PSU for GTX 480

[wafflehammer]

Everything that happens in that video happens on my 4850 in many games. It's just Nvidia giving those guys discounts on stuff, and asking them to promote Nvidia in return. Physx doesn't do anything special, it offloads the physics work from your cpu to your gpu. Which is irrelevant if you have a decent cpu. So the whole "40%" of ATI users cannot run a game, that doesn't even make sense.

PhysX adds nothing to the game, it makes it run better. Unless Nvidia's page and wiki is wrong, and somehow it does add more little effects and such, then there isn't much point to PhysX if you have a decent cpu. So instead of buying a dedicated "physX" card you might as well just spend another $100 on a better cpu.

You are glorifying what PhysX actually does. It is nothing more then middleware, offloads some work from the cpu to the gpu.

have you tried playing cryostasis with that 4850? If not, try it then come back and say phyxs does nothing special.

 

[zmatt]

You are seriously underestimating the sheer amount of work it offloads from the CPU. I don't see a single game on this planet that runs in real time, produces small physics particles, and runs on a normal CPU that produces the same standard that PhysX achieves. And trust me, if you've played GTA4 on PC - you know how much open world games need the CPU even when nothings happening. My CPU runs into problems occasional and it could not be called 'slow' by anyone except purist enthusiasts.

I'm going to contend that point on the grounds of technical ignorance. I'm actually involved in University level GPGPU research so I'm a bit more qualified to talk about this than most. First off GTA4 performance issues have nothign to do with the cpu being over taxed and everything to do with a terrible port on the part of the devs. The number of crashes and graphical errors support this. GTA4 for the PC was and still is to a good degree half backed and poorly supported. As for physx, modern cpus, let alone oens from the beginning of this decade are nowhere close to being over taxed in games, let alone physics.

What you are seeing with your 4850 are mesh objects that are scripted and don't have collision or mass or anything to do with physics. All the debris and ruble from grenade explosions does nothing in non PhysX games, it looks pretty but then it seemingly vanishes and fails to interact with any object it should of hit. PhysX actually enables real time physics for all them pieces of debris, not just some scripted event. I am almost positive Havok physics is perfectly capable of doing everything PhysX does. But we don't see it, because CPU's aren't powerful enough - You only rarely see Havok physics used in a similar way PhysX is used in the above video, but it is not anywhere near on the same scale.

Whether you appreciate it (which you clearly don't) is another matter entirely.

That isn't entirely true. Some games utilize this, however the level of scripting in games has been going down continuously since about 2004. Early versions of havok, like that used in HL2 and oblivion were pretty limited, but it is much better now, and less of a system limitation and more of a developer consideration. The reason physx games tend to have more of this is because Nvidia pays these guys to add it. Which to be honest are things that most people don't need or notice. The only physx game that I have seen that really adds anything is Mirror's edge, and the effects are easily overlooked and without AA it looks terrible.

The fact that you even said that cpus aren't fast enough shows you do not have a basic understanding of digital logic. Allow me to explain. CPU's aren't taxed by games most of the time, and really the only time they are is when you have a game like SupCom with a large number of AI, since that is cpu controlled. physics is relatively (for a computer) simple math done very fast, and that happens to be what computers are very good at. Mundane and repetitious math calculations, what they aren't good at is simulating intelligence and rendering 3 dimensional worlds because you are forcing a digital system to replicate something that is analog in nature. This is why cpus tend to have it so easy in FPS games, they get to do the easy things like process controller inputs, sound and physics all light loads that are very digitally inclined. Video cards have to emulate shapes and effects that are anything but digital. Light for example acts in very complex and hard to quantify ways. It is a particle and a wave at the same time. Or take depth of field for example. The engine has to calculate the distance an object is from you and its relation in perspective to your line of sight and then blur it accordingly trying to mimic the limitations of the human eye. That isn't a cut and dry algorithm with a simple answer. To make things look organic you have to make the logic complex to give you those unexpected and "organic" numbers. Digital logic isn't made for this, it is very expensive resource wise.


Also, cryostasis looks like crap. The graphics are high end, but the execution was terrible, no artistic direction here. It makes Half Life 2 look modern by comparison. No amount of physics can fix that. And what is with all of the cryostasis love? It came out 2 years ago, are you just now hearing about it? The game was laughed at by reviewers, if you want to make a strong case for physx than use a game that did well like mirror's edge. not a "Snail-paced frozen nonsense" -Pc Gamer UK
http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/cryostasissleepofreason

cryostasis

HL2 Lost coast

 

[wafflehammer]

all the love for cryostasis is because it ran like crap unless you had phyxs and even then it was crappy. Plus all you do in mirrors edge is just across roof tops lol

And what's so bad about nvidia paying people to but in phyxs? You pay your pizza maker to put pepperoni on your pizza, don't you? So what's so bad about that. People need to stop whining that nvidia pays people to add junk into games..it makes the game better, so what does it matter to you?

No matter what argument people use it's just useless. Nvidia has phyxs and it's a nice thing to have whether you like it or not. It's not harming you and there is no 50% phyxs tax added on to every card that can use it. Is it that great? nah..is it that useful? nah...but you can't argue that's it's terrible and you should avoid it like the plague lol

 

[S0ULphIRE]

Mirrors edge actually looked nice tho zmatt wasn't talking about gameplay, purely the PhysX side of things

 

[zmatt]

all the love for cryostasis is because it ran like crap unless you had phyxs and even then it was crappy. Plus all you do in mirrors edge is just across roof tops lol

Fallacy of relevance, gameplay has nothing to do with this conversation, nor did I even mention it.

And what's so bad about nvidia paying people to but in phyxs? You pay your pizza maker to put pepperoni on your pizza, don't you? So what's so bad about that. People need to stop whining that nvidia pays people to add junk into games..it makes the game better, so what does it matter to you?

did i say it was bad? no i explained why it is the way it is. However showing that Nvidia has to pay people to use physx does say a lot about the technology.

No matter what argument people use it's just useless. Nvidia has phyxs and it's a nice thing to have whether you like it or not. It's not harming you and there is no 50% phyxs tax added on to every card that can use it. Is it that great? nah..is it that useful? nah...but you can't argue that's it's terrible and you should avoid it like the plague lol

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. Since this is purely a matter of opinion your first statement is ridiculous. And for that I am judging you know, and it isn't going well for you. Second off, there is no physx tax, however nvidia does tend to have higher priced cards, but this has more to do with their gpu architecture and less with physx. I also never said it's terrible, so I'm not sure where you are going with that either. I pointed out that you were stating several false truths, you clearly lack an understanding not only of how the industry works, but how 3d gaming works and how digital logic works.


From a practical standpoint in running games i would argue that physx brings nothing to the table, there isn't anything that it can do noticeably better than havok, and havok is hardware agnostic. Like everything else nvidia has it is purely marketing driven and not engineering driven. having had worked with these people I can assure that the only reason physx and cuda are even used is because they think the stickers will sell more cards. BTW FWIW, cuda is a lame and hacked together programming model. I wish I could get in more depth about Nvidia and ATI, but there are some things we aren't allowed to say. Point being it's very enlightening into how these guys work.


Also just for good measure, here is a havok/euphoria demo with that starwars game.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bKphYfUk-M

 

[dirkpitt45]

^Well said.


Exactly what I was getting at, PhysX only helps if you have an older cpu. It doesn't add anything, it merely moves stuff around. So it is a pointless feature that really isn't a feature. They have this whole illusion going with PhysX, they put the name on physics intensive games and say "oh well you NEED PhysX to experience this" when in reality you don't. Sadly it seems to be working on some people.

 

[zmatt]

^Well said.


Exactly what I was getting at, PhysX only helps if you have an older cpu. It doesn't add anything, it merely moves stuff around. So it is a pointless feature that really isn't a feature. They have this whole illusion going with PhysX, they put the name on physics intensive games and say "oh well you NEED PhysX to experience this" when in reality you don't. Sadly it seems to be working on some people.

Thank you. actually to be honest any cpu that could be hooked up to a pci express motherboard should be good enough for havok, physics is rarely if ever the issue. This is why CPU overclocking gets you very little in fps. 3d games are predominately gpu limited, with the exception of RTS games being the big one.

 

[S0ULphIRE]

Still though, getting back to Oreos original point, why is everyone (coughdirkpittcough) bashing on the 480s? They've got their bad points like every card out there, I'll even concede they've got more than the usual amount. That still doesn't make them useless and irrelevant cards.

If you don't like them that's fine, but seriously enough with the negativity

 

[wafflehammer]

Still though, getting back to Oreos original point, why is everyone (coughdirkpittcough) bashing on the 480s? They've got their bad points like every card out there, I'll even concede they've got more than the usual amount. That still doesn't make them useless and irrelevant cards.

If you don't like them that's fine, but seriously enough with the negativity

yea really...

and the thread is about a PSU anyway

 

[zmatt]

When it comes to hardware you base your purchase mostly on performance and price, other things such as power, heat, reliability and features also factor in, but performance and price are the biggest. I always recommend what hits the best price/performance ratio that meets the person's requirements. Things like physx and cuda are nonessential features, and therefore they never factor in to my decision, and i cant understand why other people do. There are options that by my criteria are superior, and I recommend them, IMO the answer isn't a hard one to come by and recommending anything but the most optimal is wasting the person's money and time. The GTX480 isn't that bad, but there are better, therefore I wont recommend it. There is no reason to.