at the mention of physx cards, but they kind of drive me insane.
I don't disagree with anything you say here. PhysX is a 'nice to have', not a requirement in general. For me personally, I definitely want it, and by contrast, I don't care at all about Tesselation because I cannot see the difference. With PhysX, I see stuff explode, smoke that is otherwise missing, fragments of glass that stay around instead of disappear, and hence it's much more compelling to me.

Buying a card only for PhysX? No way in hell. But if I've upgraded, and have my old card lying around, definitely. I know I should sell the damn thing, but I also know that's just not going to happen.

I brought up PhysX because it's something to personally consider whenever you buy a card. If you care, think about it, if you don't, don't worry about it. MetroLL is definitely worst/best case for using PhysX, but it's a game I care about and I definitely want the enhanced effects.


Now for our OP, leomen, his list of games does not presently include PhysX heavy games. Maybe, maybe, Witcher 3 when it comes out.

Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers

#23
Posted 08/07/2013 12:47 AM   
[quote="eqzitara"]SLI will split performance by however "effective" the game/sli profile allows it. So non-sli might cause 30 fps dip but sli may cause only a 19 fps dip.[/quote] Well I have made the following test in Metro LL benchmark. Everything pumped to the max except the SSAA and Motion Blur thing that I dislike (I don't think it actually influences the performance) SLI enabled (GTX 590) PhysX OFF [url=http://www.iforce.co.nz/View.aspx?i=knvko4fw.1s4.png][img]http://iforce.co.nz/i/knvko4fw.1s4.png[/img][/url] PhysX ON [url=http://www.iforce.co.nz/View.aspx?i=dgaqgjyy.4yp.png][img]http://iforce.co.nz/i/dgaqgjyy.4yp.png[/img][/url] SLI DISABLED. PhysX OFF. [url=http://www.iforce.co.nz/View.aspx?i=bxx2dsfi.vsr.png][img]http://iforce.co.nz/i/bxx2dsfi.vsr.png[/img][/url] SLI DISABLED. PhysX ON. SECOND GPU as DEDICATED PhysX processor [url=http://www.iforce.co.nz/View.aspx?i=xj04jev4.dk0.png][img]http://iforce.co.nz/i/xj04jev4.dk0.png[/img][/url] Based on the above images I see the performance with Advanced PhysX is only 6fps on avg behind. Based on the above pic (from original post): 55 - 37 = 18 / 2 = 9. So I guess it is split behind the two GPUS... However nVPanel states that only GPU A is being used as a PhysX processor... [url=http://www.iforce.co.nz/View.aspx?i=w34nw5uh.k2l.png][img]http://iforce.co.nz/i/w34nw5uh.k2l.png[/img][/url] This is why I asked since I find it a bit mixed or not properly explained... Edit: Forgot to disable 3D Vision in nVpanel and the framerates are a bit lower than normal but I wouldn't expect much more. The tests were made in 2D anyway (CTRL+T before the tests start). Anyway these tests are based around PhysX and not the actual framerate I can obtain;)) which again I see a different thing than the game were usually I have 30fps constant in 3D Surround. Anyways:)) just wanted to point out
eqzitara said:SLI will split performance by however "effective" the game/sli profile allows it.
So non-sli might cause 30 fps dip but sli may cause only a 19 fps dip.


Well I have made the following test in Metro LL benchmark. Everything pumped to the max except the SSAA and Motion Blur thing that I dislike (I don't think it actually influences the performance)

SLI enabled (GTX 590)

PhysX OFF
Image

PhysX ON
Image

SLI DISABLED. PhysX OFF.
Image

SLI DISABLED. PhysX ON. SECOND GPU as DEDICATED PhysX processor
Image

Based on the above images I see the performance with Advanced PhysX is only 6fps on avg behind.
Based on the above pic (from original post): 55 - 37 = 18 / 2 = 9.
So I guess it is split behind the two GPUS...

However nVPanel states that only GPU A is being used as a PhysX processor...
Image


This is why I asked since I find it a bit mixed or not properly explained...


Edit: Forgot to disable 3D Vision in nVpanel and the framerates are a bit lower than normal but I wouldn't expect much more. The tests were made in 2D anyway (CTRL+T before the tests start). Anyway these tests are based around PhysX and not the actual framerate I can obtain;)) which again I see a different thing than the game were usually I have 30fps constant in 3D Surround. Anyways:)) just wanted to point out

1x Palit RTX 2080Ti Pro Gaming OC(watercooled and overclocked to hell)
3x 3D Vision Ready Asus VG278HE monitors (5760x1080).
Intel i9 9900K (overclocked to 5.3 and watercooled ofc).
Asus Maximus XI Hero Mobo.
16 GB Team Group T-Force Dark Pro DDR4 @ 3600.
Lots of Disks:
- Raid 0 - 256GB Sandisk Extreme SSD.
- Raid 0 - WD Black - 2TB.
- SanDisk SSD PLUS 480 GB.
- Intel 760p 256GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD.
Creative Sound Blaster Z.
Windows 10 x64 Pro.
etc


My website with my fixes and OpenGL to 3D Vision wrapper:
http://3dsurroundgaming.com

(If you like some of the stuff that I've done and want to donate something, you can do it with PayPal at tavyhome@gmail.com)

#24
Posted 08/07/2013 12:51 AM   
Hmmm your right. I was mistaken. Part of the reason I hate it is because no one accurately tests it. That screws with my logic because most games as long as they are optimized well in SLI should maintain similiar gpu usage.... So one gpu would spike? Man i'm confused.
Hmmm your right. I was mistaken. Part of the reason I hate it is because no one accurately tests it.

That screws with my logic because most games as long as they are optimized well in SLI should maintain similiar gpu usage....
So one gpu would spike? Man i'm confused.

Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com

If you like one of my helixmod patches and want to donate. Can send to me through paypal - eqzitara@yahoo.com

#25
Posted 08/07/2013 12:58 AM   
[quote="eqzitara"]Hmmm your right. I was mistaken. Part of the reason I hate it is because no one accurately tests it.[/quote] Exactly! That is why I am also so confused :)) and put the question in the first place... It is clear more tests are required..but so far from any game that I tried in SLI and 3D Surround the difference between PhysX ON or OFF is almost non existent.... Guess more tests are required!
eqzitara said:Hmmm your right. I was mistaken. Part of the reason I hate it is because no one accurately tests it.


Exactly! That is why I am also so confused :)) and put the question in the first place... It is clear more tests are required..but so far from any game that I tried in SLI and 3D Surround the difference between PhysX ON or OFF is almost non existent....
Guess more tests are required!

1x Palit RTX 2080Ti Pro Gaming OC(watercooled and overclocked to hell)
3x 3D Vision Ready Asus VG278HE monitors (5760x1080).
Intel i9 9900K (overclocked to 5.3 and watercooled ofc).
Asus Maximus XI Hero Mobo.
16 GB Team Group T-Force Dark Pro DDR4 @ 3600.
Lots of Disks:
- Raid 0 - 256GB Sandisk Extreme SSD.
- Raid 0 - WD Black - 2TB.
- SanDisk SSD PLUS 480 GB.
- Intel 760p 256GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD.
Creative Sound Blaster Z.
Windows 10 x64 Pro.
etc


My website with my fixes and OpenGL to 3D Vision wrapper:
http://3dsurroundgaming.com

(If you like some of the stuff that I've done and want to donate something, you can do it with PayPal at tavyhome@gmail.com)

#26
Posted 08/07/2013 01:01 AM   
Dont trust benchmarks because they are the developers way of saying you shouldnt have problems. Look at tomb raiders that doesnt show anything. Then walk into shanty town. Tomb Raider runs VERY good but that benchmark doesn't test anything lol. Turn on an overlay and start chucking gernades. What I want to know is [I guess you cant test it]. Is how 2 sli cards and one Physx maintain anywhere near 100% effectiveness. That seems like a lot of bandwidth on mobo. Like SLI - TRI SLI - QUAD SLI . Each additional card that is "effective" each other card becomes slightly less effective. How does this not apply to physx. Like I understand third card only turns on when needed but how does it not effect other cards since it doesnt help with load besides physx.
Dont trust benchmarks because they are the developers way of saying you shouldnt have problems. Look at tomb raiders that doesnt show anything. Then walk into shanty town. Tomb Raider runs VERY good but that benchmark doesn't test anything lol.


Turn on an overlay and start chucking gernades.

What I want to know is [I guess you cant test it]. Is how 2 sli cards and one Physx maintain anywhere near 100% effectiveness. That seems like a lot of bandwidth on mobo. Like SLI - TRI SLI - QUAD SLI . Each additional card that is "effective" each other card becomes slightly less effective. How does this not apply to physx. Like I understand third card only turns on when needed but how does it not effect other cards since it doesnt help with load besides physx.

Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com

If you like one of my helixmod patches and want to donate. Can send to me through paypal - eqzitara@yahoo.com

#27
Posted 08/07/2013 01:04 AM   
Nvidia has this! It's that Chineese multiplayer game Nvidia demoed in China at a pesentation. Anyhow, it's a small part of the game for benchmarking DirecX 11 tessellation and PhysX. I've never tried it, so no idea about how well it works. http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/put-your-system-through-its-paces-download-the-pla-directx-11-and-physx-benchmark
Nvidia has this!

It's that Chineese multiplayer game Nvidia demoed in China at a pesentation.

Anyhow, it's a small part of the game for benchmarking DirecX 11 tessellation and PhysX.

I've never tried it, so no idea about how well it works.

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/put-your-system-through-its-paces-download-the-pla-directx-11-and-physx-benchmark

#28
Posted 08/07/2013 01:16 AM   
[quote="D-Man11"]Nvidia has this! It's that Chineese multiplayer game Nvidia demoed in China at a pesentation. Anyhow, it's a small part of the game for benchmarking DirecX 11 tessellation and PhysX. I've never tried it, so no idea about how well it works. http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/put-your-system-through-its-paces-download-the-pla-directx-11-and-physx-benchmark[/quote] Right! For the FUN of it...LET US ROCK:)) I am reallllly curios lol. Will come back with results:)) EDIT: Well Here are the results: Settings: [url=http://www.iforce.co.nz/View.aspx?i=sijkving.43c.jpg][img]http://iforce.co.nz/i/sijkving.43c.jpg[/img][/url] Results: [url=http://www.iforce.co.nz/View.aspx?i=2rbxfubq.gnk.jpg][img]http://iforce.co.nz/i/2rbxfubq.gnk.jpg[/img][/url] Graph from nVidia: [url=http://www.geforce.com/Active/en_US/shared/images/articles/pla-benchmark/pla-benchmark-directx-11-physx-high-performance.png][img]http://www.geforce.com/Active/en_US/shared/images/articles/pla-benchmark/pla-benchmark-directx-11-physx-high-performance.png[/img][/url] The only diff is the screen resolution. I can't go higher than 1680x1050. I believe the difference should be around 10 fps. So this tells me what I already know..that a GTX 590 is equal to a 680 at normal resolutions and better in Surround Resolutions... EDIT: Surround Tests: [url=http://www.iforce.co.nz/View.aspx?i=rh3uzr1y.s2n.jpg][img]http://iforce.co.nz/i/rh3uzr1y.s2n.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.iforce.co.nz/View.aspx?i=yqncsgt1.udx.jpg][img]http://iforce.co.nz/i/yqncsgt1.udx.jpg[/img][/url]
D-Man11 said:Nvidia has this!

It's that Chineese multiplayer game Nvidia demoed in China at a pesentation.

Anyhow, it's a small part of the game for benchmarking DirecX 11 tessellation and PhysX.

I've never tried it, so no idea about how well it works.

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/put-your-system-through-its-paces-download-the-pla-directx-11-and-physx-benchmark


Right! For the FUN of it...LET US ROCK:)) I am reallllly curios lol.
Will come back with results:))


EDIT:

Well Here are the results:

Settings:
Image

Results:
Image


Graph from nVidia:

Image

The only diff is the screen resolution. I can't go higher than 1680x1050. I believe the difference should be around 10 fps. So this tells me what I already know..that a GTX 590 is equal to a 680 at normal resolutions and better in Surround Resolutions...

EDIT:

Surround Tests:
Image

Image

1x Palit RTX 2080Ti Pro Gaming OC(watercooled and overclocked to hell)
3x 3D Vision Ready Asus VG278HE monitors (5760x1080).
Intel i9 9900K (overclocked to 5.3 and watercooled ofc).
Asus Maximus XI Hero Mobo.
16 GB Team Group T-Force Dark Pro DDR4 @ 3600.
Lots of Disks:
- Raid 0 - 256GB Sandisk Extreme SSD.
- Raid 0 - WD Black - 2TB.
- SanDisk SSD PLUS 480 GB.
- Intel 760p 256GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD.
Creative Sound Blaster Z.
Windows 10 x64 Pro.
etc


My website with my fixes and OpenGL to 3D Vision wrapper:
http://3dsurroundgaming.com

(If you like some of the stuff that I've done and want to donate something, you can do it with PayPal at tavyhome@gmail.com)

#29
Posted 08/07/2013 01:19 AM   
[quote="eqzitara"]What I want to know is [I guess you cant test it]. Is how 2 sli cards and one Physx maintain anywhere near 100% effectiveness. That seems like a lot of bandwidth on mobo. Like SLI - TRI SLI - QUAD SLI . Each additional card that is "effective" each other card becomes slightly less effective. How does this not apply to physx. Like I understand third card only turns on when needed but how does it not effect other cards since it doesnt help with load besides physx.[/quote]Should be OK with a third card, because the bandwidth required for PhysX is a tiny fraction of that needed for the graphics itself. Should even run fine with no bottleneck in a x1 slot. (I actually have an old GTX285 in another computer, I'll plug it in and report back later.) [quote="helifax"][quote="eqzitara"]Hmmm your right. I was mistaken. Part of the reason I hate it is because no one accurately tests it.[/quote] Exactly! That is why I am also so confused :)) and put the question in the first place... It is clear more tests are required..but so far from any game that I tried in SLI and 3D Surround the difference between PhysX ON or OFF is almost non existent.... Guess more tests are required![/quote]I wouldn't discount the difference in your test. Looking at your graphs, not just the min/max numbers, you can see a truly astonishing gap between Max and average frame rates with PhysX on. The background black lines are min/max, the orange line is average. I can't explain that, but it definitely shows that in your test case, the average during the tail of the benchmark is awful, like 20fps. The overall average is 38, but that is masking a period of pretty bad play. In the first graph, looking at the orange average, it's playable. In the second, I do not think that would be playable.
eqzitara said:What I want to know is [I guess you cant test it]. Is how 2 sli cards and one Physx maintain anywhere near 100% effectiveness. That seems like a lot of bandwidth on mobo. Like SLI - TRI SLI - QUAD SLI . Each additional card that is "effective" each other card becomes slightly less effective. How does this not apply to physx. Like I understand third card only turns on when needed but how does it not effect other cards since it doesnt help with load besides physx.
Should be OK with a third card, because the bandwidth required for PhysX is a tiny fraction of that needed for the graphics itself. Should even run fine with no bottleneck in a x1 slot. (I actually have an old GTX285 in another computer, I'll plug it in and report back later.)

helifax said:
eqzitara said:Hmmm your right. I was mistaken. Part of the reason I hate it is because no one accurately tests it.


Exactly! That is why I am also so confused :)) and put the question in the first place... It is clear more tests are required..but so far from any game that I tried in SLI and 3D Surround the difference between PhysX ON or OFF is almost non existent....
Guess more tests are required!
I wouldn't discount the difference in your test. Looking at your graphs, not just the min/max numbers, you can see a truly astonishing gap between Max and average frame rates with PhysX on. The background black lines are min/max, the orange line is average.

I can't explain that, but it definitely shows that in your test case, the average during the tail of the benchmark is awful, like 20fps. The overall average is 38, but that is masking a period of pretty bad play.

In the first graph, looking at the orange average, it's playable. In the second, I do not think that would be playable.

Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers

#30
Posted 08/07/2013 01:39 AM   
  2 / 4    
Scroll To Top