Page 1 of 2
1
2
LastLast
  1. #1

    GTX 700 series / AMD 8000 Series.

    I have the 7970 series GPU atm. But since BL2 came out Im missing out on the physx so I kind of regret going to AMD this year even though the gpu itself is really great. Will the 8000 series still not have physx like stuff? Main reason I got the 7970 over the 680 is because well...I couldn't find any 680s in stock around that time back then so I just went with a 7970 since it had a pricedrop around the same time anyway and performance is the same. Was Nvidia guy 10+ years before the 7970.

    Do you think the 700 series will have the same problems the 600 series did at launch with there hardly being any in stock?

    My choice between the 7970 and 680 in Australia was like this....

    $500 vs $700 preorder for 680 (which wasn't in stocklol) (yes it was $200 extra AND it wasn't in stock on waiting list, sif wait when the 7970 was $200 cheaper and actually in stock)

  2. #2
    I would really go with a 660 Ti.....they are pretty freaking amazing and clocks and runs at 670 speeds (most cards)

  3. #3
    Unlikely AMD ever gets physx.

    There's no technical reason AMD cards don't run physx, but nVidia isn't going to port it (tho they aren't against it, they said they would support the effort) and AMD isn't interested in tech owned by the competition and mostly supports stuff like Havoc.

    I had expected developers to start dropping support for Physx by now, since it limits what they can give to their customers and would opt for a 3rd party solution that works on all gfx cards (AMD/nVidia/Intel/etc) or that they use DX11 options (Tho DX11 doesn't have "physics" per see, it can do it).

    As for stock, right after launch cards are almost always higher in demand then supply. Wait a few weeks and you should have plenty of options to buy one.
    Last edited by Amorac; 2012-09-23 at 08:13 AM.
    ~Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see.~

    ~Just because we can string words together to form what looks like a coherent sentence does not mean the sentence really makes any sense.~

  4. #4

  5. #5
    Stood in the Fire MrDeadcruel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina
    Posts
    441
    Amd can do PhysX

    Intel i5 3570k, Gigabyte 7870 OC 2GB AMD RADEON, Kingston Hyperx T1 2x4GB 1600mhz,
    Seasonic 520w M12, Asrock Z77 Pro4, WD 500GB Blue

  6. #6
    Pandaren Monk Prixie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Oostende, Belgium
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by MrDeadcruel View Post
    Amd can do PhysX
    And it does it flawlessly.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Prixie View Post
    And it does it flawlessly.
    Technically its just being done by CPU.

  8. #8
    High Overlord Bob Dole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Washington, D.C
    Posts
    110
    Quote Originally Posted by Purenight View Post
    I would really go with a 660 Ti.....they are pretty freaking amazing and clocks and runs at 670 speeds (most cards)
    Personally, I'd go for the non-Ti 660. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...k,3297-15.html If you're interested, the stable overclock that Tom's achieved on the 660 put it in a virtual tie with the 660 Ti, and the card is quite a savings.

    (سಥ益ಥ)س Y U TAKE BOB DOLE'S PEANUT BUTTER?

  9. #9
    Currently the money spot is taken by the 7950 unless you're also considering buying borderlands 2, in which case it's the 660ti. the amd is far more future proof though.
    "Marketing is what you do when your product is no good."

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by ayako View Post
    Technically its just being done by CPU.
    Which is fine since the added effects amount to almost nothing in terms of CPU cycles. PhysX is just a marketing ploy, nothing else.
    i7-4770k - GTX 780 Ti - 16GB DDR3 Ripjaws - (2) HyperX 120s / Vertex 3 120
    ASRock Extreme3 - JBL S300A - FiiO E10 - EVGA Supernova 650G - Corsair H80i

    build pics

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by glo View Post
    Which is fine since the added effects amount to almost nothing in terms of CPU cycles. PhysX is just a marketing ploy, nothing else.
    One day, the entire game environment will be computed via physics. When that day comes, you'd need a graphics card.

  12. #12
    Pandaren Monk Prixie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Oostende, Belgium
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by yurano View Post
    One day, the entire game environment will be computed via physics. When that day comes, you'd need a graphics card.
    I highly doubt that.

  13. #13
    TOTALLY NOT
    Banned
    tetrisGOAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    12,452
    Quote Originally Posted by Keller View Post
    Currently the money spot is taken by the 7950 unless you're also considering buying borderlands 2, in which case it's the 660ti. the amd is far more future proof though.
    That would be rather pointless, since he already has Borderlands 2 and a 7970, don't you think..?

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by yurano View Post
    One day, the entire game environment will be computed via physics. When that day comes, you'd need a graphics card.
    There is a difference between PhysX and physics.....

  15. #15
    Wait, how do you enable it on the willow ini file? I'm pretty noob at this shit.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Prixie View Post
    I highly doubt that.
    PhysX is possible on CPUs due to the limited number of objects. Only a few objects can move around. In Borderlands 2, you only have flags, small water puddles, debris and sparks.

    In whole environment physics, graphics card (parallel computing) will perform better than CPU.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeara View Post
    There is a difference between PhysX and physics.....
    PhysX is Nvidia's proprietary method of performing physics acceleration on a graphics card.

    AMD's physics acceleration is OpenCL.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dragoncurry View Post
    Wait, how do you enable it on the willow ini file? I'm pretty noob at this shit.
    1) Go here: "C:\Users\<username>\Documents\My Games\Borderlands 2\WillowGame\Config\"
    2) Open file "WillowEngine.ini" in Notepad
    3) CTRL+F for phrase "PhysXLevel"
    4) Edit "PhysXLevel=0" to "PhysXLevel=2"
    5) Save
    6) Profit?

  17. #17
    Why aren't people talking about the upcoming games with full of physx simulations? But the talk about OpenCL does bring up an interesting point because both AMD and Nvidia support OpenCL. Doesn't that rule out the possibility of it being able to not simulate physx?
    But that's not the point. I never had an AMD graphics card so I can't be sure but do you really miss physx in games? Because then Nvidia does have a significant edge.
    Also, please discuss a little about Crysis 3, Far Cry 3, Assassins Creed 3, etc. because these games are actually full of physx, so would they not look great on AMD?
    And does BL2 really has that many physx simulation to change a state of the art AMD 7970 card?
    Because if AMD 8000 can better fps than Nvidia 700, then i might go with them because I know that AMD cards are going to be cheaper.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by kksonakiya View Post
    because I know that AMD cards are going to be cheaper.
    And how did you come to that conclusion?
    i7-4770k - GTX 780 Ti - 16GB DDR3 Ripjaws - (2) HyperX 120s / Vertex 3 120
    ASRock Extreme3 - JBL S300A - FiiO E10 - EVGA Supernova 650G - Corsair H80i

    build pics

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by glo View Post
    And how did you come to that conclusion?
    Because it's naturally been that way for quite some time? It's not really a conclusion, it's just been a trending fact in recent years. AMD has always had a slightly lower performance to Nvidia, well at least the differences now are very very small compared to several years ago when the older Radeon cards were severely behind their Nvidia counterparts. Even if AMD continues to lead the way with getting their cards to market first and being slightly behind the later Nvidia cards but still offering a much more favorable price point, they will maintain a strong business.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Rennadrel View Post
    Because it's naturally been that way for quite some time? It's not really a conclusion, it's just been a trending fact in recent years. AMD has always had a slightly lower performance to Nvidia, well at least the differences now are very very small compared to several years ago when the older Radeon cards were severely behind their Nvidia counterparts. Even if AMD continues to lead the way with getting their cards to market first and being slightly behind the later Nvidia cards but still offering a much more favorable price point, they will maintain a strong business.
    Several years ago we had the 5xxx series which blew away Nvidia's offerings in regards to price/performance. Even this generation Nvidia loses all price/performance comparisons in -every- spot excluding the GTX 660 which is tied.

    Further, you can't have "cheaper" or "lesser performing" cards when they all compete in an ever moving price/performance ratio. The only thing you can measure is what card performs better at a given price. AMD has rarely been behind Nvidia in that regard.
    i7-4770k - GTX 780 Ti - 16GB DDR3 Ripjaws - (2) HyperX 120s / Vertex 3 120
    ASRock Extreme3 - JBL S300A - FiiO E10 - EVGA Supernova 650G - Corsair H80i

    build pics

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •