What kind of value do you place on Nvidia-specific technologies?

Physx (for the games that use it), Adaptive Vsync, Kepler architecture, etc...

Are these any reason to pay $20-$30 more for an Nvidia card over an AMD card that performs the same?

a not a single was given that day.

a not a single was given that day.

jakes456

I dig CUDA cores for some of the transcoding I do, but the only game I've seen do Physx well is Borderlands 2.General_X

There are many other games where physX is great... Like Mafia 2 and Batman.

its all basicvally useless gimmicky trash. unless you have an intent to get eyesecks tonight

10 min video show casing physX on and off.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GyKCM-Bpuw

Adds alot to a game that supports it.

10 min video show casing physX on and off.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GyKCM-Bpuw

Adds alot to a game that supports it.

Truth_Hurts_U

but its not worth the 30- 75 dollar difference between a similarly preforming amd card that is playing the game at the same visual quality (physix off) t potentially a higher fps.

ionusX

That's up to him to decided I'm just showing him how physX work in games.

I love physX in my games. That's one of the reasons I got a GTX 690. :P

More eye candy is always good. Well, for me any ways.

10 min video show casing physX on and off.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GyKCM-Bpuw

Adds alot to a game that supports it.

Truth_Hurts_U

Very little if truth is to be told. I bought my card on price vs performance in all games not just the 1 or 2 a year that nvidia payed a little extra cash to, to make it an "exclusive" ok quite funny i ended up with the 560ti but still it was nothing to do with physX, if i can use it to run Borderlands 2 with pretty effects fair enough, but because my PC was damaged and i cant get the replacement until after xmas i have been playing Borderlands 2 on my PS3 and to be honest i would enjoy it more on the PC just having my mouse back and not because of enemies bleeding out on the floor or rock chunks flying...................................

In terms of software technology, that is where I rate Nvidia. Nvidia have been more consistent with their drivers, and then there's the app support such as "NvidiaInspector". Which I've used quite a few times to implement Ambient Occlusion into games which did not officially support AO (such as DIII and Skyrim).

PhysX. I've seen it work well in the Batman games but in general not too fussed about it.

Very little; it's not worth the extra money that the Nvidia cards cost.

Now if there was only a $20 difference between the 680 and 7970, instead of $100, I might have considered it.

I dig CUDA cores for some of the transcoding I do, but the only game I've seen do Physx well is Borderlands 2.General_X

Batman games use PhysX really well, Mafia 2 also looks stunning with it.

its all basicvally useless gimmicky trash. unless you have an intent to get eyesecks tonight

ionusX

a lot of those effects could have done w/o physx just fake versionsJigglyWiggly_

Yeah but they would not be dynamic only static...

I like Physx, but that on it's own probably wouldn't be enough to make me buy an Nvidia card over an AMD. I've had a better experience with Nvidia's drivers and the user-friendliness of their control panel than AMD's. Granted, my last AMD card was almost 3 years ago.. but since I've gotten everything that I want out of Nvidia cards, I don't see any reason to switch back.

I like the nvidia control panel. That's the best feature to me, the ability to manage settings for different games.

Physx is nice but not that many games use it.

I like the nvidia control panel. That's the best feature to me, the ability to manage settings for different games.

Physx is nice but not that many games use it.

kraken2109

[QUOTE="ionusX"]

its all basicvally useless gimmicky trash. unless you have an intent to get eyesecks tonight

V4LENT1NE

[QUOTE="V4LENT1NE"][QUOTE="ionusX"]

its all basicvally useless gimmicky trash. unless you have an intent to get eyesecks tonight

ionusX

[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"] a lot of those effects could have done w/o physx just fake versionsTruth_Hurts_U

Yeah but they would not be dynamic only static...

not really seen as the only think nvidia has over AMD is physx and that is only supported in a few games and only a handful offer enough effects over non physx version to even notice it

As for adaptive Vsync you can use MSI afterburner which is free and do the same think ( lock your frame rate at what ever value you want )

As for Cuda granted is something nice to have but AMD is using a similar solution ( granted not that mature as Cuda ) thats called OpenCl

I value physx as the technology it is, a GPU accelerated physics engine, and the only one that has gotten wide use. I do not like that it is restricted to Nvidia, AMD cards are perfectly capable of doing the same things, and I will happily throw physx under the bus once we get a directcompute or opencl physics engine to be used in some major games. Until then, if the developer is using physx as its physics engine, then it is great if they put in some gpu effects or features, extra stuff for the pc version is always good

Adaptive V-Sync isn't special, you can get something that works similarly for AMD cards in a few third party programs.

CUDA is completely obsolete for gaming purposes. It has its place in proffesional applications, but you can almost always find something with OpenCL to use as an alternative.

Kepler architecture? That really isn't an exclusive feature, and it has its share of issues

I think Borderlands 2 is a game changer. I can't imagine playing it with out PhysX. I pity the AMD crowd.acanofcoke

Physx (for the games that use it), Adaptive Vsync, Kepler architecture, etc...

Are these any reason to pay $20-$30 more for an Nvidia card over an AMD card that performs the same?

realguitarhero5

Physx (for the games that use it), Adaptive Vsync, Kepler architecture, etc...

Are these any reason to pay $20-$30 more for an Nvidia card over an AMD card that performs the same?

I think Borderlands 2 is a game changer. I can't imagine playing it with out PhysX. I pity the AMD crowd.acanofcoke

I pity NVIDIA crowd that doesn't have DX11.1 Level 11.1 hardware e.g. with 64 UAVs(random read/write) for all shader types i.e. pixel, domain, hull, vertex, geometry, compute.

Current NVIDIA Kelper only supports DX11.1 Level 11.0 hardware e.g. with 8 UAVs (random read/write) for just pixel and compute shaders.

I think Borderlands 2 is a game changer. I can't imagine playing it with out PhysX. I pity the AMD crowd.acanofcoke

not much, since physx is taxing on nvidia cards as well. I mean the games that are really hard on video cards AND have physx are rare, but those types of games such as metro 2033 is pretty much unplayable on even the most powerful nvidia card. You need another dedicated nvidia card to offload physx lol...what a awesome cash cow. On the other hand you could if you wanted do the same thing with an AMD card paired up with a weaker nvidia card. The physx effect will be offloaded to the weak arse nvidia card while the AMD card handles all the real work. Another trend im seeing nowadays is that video cards aren't even NEEDED to run physx. You could simply run them through the cpu. In borderlands 2 for example, it is possible to run the physx on a cpu. Ironically the 7970 plus cpu combo for physx is faster than the nvidia cards at physx. In the future im expecting more of this as i doubt game devs will want to alienate their potential customers. They will include more options to run physx on the cpu and this will just make physx exclusivity to nvidia obsolete.

As for borderlands 2 physx ....no need to pity us AMD users lawl..the 7970 does better at physx on high than the 680 does

not much, since physx is taxing on nvidia cards as well. I mean the games that are really hard on video cards AND have physx are rare, but those types of games such as metro 2033 is pretty much unplayable on even the most powerful nvidia card. You need another dedicated nvidia card to offload physx lol...what a awesome cash cow. On the other hand you could if you wanted do the same thing with an AMD card paired up with a weaker nvidia card. The physx effect will be offloaded to the weak arse nvidia card while the AMD card handles all the real work. Another trend im seeing nowadays is that video cards aren't even NEEDED to run physx. You could simply run them through the cpu. In borderlands 2 for example, it is possible to run the physx on a cpu. Ironically the 7970 plus cpu combo for physx is faster than the nvidia cards at physx. In the future im expecting more of this as i doubt game devs will want to alienate their potential customers. They will include more options to run physx on the cpu and this will just make physx exclusivity to nvidia obsolete.

As for borderlands 2 physx ....no need to pity us AMD users lawl..the 7970 does better at physx on high than the 680 does

blaznwiipspman1

I wish you would stop posting that misleading chart when you know it's not applicable to the vast majority of us. As I and others have posted many times, that test was done with an i7 hexacore CPU that cost an insane amount. Of course the AMD card will perform better with Physx on if you're offloading the burden to that monster CPU, while the Nvidia cards keep the Physx workload on the GPU. Let's see the same test with a 4ghz 2500k as the test CPU. Or even a 3770k.

[QUOTE="acanofcoke"]I think Borderlands 2 is a game changer. I can't imagine playing it with out PhysX. I pity the AMD crowd.ronvalencia

I pity NVIDIA crowd that doesn't have DX11.1 Level 11.1 hardware e.g. with 64 UAVs(random read/write) for all shader types i.e. pixel, domain, hull, vertex, geometry, compute.

Current NVIDIA Kelper only supports DX11.1 Level 11.0 hardware e.g. with 8 UAVs (random read/write) for just pixel and compute shaders.

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

not much, since physx is taxing on nvidia cards as well. I mean the games that are really hard on video cards AND have physx are rare, but those types of games such as metro 2033 is pretty much unplayable on even the most powerful nvidia card. You need another dedicated nvidia card to offload physx lol...what a awesome cash cow. On the other hand you could if you wanted do the same thing with an AMD card paired up with a weaker nvidia card. The physx effect will be offloaded to the weak arse nvidia card while the AMD card handles all the real work. Another trend im seeing nowadays is that video cards aren't even NEEDED to run physx. You could simply run them through the cpu. In borderlands 2 for example, it is possible to run the physx on a cpu. Ironically the 7970 plus cpu combo for physx is faster than the nvidia cards at physx. In the future im expecting more of this as i doubt game devs will want to alienate their potential customers. They will include more options to run physx on the cpu and this will just make physx exclusivity to nvidia obsolete.

As for borderlands 2 physx ....no need to pity us AMD users lawl..the 7970 does better at physx on high than the 680 does

hartsickdiscipl

I wish you would stop posting that misleading chart when you know it's not applicable to the vast majority of us. As I and others have posted many times, that test was done with an i7 hexacore CPU that cost an insane amount. Of course the AMD card will perform better with Physx on if you're offloading the burden to that monster CPU, while the Nvidia cards keep the Physx workload on the GPU. Let's see the same test with a 4ghz 2500k as the test CPU. Or even a 3770k.

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

not much, since physx is taxing on nvidia cards as well. I mean the games that are really hard on video cards AND have physx are rare, but those types of games such as metro 2033 is pretty much unplayable on even the most powerful nvidia card. You need another dedicated nvidia card to offload physx lol...what a awesome cash cow. On the other hand you could if you wanted do the same thing with an AMD card paired up with a weaker nvidia card. The physx effect will be offloaded to the weak arse nvidia card while the AMD card handles all the real work. Another trend im seeing nowadays is that video cards aren't even NEEDED to run physx. You could simply run them through the cpu. In borderlands 2 for example, it is possible to run the physx on a cpu. Ironically the 7970 plus cpu combo for physx is faster than the nvidia cards at physx. In the future im expecting more of this as i doubt game devs will want to alienate their potential customers. They will include more options to run physx on the cpu and this will just make physx exclusivity to nvidia obsolete.

As for borderlands 2 physx ....no need to pity us AMD users lawl..the 7970 does better at physx on high than the 680 does

hartsickdiscipl

I wish you would stop posting that misleading chart when you know it's not applicable to the vast majority of us. As I and others have posted many times, that test was done with an i7 hexacore CPU that cost an insane amount. Of course the AMD card will perform better with Physx on if you're offloading the burden to that monster CPU, while the Nvidia cards keep the Physx workload on the GPU. Let's see the same test with a 4ghz 2500k as the test CPU. Or even a 3770k.

intel hex cores can be purchased for about $550, the 3930k that is. Also im sure my 3770k can probably run physx at medium pretty well. I don't have borderlands 2 yet but when I get it I will run some tests.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

not much, since physx is taxing on nvidia cards as well. I mean the games that are really hard on video cards AND have physx are rare, but those types of games such as metro 2033 is pretty much unplayable on even the most powerful nvidia card. You need another dedicated nvidia card to offload physx lol...what a awesome cash cow. On the other hand you could if you wanted do the same thing with an AMD card paired up with a weaker nvidia card. The physx effect will be offloaded to the weak arse nvidia card while the AMD card handles all the real work. Another trend im seeing nowadays is that video cards aren't even NEEDED to run physx. You could simply run them through the cpu. In borderlands 2 for example, it is possible to run the physx on a cpu. Ironically the 7970 plus cpu combo for physx is faster than the nvidia cards at physx. In the future im expecting more of this as i doubt game devs will want to alienate their potential customers. They will include more options to run physx on the cpu and this will just make physx exclusivity to nvidia obsolete.

As for borderlands 2 physx ....no need to pity us AMD users lawl..the 7970 does better at physx on high than the 680 does

blaznwiipspman1

I wish you would stop posting that misleading chart when you know it's not applicable to the vast majority of us. As I and others have posted many times, that test was done with an i7 hexacore CPU that cost an insane amount. Of course the AMD card will perform better with Physx on if you're offloading the burden to that monster CPU, while the Nvidia cards keep the Physx workload on the GPU. Let's see the same test with a 4ghz 2500k as the test CPU. Or even a 3770k.

intel hex cores can be purchased for about $550, the 3930k that is. Also im sure my 3770k can probably run physx at medium pretty well. I don't have borderlands 2 yet but when I get it I will run some tests.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

not much, since physx is taxing on nvidia cards as well. I mean the games that are really hard on video cards AND have physx are rare, but those types of games such as metro 2033 is pretty much unplayable on even the most powerful nvidia card. You need another dedicated nvidia card to offload physx lol...what a awesome cash cow. On the other hand you could if you wanted do the same thing with an AMD card paired up with a weaker nvidia card. The physx effect will be offloaded to the weak arse nvidia card while the AMD card handles all the real work. Another trend im seeing nowadays is that video cards aren't even NEEDED to run physx. You could simply run them through the cpu. In borderlands 2 for example, it is possible to run the physx on a cpu. Ironically the 7970 plus cpu combo for physx is faster than the nvidia cards at physx. In the future im expecting more of this as i doubt game devs will want to alienate their potential customers. They will include more options to run physx on the cpu and this will just make physx exclusivity to nvidia obsolete.

As for borderlands 2 physx ....no need to pity us AMD users lawl..the 7970 does better at physx on high than the 680 does

blaznwiipspman1

I wish you would stop posting that misleading chart when you know it's not applicable to the vast majority of us. As I and others have posted many times, that test was done with an i7 hexacore CPU that cost an insane amount. Of course the AMD card will perform better with Physx on if you're offloading the burden to that monster CPU, while the Nvidia cards keep the Physx workload on the GPU. Let's see the same test with a 4ghz 2500k as the test CPU. Or even a 3770k.

intel hex cores can be purchased for about $550, the 3930k that is. Also im sure my 3770k can probably run physx at medium pretty well. I don't have borderlands 2 yet but when I get it I will run some tests.

$550 is a ridiculous amount for most of us to spend on a CPU.

"Also I'm sure my 3770k can probably"

LOL

None

$550 is a ridiculous amount for most of us to spend on a CPU.

"Also I'm sure my 3770k can probably"

LOL

hartsickdiscipl

It's nice to know you can have physx and other Nvidia technologies but in most gaming scenarios I don't fully (if ever) utilize/notice them. I really just like Nvidia's drivers more, Catylist always gave me problems.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

$550 is a ridiculous amount for most of us to spend on a CPU.

"Also I'm sure my 3770k can probably"

LOL

horgen123

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

not much, since physx is taxing on nvidia cards as well. I mean the games that are really hard on video cards AND have physx are rare, but those types of games such as metro 2033 is pretty much unplayable on even the most powerful nvidia card. You need another dedicated nvidia card to offload physx lol...what a awesome cash cow. On the other hand you could if you wanted do the same thing with an AMD card paired up with a weaker nvidia card. The physx effect will be offloaded to the weak arse nvidia card while the AMD card handles all the real work. Another trend im seeing nowadays is that video cards aren't even NEEDED to run physx. You could simply run them through the cpu. In borderlands 2 for example, it is possible to run the physx on a cpu. Ironically the 7970 plus cpu combo for physx is faster than the nvidia cards at physx. In the future im expecting more of this as i doubt game devs will want to alienate their potential customers. They will include more options to run physx on the cpu and this will just make physx exclusivity to nvidia obsolete.

As for borderlands 2 physx ....no need to pity us AMD users lawl..the 7970 does better at physx on high than the 680 does

blaznwiipspman1

I wish you would stop posting that misleading chart when you know it's not applicable to the vast majority of us. As I and others have posted many times, that test was done with an i7 hexacore CPU that cost an insane amount. Of course the AMD card will perform better with Physx on if you're offloading the burden to that monster CPU, while the Nvidia cards keep the Physx workload on the GPU. Let's see the same test with a 4ghz 2500k as the test CPU. Or even a 3770k.

intel hex cores can be purchased for about $550, the 3930k that is. Also im sure my 3770k can probably run physx at medium pretty well. I don't have borderlands 2 yet but when I get it I will run some tests.

I can run physics on high and get smooth 60+ framerates with my 3930k

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

I wish you would stop posting that misleading chart when you know it's not applicable to the vast majority of us. As I and others have posted many times, that test was done with an i7 hexacore CPU that cost an insane amount. Of course the AMD card will perform better with Physx on if you're offloading the burden to that monster CPU, while the Nvidia cards keep the Physx workload on the GPU. Let's see the same test with a 4ghz 2500k as the test CPU. Or even a 3770k.

Toxic-Seahorse

intel hex cores can be purchased for about $550, the 3930k that is. Also im sure my 3770k can probably run physx at medium pretty well. I don't have borderlands 2 yet but when I get it I will run some tests.

Not really. The Intel CPU was more efficient. Only a 11fPS drop compared to the 14 by the 680. Also it's well known that physx can run on the weakest nvidia cards such as a 550. Physx isn't optimized for CPUs it is done just by sheer CPU brute power.

I value physx as the technology it is, a GPU accelerated physics engine, and the only one that has gotten wide use. I do not like that it is restricted to Nvidia, AMD cards are perfectly capable of doing the same things, and I will happily throw physx under the bus once we get a directcompute or opencl physics engine to be used in some major games. Until then, if the developer is using physx as its physics engine, then it is great if they put in some gpu effects or features, extra stuff for the pc version is always good

Adaptive V-Sync isn't special, you can get something that works similarly for AMD cards in a few third party programs.

CUDA is completely obsolete for gaming purposes. It has its place in proffesional applications, but you can almost always find something with OpenCL to use as an alternative.

Kepler architecture? That really isn't an exclusive feature, and it has its share of issues

ferret-gamer