VegetaCreeper
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 2651
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2007/08/04 14:49:14
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 9
Would this card be a good option, paired up with a gt 670 for physx?
Or would a 450 gts be a better option? Thanks!!!
Be The change in the World you want to seeUse my associate code if you want to save money on your purchases : DIC39SVDZOR8D11 
|
VegetaCreeper
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 2651
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2007/08/04 14:49:14
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 9
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/05 22:14:38
(permalink)
Be The change in the World you want to seeUse my associate code if you want to save money on your purchases : DIC39SVDZOR8D11
|
crezno
SSC Member
- Total Posts : 676
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2010/07/27 04:06:07
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 3
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/05 22:55:55
(permalink)
kepler is fast enough now, i dont think there is a need for dedicated physx.
I know on the 570 when i looked in to this, physx was only using about 10-15% of the gpu in that batman game. So, on a 670 probably be 5-7% which the 640 would be overkill id think.
Last year i wanted to get a 550TI as physx card and even it was only used <50%.
Not sure how the 640 Fairs against a 550TI, it has double the cores, which according to the whole fermi to kepler ordeal should be about the same if you get the shaders to the same speed. Which I think on the 550ti they were around 1900Mhz.
Haha, which I guess makes the 640GT a little over half the speed of a 550TI, so I guess it would be perfect for a PhysX card =)
|
crezno
SSC Member
- Total Posts : 676
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2010/07/27 04:06:07
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 3
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/05 23:09:18
(permalink)
Sorry my math was way off in the previous post, but the benches matched haha.
To be more accurate, the 550TI had 192 cores at 1902 Shader, so 192x1902=365184 while the 640GT has 384 cores at 901 Shader, so 384x901=345984, so the 550TI has about 4-5% more power on the 640. The reason for the 50% less performance was the memory bottleneck. 550TI had 104.5GBps, while the 640GT has 28.5GBps. Its only 1/4th the bandwidth on the memory even though it has roughly the same gpu power.
So having said that, the 640GT would still be a perfect card for physx, and it uses like 50 watts at full load which is commendable. You cant OC it atm, but when they release a patch for afterburner or precision, im betting you can OC that ram and push a ton more power out of it.
|
xanderf
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 2068
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2004/04/26 17:16:42
- Location: Cleveland, OH
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 36
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/05 23:13:17
(permalink)
crezno
kepler is fast enough now, i dont think there is a need for dedicated physx. Wrong. Even with GeForce 680s in SLI, adding a dedicated 560 Ti for PhysX resulted in a 18% boost in average FPS (32% boost in min FPS) in 'Batman: Arkham City'; 39% increase in average FPS in Mafia 2; etc. Any game where the graphics card is stressed at all, logically, would benefit from a PhysX card taking some load off the graphics card...presuming the dedicated PhysX card can keep up. (I tried a GT 430 as a dedicated PhysX card with a pair of 560 Ti in SLI...it actually resulted in a slight performance decrease vs just the 560 Tis in SLI...a 430 cannot keep up!) So this thread is very much a question on my mind, now that I'm also on a 680. Is a 640 enough to 'keep up with the rendering' and thus reduce load on the 680 for an overall improvement? Or is it more like the 430...can't supply enough data as fast as the card could on its own? Regardless, it's plainly obvious by the linked test (and others) that even 680s in SLI *CAN* benefit from a dedicated PhysX card...and very much so. But the PhysX card needs to be fast enough to keep up. A 560 Ti is. A GT 430 is not. Where does a 640 land? No idea...but I wonder, myself...
 
|
crezno
SSC Member
- Total Posts : 676
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2010/07/27 04:06:07
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 3
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/05 23:23:41
(permalink)
xanderf
crezno
kepler is fast enough now, i dont think there is a need for dedicated physx.
Wrong.
Even with GeForce 680s in SLI, adding a dedicated 560 Ti for PhysX resulted in a 18% boost in average FPS (32% boost in min FPS) in 'Batman: Arkham City'; 39% increase in average FPS in Mafia 2; etc.
Any game where the graphics card is stressed at all, logically, would benefit from a PhysX card taking some load off the graphics card...presuming the dedicated PhysX card can keep up. (I tried a GT 430 as a dedicated PhysX card with a pair of 560 Ti in SLI...it actually resulted in a slight performance decrease vs just the 560 Tis in SLI...a 430 cannot keep up!)
So this thread is very much a question on my mind, now that I'm also on a 680. Is a 640 enough to 'keep up with the rendering' and thus reduce load on the 680 for an overall improvement? Or is it more like the 430...can't supply enough data as fast as the card could on its own?
Regardless, it's plainly obvious by the linked test (and others) that even 680s in SLI *CAN* benefit from a dedicated PhysX card...and very much so. But the PhysX card needs to be fast enough to keep up. A 560 Ti is. A GT 430 is not. Where does a 640 land? No idea...but I wonder, myself...
Wrong? I never said it wouldnt increase performance. Hes asked if a 640 would be a good pair for a single 670. Not sli 680s. and a 18% boost was only due to not using a vsynch and using a large resolution. The OP is only using 1 670 and he is running 1920x1200 which is almost half of the resolution your links bench was running. The op has basically half the requirement you are talking about. Half the gpu power required, half the physx that would be required. Adding a 3rd 680 in that users case would have increased his FPS probably closer to 5x that of that physx card he was using. Also, the 430GT is less than half a 640GT even given the memory bottleneck. I was responding to the OPs question, not to the fact that a dedicated card is required for physx. Please stop trolling.
|
xanderf
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 2068
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2004/04/26 17:16:42
- Location: Cleveland, OH
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 36
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/05 23:31:44
(permalink)
crezno
Wrong? I never said it wouldnt increase performance. Hes asked if a 640 would be a good pair for a single 670. Not sli 680s. and a 18% boost was only due to not using a vsynch and using a large resolution. The OP is only using 1 670 and he is running 1920x1200 which is almost half of the resolution your links bench was running. The op has basically half the requirement you are talking about. Half the gpu power required, half the physx that would be required.
Yes, you did. You said exactly that. You said "kepler is fast enough now, i dont think there is a need for dedicated physx." I was pointing out that, even in SLI, Kepler cards absolutely benefit from having a dedicated PhysX card. If a pair of 680s in SLI see a performance improvement with the additional of a dedicated PhysX card, obviously the considerably-less-powerful single 670 would see a performance gain from not having to calculate PhysX effects alongside 3d scene rendering. As to your resolution vs GPU thing...I have no idea where you are coming from on that. Resolution effects 3d scene rendering only. You could be running at 16 million by 10 million pixels, and it would make no difference* to the PhysX impact at all vs running at 640x480 resolution - PhysX is calculating the effect of object transforms in the scene, and has nothing to do with number of pixels (resolution). * Well, very little difference, but no relative difference. Obviously, adding 'stuff to render' to the scene does have some impact on performance, but that impact would be there whether the 3d card was doing double-duty as a PhysX calculation engine or you had a dedicated PhysX card doing that work. Same stuff added either way. Question is just whether the primary 3d card can blow through rendering the scene with plenty of processing resources to spare to handle PhysX calculations alongside (and, obviously, even 680s in SLI are not that powerful in certain demanding titles), or if another card can lift some of that load.
|
crezno
SSC Member
- Total Posts : 676
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2010/07/27 04:06:07
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 3
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/05 23:46:52
(permalink)
You are arguing the wrong points Xanderf.
I am not arguing physx. I am alerting the OP to the need to get more than a 640GT or not!!!!!!
I can 100% tell you that a 560TI does not max out when its set to physx only. I have tested this. My 570 would onnly hit 15% at most.
I had tri sli 570s. So if you calculate the 15% off the workload of 2 570s, it would be safe to say it takes about 7.5% off each card. Which does prove that it does something. And yes, 15% would increase the FPS accordingly.
What im arguing is that you dont need the 560ti or the 570. I had my 570 OC to 900 Clock, so 15% of that would be about 72 cores at 900Mhz. Which in kepler terms, would be about 144 cores with a 900Mhz shader, which the 640 has more than 2x that amount. Calculate the memory bottle neck of the 640, and the 640 should only be reaching about 80% load.
I was not arguing what PhysX is when i said GPU power on the resolutions affecting physx in the same way. I was arguing the resolution difference means that his 1 670 does not have to work as hard to display 1920x1200 as it would to display 2560x1440, so his GPU power requirement is less, meaning it would have more power to dedicate to physx when needed.
The adaptive Vsynch works great in this case, because on a single 1920x1200 monitor, 1 670 will surpass 60FPS, and his monitor has a 60Hz refresh rate, so anything past 60FPS will not be visible. The game will render more, but the monitor will not display it since it only refreshes 60 times every second. So that will drop his cards work load, and the physx then renders off that remaining amount.
|
xanderf
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 2068
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2004/04/26 17:16:42
- Location: Cleveland, OH
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 36
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/05 23:54:56
(permalink)
crezno
What im arguing is that you dont need the 560ti or the 570.
Well, strangely, your second post with extensive calculations somehow shows up before my reply post although mine has an earlier timestamp than yours, so...yeah, that makes this weird. But I see where you are coming from, here - I'm surely not indicating, myself, that a 560 Ti or 570 is necessary. I really do doubt that anything significant on those cards was used. And testing of PhysX cards seems to show that it really is a very, very heavy GPU (like, literally, the core itself) calculation...and much less of a memory bandwidth question (where the 640 chokes). So it is - and the reason I've been wondering this, myself - very much probable that the 640 is potentially the best dedicated PhysX card we've ever seen. Maybe. I sure wish someone would test that...
|
HAZMAN_THE_GREAT
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 4805
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2011/12/01 04:40:46
- Location: Planet Earth
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 7
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/06 01:33:15
(permalink)
Since a 640 ranges around as a 450 and a 550 it will be a great physics card. Don't use a 670 as a physics card. That would be foolish and a waste of a card. So go with the 640 because of course new technology is better. If you have a old card like I do sitting around already, use that if you want. I have a EVGA 560 SC 2GB card and I am going to use it for a PhysX card until I wrap enough money to get a third 670 and a new motherboard. So ya go with it because it is cheap and its a little fast cute 2GB card lol.
|
hoserx
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 2787
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2007/02/15 21:00:31
- Location: Ohio
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 4
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/06 02:47:08
(permalink)
CAPSMAN_THE_GREAT: did you even read this thread? lol.
Asus Rampage IV Formula x79/ Core i7 3820 /16gb G Skill ddr3-2133mhz / 2x EVGA GTX 680 / Intel X-25m 80gb G2 + 120gb G2 / Corsair Force GT 120gb /WD Caviar black 1TB /WD Caviar green 500gb /Sound Blaster X-fi titanium fatal1ty / Corsair AX1200 /NZXT Switch 810 (white)/Corsair H100/ HP ZR30W
|
HAZMAN_THE_GREAT
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 4805
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2011/12/01 04:40:46
- Location: Planet Earth
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 7
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/06 02:55:37
(permalink)
hoserx
CAPSMAN_THE_GREAT: did you even read this thread? lol.
I am going to be honest with you bro. Only half way. I skimmed through the rest lol. I got lazy with the rest of it lol. 
|
gerardfraser
Superclocked Member
- Total Posts : 102
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2006/07/07 16:17:57
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 2
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/06 04:45:13
(permalink)
VegetaCreeper
Would this card be a good option, paired up with a gt 670 for physx?
Or would a 450 gts be a better option? Thanks!!!
A 450gts would work fine for a Physx card.I did not test a 640 for physx but it probably would also be good. Tested 680GTX with 450GTS for physx here.1920x1080 on 5000Mhz 2600k http://forums.evga.com/tm.aspx?m=1533794&mpage=1 680 Mafia 2 physx 1920x1080 60.5 FPS 680 Mafia 2 + 450 for physx 1920x1080 81.8 FPS 680 Batman Arkham City physx 1920x1080 MIn=7 Max=118 AVG=64 680 Batman Arkham City 450 physx 1920x1080 MIn=12 Max=124 AVG=74
|
valen78
Superclocked Member
- Total Posts : 125
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2010/08/20 10:54:50
- Location: Long Island , Ny
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/06 05:08:47
(permalink)
gerardfraser
VegetaCreeper
Would this card be a good option, paired up with a gt 670 for physx?
Or would a 450 gts be a better option? Thanks!!!
A 450gts would work fine for a Physx card.I did not test a 640 for physx but it probably would also be good.
Tested 680GTX with 450GTS for physx here.1920x1080 on 5000Mhz 2600k
http://forums.evga.com/tm.aspx?m=1533794&mpage=1
680 Mafia 2 physx 1920x1080
60.5 FPS
680 Mafia 2 + 450 for physx 1920x1080
81.8 FPS
680 Batman Arkham City physx 1920x1080
MIn=7
Max=118
AVG=64
680 Batman Arkham City 450 physx 1920x1080
MIn=12
Max=124
AVG=74
Thank you for this!! You just swayed my decision on weather or not I should get a physx card. I only have 1 670 but batman frames dip on me and I could really use the extra boost.
|
staypuft
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 3764
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2006/03/11 14:04:03
- Location: USA
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 31
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/06 07:43:58
(permalink)
gerardfraser
VegetaCreeper
Would this card be a good option, paired up with a gt 670 for physx?
Or would a 450 gts be a better option? Thanks!!!
A 450gts would work fine for a Physx card.I did not test a 640 for physx but it probably would also be good.
Tested 680GTX with 450GTS for physx here.1920x1080 on 5000Mhz 2600k
http://forums.evga.com/tm.aspx?m=1533794&mpage=1
680 Mafia 2 physx 1920x1080
60.5 FPS
680 Mafia 2 + 450 for physx 1920x1080
81.8 FPS
680 Batman Arkham City physx 1920x1080
MIn=7
Max=118
AVG=64
680 Batman Arkham City 450 physx 1920x1080
MIn=12
Max=124
AVG=74
Thanks for the data...
Interested in a discount on EVGA products? Click here for details and enter this Associates code at checkout >> 2ILPLQQ8IWY8DPN 2021 Build: Gigabyte Z590 Ultra | Core i7-10700K | be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4 | 32GB G.Skill Trident Z DDR4-3200 EVGA RTX 3080 FTW3 Ultra | Samsung 970 EVO 500GB | Seasonic Focus GX-850 | Fractal Design Meshify C | Asus TUF VG27AQL1A
|
VegetaCreeper
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 2651
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2007/08/04 14:49:14
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 9
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/06 08:55:19
(permalink)
Thanks for the responses so far...
Arguing the fact of the need for a physx card with a gtx 670 is meaningless - because theis card does benefit greatly from a dedicated physx card.
I bought this gtx 670 (Asus Direct Cu ii Top GTX 670) a month 1/2 ago and sold it to my buddy, and then sold him a 450 gts. The 450 gts helps his games with physx tremendously he says.
Since both of these cards are generally around the same price, it would be nice to simply pick up a 640 gts.
Again, I do appreciate your posts - I will probably pick one of these up soon for physx and report back.
Thanks!
Be The change in the World you want to seeUse my associate code if you want to save money on your purchases : DIC39SVDZOR8D11
|
whitnasty1
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 2440
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2010/12/26 17:36:08
- Location: North Carolina
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 5
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/06 10:31:17
(permalink)
It really depends on how much you plan on playing games that are going to be taking advantage of the PhysX technology. Since there are only a handful of games that actually utilize PhysX, I would probably say save your money for something else, but if you do play these games that use PhysX a lot, it is not going to hurt anything by adding an additional PhysX card, it is really up to you if the added power consumption is going to be worth the increase in performance in those games, do not use a card that is too slow though, as sometimes the faster card is going to be able to process the PhysX end of the rendering faster than your slower dedicated PhysX card is going to be able to.
Project Name: "Dragon Slayer" /Case: Cooler Master HAF-X /CPU: Intel i7-2600k @ 4.8Ghz /MoBo: EVGA P67 FTW E679 w/ ECP /CPU Cooling: Corsair H70 w/ Gentle Typhoon AP-15's /RAM: 8GB G.Skill RipJaws @1600Mhz (Red) /GPU: 2xEVGA GTX 660ti FTW Signature 2 SLI /GPU Cooling: Additional 120mm EverMax fan /Sound Card: Creative SB X-Fi Titanium /PSU: Corsair AX1200 /Optical Drive: ASUS DVD/CD R/RW; Samsung Blu Ray Drive /SSD: Intel 520 Series 120GB SSD SATA III (OS) / Intel 320-series 40GB (Data) / HDD: 1TB Samsung SpinPoint F3 7200kRPM /Monitor: Acer P236H (1920x1080)
|
kram36
The Destroyer
- Total Posts : 20362
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2009/10/27 19:00:58
- Location: United States
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 72
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/06 10:47:54
(permalink)
Some of my favorite games use nVidia PhysX. The Batman titles, Mafia II, Metro 2033 and my latest fun game Alice: Madness Returns which is quite fun to play, plus looks pretty good.
I run a GTS 450 for PhysX processing, would like to use the 640 GT and have no extra power connection that the GTS 450 has.
|
charlesbego
New Member
- Total Posts : 4
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2012/07/06 22:18:37
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/06 22:49:25
(permalink)
Dont waste ur money.. gtx670/680 is great with physx. Let's not talk about old cards and focus with new cards as dedicated physx card.
gtx670 + gtx560 = good fps boost.. but too expensive and power/heat
gtx670 + gtx550ti/gts450ddr5 = decent fps boost, maybe 20%, worth it ? ur choice.
gtx670 + gt640 ddr3 = worse than gts450ddr5, yes its because of the ddr3.
gtx670 + gt630 = almost no fps gain and worse fps in BAC
|
xanderf
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 2068
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2004/04/26 17:16:42
- Location: Cleveland, OH
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 36
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/06 23:44:45
(permalink)
charlesbego
gtx670 + gtx550ti/gts450ddr5 = decent fps boost, maybe 20%, worth it ? ur choice.
gtx670 + gt640 ddr3 = worse than gts450ddr5, yes its because of the ddr3.
Except as noted above, PhysX calculations appear to make almost no use of video memory at all - so memory bandwidth will be MUCH less of a concern.
|
HAZMAN_THE_GREAT
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 4805
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2011/12/01 04:40:46
- Location: Planet Earth
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 7
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/07 04:12:34
(permalink)
charlesbego
Dont waste ur money.. gtx670/680 is great with physx. Let's not talk about old cards and focus with new cards as dedicated physx card.
gtx670 + gtx560 = good fps boost.. but too expensive and power/heat
gtx670 + gtx550ti/gts450ddr5 = decent fps boost, maybe 20%, worth it ? ur choice.
gtx670 + gt640 ddr3 = worse than gts450ddr5, yes its because of the ddr3.
gtx670 + gt630 = almost no fps gain and worse fps in BAC
Ya don't waste your money either on using a 670/680 as a PhysX card too. At least I already have a 560 I am going to use that like I said. Well regardless of FPS boost in games, a PhysX card should help you out with your benchmark scores. So like in 3dmark11 a PhysX card should come in handy.
|
Donkeyball Z
New Member
- Total Posts : 16
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2012/05/12 04:36:55
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/07 04:49:21
(permalink)
All in all, a dedicated PhysX is a waste of money and power usually.
It's not like a game will go from unplayable to playable if you already have a 670/680 and add a PhysX card.
Only a few games support PhysX, and those games run just fine.
If benchmarks are what gets you off, go ahead and get a PhysX card.
The 640 will probably be too weak to add something though.
I have a spare 460 lying around, but i'm not going to put it in just for physx..
EVGA 670 SC + Arctic Cooling Accelero Mono Plus
|
HAZMAN_THE_GREAT
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 4805
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2011/12/01 04:40:46
- Location: Planet Earth
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 7
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/07 05:09:02
(permalink)
Donkeyball Z
All in all, a dedicated PhysX is a waste of money and power usually.
It's not like a game will go from unplayable to playable if you already have a 670/680 and add a PhysX card.
Only a few games support PhysX, and those games run just fine.
If benchmarks are what gets you off, go ahead and get a PhysX card.
The 640 will probably be too weak to add something though.
I have a spare 460 lying around, but i'm not going to put it in just for physx..
That is true that a PhysX card will not make a game go from unplayable to playable. But any extra GPU power available does help with benching scores and a little extra frames. See I mean I have a 560 and its lying around doing nothing. So I might as well put it to good use. I know I could sell my 560 but I like it because it was a good card to me and its a good 560 due to the fact it has 2GB of memory and its a superclocked card. Plus I spent 250 bucks on that thing and I bet I wont even get half the money back I spent on it because everyone wants a 600 series card now (accept for those that cant afford it). But hey I have the power to support it with my 1250w PSU and that is not its peak power either. BUT any OTHER CARD higher than a 560 WILL be a WASTE for a PhysX card. My 560 can over clock high too. I can go up to 975mhz and memory clock up too 2225mhz. 
|
xanderf
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 2068
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2004/04/26 17:16:42
- Location: Cleveland, OH
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 36
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/07 09:51:12
(permalink)
Oh, c'mon - look at the Batman test above using as little as a 450 for dedicated PhysX.
Adding a dedicated PhysX card took the min FPS from 7 to 12. That nearly doubles it. And, sure, the game isn't spending *long* at the min FPS...but a drop to 7fps would be choking and immediately and painfully obvious. A brief drop to 12fps would not be nearly as bad.
Just look at the average! At 64fps (without a dedicate PhysX card), you'll obviously be varying on both sides of that...thus pretty frequently dropping below the desired 60fps and getting stutters that you'll feel. Adding a dedicated PhysX card takes you up to 74fps average. Much better odds you spend most the game over 60, there.
So, no, technically, it does not make an 'unplayable' game 'playable', however it does make a 'playable but stuttering' game (assuming the game supports hardware PhysX, of course) 'buttery smooth'.
|
whitnasty1
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 2440
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2010/12/26 17:36:08
- Location: North Carolina
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 5
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/07 10:38:27
(permalink)
If the only game you play is Batman with PhysX enabled then yeah, it would be worth getting one probably. But as of now, just not enough games are using PhysX to warrant the purchase of a dedicated PhysX card.
Project Name: "Dragon Slayer" /Case: Cooler Master HAF-X /CPU: Intel i7-2600k @ 4.8Ghz /MoBo: EVGA P67 FTW E679 w/ ECP /CPU Cooling: Corsair H70 w/ Gentle Typhoon AP-15's /RAM: 8GB G.Skill RipJaws @1600Mhz (Red) /GPU: 2xEVGA GTX 660ti FTW Signature 2 SLI /GPU Cooling: Additional 120mm EverMax fan /Sound Card: Creative SB X-Fi Titanium /PSU: Corsair AX1200 /Optical Drive: ASUS DVD/CD R/RW; Samsung Blu Ray Drive /SSD: Intel 520 Series 120GB SSD SATA III (OS) / Intel 320-series 40GB (Data) / HDD: 1TB Samsung SpinPoint F3 7200kRPM /Monitor: Acer P236H (1920x1080)
|
VegetaCreeper
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 2651
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2007/08/04 14:49:14
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 9
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/07 12:11:05
(permalink)
I have a brand new gtx 480 that ill ude as a physx card for a while...
Be The change in the World you want to seeUse my associate code if you want to save money on your purchases : DIC39SVDZOR8D11
|
gerardfraser
Superclocked Member
- Total Posts : 102
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2006/07/07 16:17:57
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 2
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/07 13:15:34
(permalink)
@ xanderf Physx card does help alot,and you can see that it does.Some people will always think it is a waste or gimmick. I would rather play Batman games,Alice Madness Returns,Mirrors Edge,Mafia 2 ETC with a Physx card for better gaming experience. It does make a difference. @ VegetaCreeper Now some Physx games can Max out with just a 670/680 @ 1920x1080 but so what,if you have an extra card may as well use it.480 will work fine in Physx games.
|
logan801
SSC Member
- Total Posts : 806
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2010/09/12 13:41:23
- Location: Mountain view
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 1
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/07 13:37:50
(permalink)
My two cents. I haven't used a Phx card with my 680's sli but my 570's sli would gain 10fps in Phx games, and that's with a 9800gt which only have 119 cores. So I tend to think it doesn't matter which card you use as long as its around or equal to what nvidia recommends which is 130 cuda cores and above. This info is from my own testing your results may very.
|
HAZMAN_THE_GREAT
CLASSIFIED Member
- Total Posts : 4805
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2011/12/01 04:40:46
- Location: Planet Earth
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 7
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/07 22:30:10
(permalink)
I never used a dedicated PhysX card yet but I thought a simple thumb of rule is that the better the PhysX card the better the frame rate increase you will have? IDK like I said I never used one before. I still think that if you were to use a high end card like a 670/680 for PhysX, your insane and ridicules.
|
DarkAngel_ZERO
Superclocked Member
- Total Posts : 144
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2007/09/15 15:01:56
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 2
Re:Gt 640 for physx?
2012/07/08 02:43:01
(permalink)
The general rule for dedicated physx was that the card you were using had to have either 1/3 or 1/2 the number of CUDA cores that your primary card had to get the best benefit without gimping your overall performance or overdoing it. If someone really wanted to use a x70/x80 card for physx, then they're really just increasing their heat and power consumption more than they are their benefit.
I'm really tempted to try a 640 as a dedicated card, but no one seems to have a video or review posted for the single-slot EVGA version, so I have no idea what the fan noise is like.
|