AMD HD 6950 and 6970 released

[vickybat]

hmm i guess all physx based games can be played in amd cards by simply turning it off. Mafia 2 plays rock solid in my 5750 by turning apex physx off but rest everything set to high. But since newer games are using this, it has to be seen how good it is with physx on and off in an nvidia card.

Maybe mafia2 will have some spectacular vehicle explosions, gunfights and falling realistic debris to name a few with physx on in an nvidia card.

Whether its great or not but i want to ask if that extra is worth it to switch to an nvidia card from an equivalent amd card when making a purchase decision? And how well does AMD'S 6XXX series fare in a physx title? Ofcourse after turning on the physx option.

I know that it doesn't understand the physx code but will the framerates drop to unplayble levels even on highend amd cards?

Please guys i need some answers as this will be highly helpful for future buyers.

 

[Ishu Gupta]

I have seen B:AA with and without Physx (5870 with 9600) and Physx was better but nothing immense. I don't care for it.

 

[ico]

But since newer games are using this,

How many new games?

I know that it doesn't understand the physx code but will the framerates drop to unplayble levels even on highend amd cards?

We had a lengthy discussion on this in another thread. yes, the frame rates will drop to unplayable on high-end AMD cards too.

nVidia PhysX is a proprietary "physics" engine. nVidia owns it. It is their property. Sources say that its SDK is free.

Traditionally physics processing has always been done on the CPU and still so in 97.5% of the games. PhysX processing is however done on the GPU and when you turn it ON in the game, you do experience a frame rate loss as the GPU will experience more load. On nVidia cards, the game will be still playable because they "support it" but not in AMD cards because they don't.

What happens when you turn PhysX on?
Some paper flying, extra cracks in the walls with some flying debris and a 60% frame rate loss in nVidia cards. Unplayable game in AMD cards.

But are these effects something which can't be implemented the traditional way?
Of course the game developers can easily do this the "traditional way."

But why did game devs use PhysX then?
nVidia sponsored them or gave them $$$ or simply struck a deal with them. Nothing wrong in this though.

Is the performance loss in nVidia cards justified for the effects?
No, it isn't.

CUDA however is no joke and is a great thing in nVidia cards.

 

[asingh]

^^
Errm..or you could say "the way it's meant to be played".

Buy another GPU for PhysX.

 

[Ishu Gupta]

Quality post ico. Agree with all of it.

 

[clear_lot]

Traditionally physics processing has always been done on the CPU and still so in 97.5% of the games. PhysX processing is however done on the GPU and when you turn it ON in the game, you do experience a frame rate loss as the GPU will experience more load. On nVidia cards, the game will be still playable because they "support it" but not in AMD cards because they don't.

a liitle point here is that Physx implementation is done by game developers. the VERY massive frame drops experienced by amd cards is because in absence of nvidia card, the CPU does Physx. which is very slow because of old 8087 instructions.

the massive frame drops in nvidia cards (but less than ati) when physx enabled is because physx is computationally expensive even for nvidia card. it is unable to do other rendering AND physx calculations together. hence the massive drops(though lesser than ati).
to realistically enable gpu physx AND normal rendering, a SEPARATE NVIDIA CARD is must. this extra card does nothing but physx.
main rendering can be done by the primary nvidia/ati card.
the seperate nvidia card must be > 9600gt for realistic playable framerates.

source: Analysis: PhysX On Systems With AMD Graphics Cards : Introduction

 

[damngoodman999]

DG.Man, you post well, but seriously what were you thinking here. How many games do we see with some type of physics (nVidia Physx or Havoc) coming out. Having the game do physics (paper flying/moving cloth) is different to exclusive physics being implemented via an engine. I have seen PhysX games being rendered and as Ico posted it is nothing great. Just something extra. It is not the differentiating factor between ATI and nVidia. Also I have seen the Havoc (CPU) physics on games like Red Falcon Guerilla and Timeshift but it does not 'make or break' the game.

End of the day it is how good FPS the accelerator can generate coupled to the overall system.

Yes i Do accept i many terms as ICO says that Due to physx the FPS reduces by 60% of the GPU in Nvidia ! But still if some one getting card more than 10K sure they ll need of eyecandy also their point ll be on more texture & physx ! so Sacrificing physx worth it all ??

But i saw some where while googling Ati cards provide Physx on many games as not like Nvidia cards but ati cards are trying a bit to access like Physx i.e.(Breaking particles , debris , leaves )

Is that So , Then Y dint AMD concentrate on providing alternative for Physx ??


HAVOC is Joke , i never saw after Red faction guerrilla ???

 

[asingh]

^^
I think till date ATI cards cannot process physics of any type.

 

[vickybat]

I agree with damngoodman999 here. A high card like gtx 570 will give playable framerates with physx on but lets a say a 6950 and 6970 won't be able to provide playable frame rates with that feature on. So why will anybody buy an amd card and buy a dedicated physx card later?

Amd is not thinking about a physx alternative and that is a drawback which they should work on fixing or providing something out of the box. Mafia 2 plays brilliantly with physx on and i have seen it on my friend's gtx 460.

@ ico

Batman Arkham city. mirror's edge 2, next unreal tournament, ghost recon future soldier, dragon age origins 2, dmc (not sure) etc are some titles supporting physx and many are on the way. If nvidia supports a AAA title like batman arkham city and enables physx then all high end amd owners or future owners will miss on complete eye candy.

Whats your opinion on this?

 

[ico]

How many games came out in 2010?? How many of them supported PhysX??

Is that So , Then Y dint AMD concentrate on providing alternative for Physx ??

If a developer wants to add those effects, he can easily do that without using PhysX and hence giving us a terrible frame rate penalty.

 

[Piyush]

^^valid point

 

[asingh]

]
HAVOC[/B] is Joke , i never saw after Red faction guerrilla ???

Bad Company 2 uses Havoc Engine with the Frost Bite engine. Guess all jokes stop....!

I agree with damngoodman999 here. A high card like gtx 570 will give playable framerates with physx on but lets a say a 6950 and 6970 won't be able to provide playable frame rates with that feature on. So why will anybody buy an amd card and buy a dedicated physx card later?

Amd is not thinking about a physx alternative and that is a drawback which they should work on fixing or providing something out of the box. Mafia 2 plays brilliantly with physx on and i have seen it on my friend's gtx 460.

As far as I know, if a game with the PhysX API calls is run JUST using ATI cards and they will render correct and fine. Only the PhysX will not render. How can you say that PhysX enabled games will not run on a HD6970, that to playable..? I am able to run Metro 2033 all maxed out just fine on my system..? PhysX cannot be turned ON when just an ATI card is used, but yes the installation forces you to install the pack else the game will not launch. API calls are not made in the game for PhysX and it renders 'normal'.

nVidia has invested in PhysX. Game developers sign up to use this tool and become part of the program. It is cross portable to consoles too. As of now the Unreal Engine 3, Gamebryo, Vision, Instinct, Trinigy, Diesel, Unity 3D, Hero, and BigWorld engines support PhysX and EA, THQ, 2K Games, Sega publishers too. Why does ATI need to do this...?

 

[ico]

Here's a video:

[youtube]_8D2Kql392c[/youtube]

 

[vickybat]

As far as I know, if a game with the PhysX API calls is run JUST using ATI cards and they will render correct and fine. Only the PhysX will not render. How can you say that PhysX enabled games will not run on a HD6970, that to playable..?

No buddy you got me wrong. I never said that. In fact amd cards will render physx titles fine but with physx turned off.

Lets take an example of mafia 2 and we have two cards:
1. gtx570
2.radeon 6970
We setup two systems with exactly same hardware sans the gpu which will be diff. ofcourse.
System A Has gtx 570 plugged and System B has radeon 6970.

If we fire mafia 2 side by side in both the systems at high settings and apex physx on : (now my questions)

1.Will SYSTEM B deliver playable framerates?
2.Will SYSTEM A deliver playable framerates?
3.Will there be significant differences between the two systems?

 

[ico]

^^ I had answered it already a number of times. GTX 570 will run better obviously and HD 6970 will be running it at an unplayable rate because PhysX will be processed by the CPU in the case of HD 6970 for which PhysX is totally not optimized.

 

[vickybat]

Here's a video:

[youtube]_8D2Kql392c[/youtube]

The looks pretty significant to me. We are missing out a lot of scattering effects which looks less realistic when we turn physx off.

Now we pay for a highend gpu to enable all the effects in a game and the way developers want it to be played . For churning out more fps we can simply tone down the resolution but that takes away all the joy.

So don't you think if a lot of quality titles come this year with nvidia physx ain't all the highend AMD owners missing out on something?

^^ I had answered it already a number of times. GTX 570 will run better obviously and HD 6970 will be running it at an unplayable rate because PhysX will be processed by the CPU in the case of HD 6970 for which PhysX is totally not optimized.

Ok but why the significant drop in framerates? If only the physx code is not supported then physx based effects won't get rendered imo whereas the rest of th game should be rendered normally sans physx effects.

6970 is a powerful gpu and should render rest of the game flawlessly without the effects ofcourse but why unplayable frame rates?

Can you please explain this buddy?

 

[ico]

Do you really think that those pop-corn effects churn out 60% of your frame rate even on an nVidia card? Do you really think that they can't be implemented without PhysX? How many quality titles supported PhysX in 2010???

PhysX is a gimmick. Not my criteria of choosing a card. That's all I can say.

If X card whether from nVidia or ATi runs Crysis better in my price range, I'll go for X.

High end AMD owners can go for a small nVidia card like GTS 450.

It looks pretty significant to you, go for an nVidia card? I'll nonetheless go for GTX 580 in my budget of 30k if buying a card and yea, PhysX won't be the deal maker for me. I'll decide my purchase according to the card's true power.

Ok but why the significant drop in framerates? If only the physx code is not supported then physx based effects won't get rendered imo whereas the rest of th game should be rendered normally sans physx effects.

6970 is a powerful gpu and should render rest of the game flawlessly without the effects ofcourse but why unplayable frame rates?

Can you please explain this buddy?

If we fire mafia 2 side by side in both the systems at high settings and apex physx on : (now my questions)

What I said was only for PhysX enabled and in reply to your post.

 

[asingh]

@VickyBat:

Because it is pathetic and lame coding by nVidia. When an nVidia card is not realized by the sub system it is all off loaded to the CPU. Now these are mathematical calculations with extremely high floating points --- and the CPU which is supposed to be managing things is now actually doing them.

It is not ATI faults that these 'high end' affects cannot be rendered on their die and get off loaded to the CPU. It is the game developers and the PhysX engine which forces the game to run in this manner. See this link here. Yes the Green cards are on top, but they are made for this game. You will also see some HD5xxx series in there giving 'playable' rates. Now why is that...??

The Mafia 2 developers signed up for this program with nVidia. Basically it is home ground advantage to put it in layman terms. Of course the green cards will win.

Regarding your system A,B question:
System A will run better cause it is customized to run on nVidia cards. ATI cards have a disadvantage here, which is not their fault. Why you think we run Vantage benchmarks with the PhysX capability off. To give both sides an even playing ground.

See this playable screenshot.
And this too. With PhyX off. The average is 101.2

 

[Joker]

Ok but why the significant drop in framerates? If only the physx code is not supported then physx based effects won't get rendered imo whereas the rest of th game should be rendered normally sans physx effects.

6970 is a powerful gpu and should render rest of the game flawlessly without the effects ofcourse but why unplayable frame rates?

Can you please explain this buddy?

he explained u everything and still u can be clueless.

 

[vickybat]

Might not be in 2010 but may be in 2011. So you are saying anybody interested in physx effects should turn away from amd camp and look nowhere except nvidia right?

Even i think like you. I would choose a card according to its true power. But to be honest ICO i sometimes regret of not choosing the gts 450 when i made my purchase.Atleast it would have given me playable framerates in physx titles like mirror's edge and mafia 2.

But that is a personal choice anyways.