NVIDIA Responds To GPU PhysX Cheating Allegation

someone is crying foul......lol

http://hothardware.com/cs/forums/t/39136.aspx

edit: had to change this to just a link

 

Woah, I'm not reading all of that :O
Maybe you could summarize that?
P.S Isn't Brian Burke the GM for the Anaheim Ducks?

 

Very informative. Though I saw the driver gave a big boost in cpu scores the overall vantage score rose but not enormously. No harm no foul since futuremark is testing the drivers.

 

lol, i just posted that for informational purposes...although i did read it. pretty interesting and it somes up the the whole physx thing.


dont know about that ducks thing though

 

did you get it though? because it was the gpu doing all the work boosting the cpu up in the end.

i didn't get it at first, till i read that article right there.

 

Yeah i mean yeah thats the point of physx, i meant the airplane score went up which was the purpose of it. The one thing I didnt understand about physx is if the gpu is already under strain wouldn't physx do nothing, or worse decrease fps and such.

 

eventually yes in some games... im thinking. now you know why i said..."i hope they have an on/off switch" for that.

 

Copying an entire article without giving any attribution at all is extremely rude. Next time just post a link.

 

here is your link.

http://hothardware.com/cs/forums/t/39136.aspx

 

its mentioned that this driver enables the gpu to process information instead of the cpu and that there are more high end graphics cards than ageia physx enabled cards. hence I can deduce that these drivers will give better outputs for high cards. the 8800gt will be able to handle it whereas the 8600gt which is already straining won't be able to handle physx processing by the gpu. this is what I understood

 

are there any near-future games supporting it?

 

and now they are mixing cards. seen that in another forum. using something like an 8800gt for physx while using the gtx or gx2 as the main card

 

http://www.planetphysx.com/weblog/archives/physx_enabled_games/

edit: i think ill spend a whole day just blowing up stuff...lol

 

You need to install physx driver as well for physx to work with the GPU. There's your on off switch. Install physx driver: on. Don't install physx driver: off.
At least thats for the time being. No doubt nVidia will put the two drivers together and then we probably won't be able to do too much in the way of controlling it. Or, they could give us more control by doing so as at the moment when you install the physx driver there are only options for viewing whether physx is enabled or not.

 

oh, you mean like this

http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/6508/40461848lt5.png

 

Exactly. Where is the on/off setting in there? I think it is going to be only possible to either enable it (by installing the driver) or not enable it (by not installing the driver). Not really good enough for a lot of people, myself included. We need to be able to scale the enhancements to suit a balance between performance and visual goodies.

 

more along the lines of an option like turning on "forced sync or turning of forced sync". bet you wouldn't want that on all the time. like 1920x1200 and very high. gpu might burn a hole out the bottom..lol. trying to keep up with 10 frames per second running physX. lol

 

It makes me laugh about the responses to 'is it cheating' : nV-"well we didn't submit it for approval" , FM - "Well the didn't submit it for approval" , yet how many reviewers use nVidia's latest beta drivers for their tests, do you think they make a big deal about them being 'FM-approved'?

I also enjoyed the part about do you change the benchmark, nV - "Oh we don't change the benchmark, just which processor handles it" , wasn't that ATi's argument when they did the shader re-compile? The output is the same we just changed the instruction order ADCB instead of ABCD to run better on our hardware. So how would that optimization that FM barred be different than this?

And to me the most important part of the article was this line, making me wonder if FM really cares about the integrity of their benchmark versus what they might loses by offending nV;
"Outside of this matter, we have been introduced to this technology from NVIDIA and it is truly innovative for future games and game development. As you know, we have an actual game coming as well and it could also make use of PhysX on the GPU." :twitcy:

Maybe FM's reaction to nV determines whether it changes their PhsyX costs from: "moderate to no licensing fees".

 

this is why intel wont allow nvidia chipsets for nehalem, because nvidia is seeking to make the cpu more and more obsolete by having their gpu's do cpu type work, such as physics and advanced calculations now, CUDA

 

yup, Intel's number 1 target now is to stop CUDA, which can be easily done by intel you know..

 

will they still sell a separate card like before or will you have to get a Nv card to use PhysX?

 

Just out of curiosity I downloaded the latest Nvidia driver plus the PhysX driver and ran them on my NV8600 GT. Even though the Physx driver says that there is no PhysX card present it still ran the demos:


(notice the balls stuck at the bottom)




(yes, I'm using the Alienware Invader Desktop Theme)



(running over the NBR window)


(yes, I have also installed the DX10 installer for XP)

 

the demos could run anywhere, but the problem is if you spam those tests, even with my lappy its can drop Down to the ground. and thats what actually happens with physx enabled games. i Hope 8m users get physx support

 

Hardware PhysX support is only available with the 177.39 drivers, 8.06 PhysX drivers, and GeForce 200- and G92-based (8800GT, 8800GTS 512) GPUs only. Support for the rest of the G80+ lineup is on the map, but it's not certain when exactly it will happen.

 

Why do I have an Ageia Physx driver panel in my Control Panel? It's been there since I first started up my computer...

It also has some cool demo's, where I can throw a sphere at a bunch of boxes, and they go flying around like the really would.


Actually, it looks more like there's really low gravity in the demo. These boxes will fly, and fly, and fly...

 

hope they include the g92m as well....

 

yeah thats what ive been trying to say,the effect wont be as the desktop counterparts alright, but it'll make the UT3 maps from Unplayable to playable!

 

PhysX is not meant to increase your FPS as some believe. It MAY have that effect on some games but the main purpose of PhysX is physics functions, not graphics acceleration.

 

Funny that you mention it because I also get this using the GF8 series drivers:



(yes, I'm also confused)

 

i wish nvidia's response would have been:

"we don't give a flying hoot about futuremark or their benchmarks. we are making our drivers for games and performance, and futuremark doesn't measure our success"

i would applaud.

 

It's kind of like DirectX in a way. Some games will install a version of DirectX 9.0 because they require files specific to a particular DirectX build. PhysX drivers are installed before you run Unreal Tournament 3 for the first time, even though you may not have a PPU.

It may not be officially supported, but I'm sure it will work - just like when you mod an .inf on a video driver to get it to install on a notebook. It might actually work on yours right now. Download the official 177.39 release from NVIDIA, mod the .inf to support your G92m as you normally would, install the video drivers, then install the PhysX drivers. After the PhysX drivers are installed, you should have an entry in your start menu for the PhysX control panel.

Then install 3DMark Vantage if you've not done so already and run the test in with the "Performance" preset. You should notice a huge jump in your CPU score if PhysX is properly enabled.

Again, this only works with the 177.39 drivers with G92 and GT200-based GPUs, nothing else

 

The first time I ever turned my PC on, when I went to control panel, Ageia Phsyx is right there, next to Administration Tools.

 

yeah, that's a big 10-4 negative. tried all that and it isn't activating physx on no g92m chips sets, but it will activate on the g92 chipset.and clicking on settings will let you know if it is enabled. we kind of went through all this stuff in another thread as well. trying the 177.41's to see, but they do not work either. so it wont be some inf mod that is going to activate it if it isn't already in the dll's them selves.....darn shame too. i would have loved to been wrong there.