PhysiX - Should I install?

Ok,

so the games I play dont support PhysX, and I dont have a PhysX card/cpu. so is it even worth it to install it? in the control panel it says let NVIDIA decide/CPU/8600mgt - if your hardware and/or the games u play dont install it, what are the procs and cons of installing vs not installing the software?

thanks.

 

the 8600m gt does support physx.

 

If required, the game will include a installer to install it.

There is no pros if the game is not developed using physX physics engine. If the game is developed with physX physics engine, you can't run the game at all if you don't install it anyways.

 

If [x] is a requirement for [y] and only for [y], and I don't have [y], what are the pros and cons of obtaining [x]?

 

Not all PhysX using games run it on dedicated hardware. Medal of Honor Airborne for example just uses it for it's general physics engine, ran on the CPU. It is installed as it's own separate program on your computer though, and is used whether you have an Nvidia Geforce card capable of it or not. PhysX is quite common for general physics in games actually, taking a big chunk out of Havok's market.

 

PhysX will run on the CPU in a reduced accuracy mode if you don't have PhysX supporting hardware.

Basically, it won't hurt, and since you have an Nvidia card it will help. It's too bad that it's so tightly tied to Nvidia and the Green Monster throws cash at game companies to have them use PhysX instead of something more general, but since Intel canceled Havok, there's not much else available. Bullet is actually a great engine that's underutilized, IMHO. Especially since it's an OpenCL engine, which means ANY GPU will be able to accelerate it.

 

I would hardly say it's taking a chunk from Havok. I'd say maybe few a % of the games I've played use PhysX. Used far more games with Havok and modified Havok. That's the other thing people don't realize, just cause the game doesn't have a Havok logo on it doesn't mean it's not running Havok. Lots of game engines use modified Havok like BC2 does.

PhysX should just die in every way in my opinion, both software running on CPU and on GPU.

PhysX is purposely crippled on PC making it an extreme fail for those without Nvidia's proprietary garbage PhysX hardware. It's been proven that PhysX runs on x87 instructions rather than SSE which is supported by both AMD and Intel since 1999. It's purposely crippled so that it runs inefficiently and not as well.

Nvidia could with just 2 days of work quadruple the performance of PhysX on CPU for PC. But they won't do that, they just want gamers to be slaves to buying their hardware. Nvidia is saying, Screw Intel, Screw AMD, Screw ATi, and Screw anyone that doesn't have Nvidia GPU. Game developers in some ways doing the same.

PhysX purposely inefficient and broke on CPU to force players to buy Nvidia garbage physics hardware.

Because PhysX is a single thread with x87 instructions, this makes CPU unable to be sufficient for PhysX. This in turn bottlenecks the GPU. PhysX games will inherently run worse than if you have a Nvidia GPU by a noticeable margin.

An optimized engine that supports multi-threading on CPU and GPU is superior to Nvidia hardware PhysX.

 

Mate that's a lot of NVIDIA hate there! But to be frank , NVIDIA is always screwing everyone.. nver buying from that company unless their prices go down and u get more bang for the buck.

 

It's amazing how quickly a Nvidia related thread can derail into a hate thread.

 

If Nvidia didn't do so many things that were hate worthy, it wouldn't Seriously though, hating on Nvidia is fine. Just make sure we don't have any personal attacks or foul language or anything in here guys.

 

Haha, like the reverse-PhysX timebomb they included for running on non-nvidia cards. Or "the way it's meant to be played"
Meh, still, I've had enough crudware and Folding@Home forced-installs from ATI to last me a lifetime. It's give and take, they both pull stupid stunts.

As to OP, if I'm not mistaken, the latest NV drivers will already have installed PhysX for you.

 

come on guys you cant be saying ati anymore its amd now

honestly i dont see whats with all the hate on physx even if its only for nvidia. it doesnt really change gameplay. its just a visual thing much like motion blur or something similar. i can see it sucks that they dont support amd cards but if you were nvidia would you waste your time and money to support the competition? two days worth is still money down the drain from a business perspective. locking out amd cards when run together with nvidia cards from a business perspective makes sense since you cant guarantee the cards will play nice with each other so in turn you use less money on support calls and such not to mention also the gained revenue from selling more nvidia cards.

ill admit physx is a cool effect but it certainly doesnt make or break my purchase. i focus more on drivers support which is the reason i bought nvidia.

 

The problem with PhysX is that it's artificially hobbled on non-Nvidia systems. It's just the principle of the matter It's Nvidia's ball to play with and take home if they want to, but that doesn't mean it's right.

 

Problem is, Bullet is not free for commercial, while PhysX is. Game developers really can't complain about free stuff given to them. Moreover, physics performance is not really something important, since it's done on CPU, and CPU is almost never and far from being the bottleneck, as well as the fact that most games using physX never planned on using physics extensively, but simply using the physics engine for collision detection etc, the performance issue is a none issue.

 

none
but chances are you won't be asked to install [x] unless you obtain [y]
and if you don't have [y] right now, you musn't play many pc games...

in all honesty though, i don't like the issues that come with physx. try playing an older game (inferno - it's not that old mind you) which requires ageia physx and won't work with nvidia physx... but you can't have both installed and work properly at the same time.