GeForce PhysX heavily loads the CPU, but not Ageia PhysX

Kirill · August 13th, 2008, 07:44 PM

Source: http://www.radeon.ru
#1
http://www.radeon.ru/?select=more&f=2008_08&new=57
#2
http://www.radeon.ru/?select=more&f=2008_08&new=61

Translated with google
#1
http://translate.google.com/translat...F8&sl=ru&tl=en
#2
http://translate.google.com/translat...F8&sl=ru&tl=en

**Chaos** · August 13th, 2008, 10:07 PM

interesting

lyla · August 14th, 2008, 12:02 AM

Not that interesting....most games dont fully utilise all processor cores, and surely the Physx API can utilise a seperate core to the application. Seeing as we mostly have 2-4 cores...

AfterLife · August 14th, 2008, 12:16 AM

Havok does the same thing it will utilize a CPU core to do physics , why the hell are Nvidia promoting it as GPU physx when ultimately the physics are done by the processor ??

lyla · August 14th, 2008, 01:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AfterLife

Havok does the same thing it will utilize a CPU core to do physics , why the hell are Nvidia promoting it as GPU physx when ultimately the physics are done by the processor ??

The physics will be done on the GPU, it is just like Folding@home, to keep the GPU fed with physics to process particularly when the GPU can do so much so fast, occupies a fair bit of CPU power.

squall_leonhart · August 15th, 2008, 08:43 AM

The same applies to Frames rendered, a certain amount are prepared by the CPU before being fed for final processing on the gpu, this goes for physics.

external phsyics processing has the addition of latency, resulting in lower max frame rates, and/or controller lag.