ATI + Nvidia PhysX configurations are banned with newest drivers

PhysX is a useless piece of crap annyway, so i couldn't care less. Can't wait for Havok to take over with OpenCL implimentation of their physics that will squash stupid PhysX and leave it in the dust to rot for eternity.

 

Actually, the Batman game looses a ton of effects (Banners, Fog) without PhysX, mainly because they interact only with the PhysX engine. In short: The game looks a lot worse without PhysX.

NVIDIA also ported PhysX to all the consoles, so devs are finally starting to use it more and more. Heck, PhysX support is actually higher then DX10 support at this point. And I remind everyone, when they aquired PhysX, NVIDIA offered to help port it to the ATI platform. ATI refused, so don't blame NVIDIA for lack of ATI support.

 

It won`t be long before Nvidia decide to make ATI cards incompatible with Nforce M/boards.

 

bit dramatic don't you think

 

hi all i have ati +nvidia

all u gota do is install the ati drivers lastest will do, and then install the nvidia 181.71 drivers and then replace the physx with the latest installer versions


no need for the most uptodate nvidia drivers

 

You know whats the funny of this? his not only affects Physx, they have disabled CUDA support, SO, if someone got a Tesla card (with it dont have any video out), it cant use it for anything, since the driver will disable the CUDA support if there is a non-cuda primary, and this include GF6x and GF7x cards...

 

No it don't. My quad core is far from maxed out in that game too, so If you're telling that it can't do a few flapping flags and bits of paper then you are quite frankly nuts. Its all marketing bull.

Killzone 2 has better smoke effects and its on a damn console.

All physx has been from the start is the odd flapping flag or so in a game and until everybody supports it thats all it will be. Its dead, the first guy to produce an open physics standard wins period.

 

^^ Theres a difference between using a game engine, and using a seperate physics engine.

Every prior usage of PhysX has simply added a PhysX layer on top of the existing game engine. That's why PhsyX effects have been "eh" over its inception. Arkum, on the other hand, seems to use PhysX for certain objects, independnet of the main gameplay engine. This takes a lot of strain off of the main engine, while it allows PhysX to shine.

Until the game is released, we won't know how far this extends, but I for one would love fog that bends/disperses as effects happen around it. PhysX can do that, game engines can not.

 

Havok will run on any video card as it's software based physics.
Just look at Half Life 2...it's still one of the finest example of physics out there...
Star Wars: Force Unleashed also used the Havok engine and it looks fabulous as well.

And screw u Nvidia..I'm glad I jumped ship to ATI...never been happier.

 

^ so what ?

most PhysX titles are software accelerated as well. only few uses NVIDIA GPU acceleration in their game, which is something Havok cannot do.
currently, according to official & unofficial game lists, 168 tites use Havok, while 219 use PhysX (both including unreleased/upcoming titles)

in regards to stupid "flapping flags and bits of paper" kind of rants, you first need to understand the difference between pre-animated cloths and complex real time physics, then try to understand that the CPU just cant handle these.

 

Lets see the number of games out NOW, you can't just say Havok has this many: and PhysX has and will have this many:, how the hell is that an accurate comparison?

 

OK then, Havok has 161 released titles, PhysX has 173 released ATM.

I still think upcoming games count does mean quite a lot (thats 7 against 46)

 

so whats the newest drivers that will run ati+ nvidia physx? im currently on the 181.71 and they work great with the newest physx drivers. I was wondering if there were anyother drivers that might mght work with win 7 cause these come up as pre-release wddm 1.1 drivers.

 

186.16 would be the newest whql driver that works, but you need to use the nvapi files from 185.68 drivers to make it work. None of the 190.x drivers work.
http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/2236/vantage.jpg

 

will switching from 181.71 to the 186 drivers make that big of a difference for physx?

 

Honestly I haven't really tested to see which is faster or not. Maybe I'll test later, but I doubt there's going to be any big difference.

 

right now im gettings a minimum of 70fps on fluidmark at 1920x1080. Max goes up 560+ with an average of 120fps. to me that seems pretty damn good. I can get it to go higher as I oc the 8800gts but im not sure how to tell where the 8800gts tops out at.

 

That seems about right. Here's what I'm getting right now with Fluidmarks @ 1080P 8xAA
79 min / 131 avg / 521 max
http://3mb.us/images/401_fluidmark19x10_8x.jpg

I kind of know my max oc on my 8800GTS from gaming with it before my 4870.

 

what gts do you have? mines a 8800gts 320mb 96sp
im assuming yours is the 512mb 112sp?

NVM, just saw the pic.

 

Where you get this data ??

As far as i know, at this moment it's seldom the game use physix,,,

it's only GRAW, Mirror Edge, cryostasis, etc,,,

so where 173 released come from ?