Puget Systems print logo
Read this article at https://www.pugetsystems.com/guides/69

Dedicated PhysX Comparisons

Written on October 5, 2009 by Ruben Romero


A few years back, Ageia Technologies, a semiconductor company located in Santa Clara California, launched a product designed to help handle the increasingly complex physics calculations which were becoming popular in modern games. They named this product "PhysX", and it was the world's first dedicated physics card. Enthusiasts were excited, and many thought that this technology was set to be the next piece of essential hardware for enthusiast systems.

Ageia impressed everyone with demonstrations of what their product could do. Fluids flowed with more ripples, sparks were much more abundant, and the classic explosion was much more satisfying. Enthusiasts were excited about the new technology and were eager to employ this new hardware onto their own systems. But the enthusiasts were not alone - Nvidia was also interested in this new technology. In 2008, Nvidia acquired Ageia and their PhysX products. The PhysX engine is now known as Nvidia PhysX.

After several revisions, Nvidia completed their project and released their first driver package that included PhysX compatibility. By accessing the Nvidia control panel and enabling the option, a supported Nvidia card could now perform both functions at once. Nvidia continued to work on their PhysX platform, which now has the ability to offload the physics processing onto a second supported Nvidia card.

One of the biggest questions consumers have about this sort of new technology is "how much will this really make a difference?". We decided to independently test the Nvidia PhysX platform, and share our results.


We'll be using the benchmarks included with Far Cry 2 and H.A.W.X to get results from games that have various levels of effects; we will also be using the Cryostasis tech demo. Cryostasis has a high amount of specific PhysX code and extensively uses the PhysX technology.

Test System
Asus P6T Deluxe BIOS Version 1402
Intel Core i7 965 Stock
6GB Kingston HyperX 1600Mhz CAS8
Western Digital 640GB Black Edition
Windows Vista 64-bit

Video Cards
nVidia 186.18 Driver Package
Geforce 285 GTX 1GB
Geforce 250 GTS 1GB
Geforce 9600 GT 512MB

Game Settings
Monitor Resolution at 1680 x 1050
H.A.W.X at Max Settings with DX10 enabled
Far Cry 2 at Max Settings with DX10 enabled
Cryostasis at Max Settings with DX10 enabled

H.A.W.X. Results

We'll be presenting the results of several configurations for each of 3 video cards. We list the video card setup on the left, and then parenthetically note the PhysX state (enabled, disabled, or a dedicated video card for PhysX).

The clear winner in the above comparison is the GTX 285 SLI setup with the PhysX disabled. When using a single GTX 285, enabling PhysX gives yields almost no performance change. There is not a significantly large impact on performance by adding a dedicated PhysX card and H.A.W.X looks to run better with PhysX disabled.

The GTS 250 as a standalone card has a lower average FPS, but nearly equal maximum FPS scores. With the GTS 250's in an SLI configuration we find a better mean score and it performs better with a 9600 GT for a dedicated PhysX card compared to a dedicated GTS 250.

The 9600 GT placed on the lowest tier of the three. It did have much better maximum FPS as compared to the GTS 250 but with lower average scores, several sections of the benchmarks slowed to a crawl. It also performed best as a standalone card, when compared to its SLI setup.

Farcry 2 Results

Far Cry 2 has a good mix of both environmental and special effects and can be demanding of hardware to run smoothly, the most notable system performance demands being fire effects.

In Far Cry 2, one very noticeable finding is that all three dedicated configurations gave us very similar results. All three configurations performed just like the single GTX 285 in each mode. A pair of GTX 285's with PhysX enabled out-performs all the other setups.

The GTS 250's gave us very consistent scores. Both SLI modes showed similar scores. Single card configurations, as well as having a dedicated PhysX card were very similar in benchmarks. This was almost a mirrored pattern that we saw with the GTX 285 configurations.

Like the other two configurations, the 9600 GT's gave us similar results. Summary: Far Cry 2 benefits the most from an SLI setup with PhysX enabled.

Cryostasis Results

Cryostasis heavily applies PhysX and we're excited to see nVidia's feature shine at its best. With PhysX, we see water droplets bouncing off characters, streaming across floors, smaller puddles combining together to form larger ones, and falling objects making a splash into pools of water. This is a great example of how PhysX can be put to good use in video games.

The pattern is pretty straightforward. With PhysX enabled we get decent scores and smooth game play. Turn off PhysX and the scores drop significantly. The SLI with PhysX configuration took high score but across the chart we saw similar results. [Note: The high maximum FPS is reflective of the ten seconds where physics are not in play, and thus maximum FPS scores shoot up.]

The GTS 250 continues the pattern - PhysX is a massive boost in performance, and for the first time we see a dedicated physx card give a significant performance boost - although it's still inferior to a SLI setup.

Unlike the other two setups the 9600 GT could not yield a decent score with PhysX enabled until it was paired with a dedicated PhysX card. This is the only benchmark that gave us a better overall score with a dedicated PhysX card.


After looking over the results, we can see that the overall best configuration for PhysX has to be an SLI setup with PhysX enabled. Unsurprisingly, it is also the most expensive of all the configurations.

Single card setups perform very similar with or without PhysX enabled and the user shouldn't hesitate to turn on the function. As for dedicated PhysX card configurations, benchmarks show us that the single card counterpart performs just as well in most scenarios. In many cases, dedicated cards just do not have much of a performance benefit, and will simply add expense, heat and complexity to a system. Until more games can be heavily optimized for these types of special effects which utilize the PhysX engine, there is just not much benefit in dedicating a video card to handle the physics workload.

The potential for PhysX is great, but will depend on whether developers will want to embrace this technology. It's no coincidence that the PhysX engine has the biggest impact in Cryostasis, which has been coded specifically to take advantage of PhysX. If more developers start to take advantage of this in a future, expect to see PhysX become a more important feature. For now, our purchasing advice is to enable PhysX on any compatible Nvidia card, but hold off on purchasing a dedicated card for the task.

Tags: Technology, PhysX, Performance, Gaming

The biggest problem with PhysX is it only works with Nvidia hardware. Widespread adoption isn't going to occur until a developer can write one set of physics code and have it work on AMD and Nvidia GPUs.

Posted on 2009-10-05 14:07:01

I wasn't aware that Cryostasis had such deep PhysX coding when I first played it, I instead used a 'performance patch' that I suppose removed most of the physics.

I'll have to give it another run with fresher drivers.

Posted on 2009-10-07 09:57:44

Should I buy another GeForce 9800GT card for games that support PhysX? I have Dark Basic Pro with Dark PhysX add-on and I found out that FPS is slightly lower on hardware PhysX mode than in software PhysX mode. My computer already has a GeForce 9800GT card.

Posted on 2009-10-10 18:19:45

Just a few thoughts for the thread posts.

RE: cccmd
If memory serves me right, I *think* when nVidia was on one of their 18X.XX drivers you were able to use an ATI dedicated GPU with an nVidia dedicated card for Physx. I don't think it lasted very long though, but I really would have wished it would have stayed that way! Granted I could only imagine some of the possible headaches that came along with that setup and cost. It was only word through the grapevine so I can't really confirm it, but I do agree on the adoption statement. Only time will tell.

RE: Ranzear
I'm curious to know how that ended up playing out. We ran benchmarks utilizing "In Game" scenarios, but I know as it is for many other situations, experience makes the bigger difference. But I think more so than anything I am curious on the outcomes of your trials and errors, if any of the two occurred.

RE: jeffmorris
I am not too familiar with Dark and how much hardware plays a factor in game play. I will however say that I prefer to keep my system as simple as I can possibly control. In our tests the obvious winner was an SLI setup with Physx enabled, but what that really is is an overpowered card relying on a bridge to interconnect between the two GPU's on two seperate ports. One to many steps for me to get behind it. SLI and Crossfire is a great hardware advantage to crank out major FPS, but really I tend to lean more towards a single powerful card. Also, with ATI now releasing their 5 series cards, I can only imagine nVidia isn't going to drag their feet with either a new card or a competitive price drop.

I understand it's been almost a month from the original article, hopefully this was not a response to late.

Posted on 2009-11-04 00:42:07

I wasn't aware that Cryostasis had such deep PhysX coding when I first played it, I instead used a 'performance patch' that I suppose removed most of the physics.I'll have to give it another run with fresher drivers.Should I buy another GeForce 9800GT card for games that support PhysX? I have Dark Basic Pro with Dark PhysX add-on and I found out that FPS is slightly lower on hardware PhysX mode than in software PhysX mode. My computer already has a GeForce 9800GT card.

replica handbags

Posted on 2010-04-21 02:17:44

The cam gear pump works fine for filtered WVO or used motor oil Babington heaters and I have installed it on my Babington style heaters. Ldu Company's stock number is 450516 , The only thing about the cam gear pump is that the fire kind of pulses as the cam gear rotates. If you use the spur gear pump that is LDU's stock number 450512 then you get a steady non-pulsing fire. The WVO pump website is www.LDUcompany.com

LDU Company also has other parts that I use for building my waste oil burners, like gear reduction motors. I find it best to turn the pump slower because you really don't need a whole lot of oil dripping on the atomizer ball.

Posted on 2010-06-24 22:13:18

Iam so happy for you post,it's very wonderful.Here I want to introduce one new website I found and they have beautiful UGG Tall Stripe Cable Knit Boots,
fashionable boots ..atlanticshoppingline.com guarantees to deliver all products defective-free. Prior to shipping your order we conduct a quality inspection on all items against defects. If you received defective products, do contact us within 7 business days of the receipt of your package so we can process claims.

Posted on 2010-08-25 06:37:13


Posted on 2010-08-30 12:50:51

alain silberstein replica

Posted on 2010-08-31 02:19:14