bit-tech.net

Mix ATI & Nvidia? Lose PhysX

Mix ATI & Nvidia? Lose PhysX

Nvidia has confirmed that systems mixing ATI GPUs for graphics rendering and Nvidia GPUs for physics rendering will have PhysX disabled.

It's a problem which is unlikely to affect more than a handful of people, but for those who attempt to squeeze every last morsel of performance out of their systems mixing ATI and Nvidia graphics cards may prove disappointing.

SlashGear reports that Nvidia's graphics drivers deliberately disable support for on-GPU PhysX physics processing when they detect an ATI graphics card present in the system - something that has apparently been happening since version 186 of the driver bundle.

The issue crops up on systems that have an ATI card for graphics rendering along with an Nvidia card for dedicated PhysX handling - a somewhat unlikely combination, but one that will appeal to those who miss the days of dedicated PhysX acceleration cards prior to Nvidia's purchase of Ageia back in 2008.

Sadly, all that cleverness turns out to be for naught: in an e-mail to a member of the NGOHQ forums, Nvidia has confirmed that on-GPU PhysX processing is disabled on all Nvidia hardware if the system also contains an ATI graphics card.

The e-mail states that the functionality is disabled for "a variety of reasons - some development expense[,] some quality assurance and some business reasons" with the upshot being that "Nvidia will not support GPU accelerated PhysX with Nvidia GPUs while GPU rendering is happening on non-Nvidia GPUs."

For now, if you want the fastest possible PhysX rendering while retaining an ATI card as your primary graphics rendering device it looks like you'll have to trawl the markets for one of the increasingly rare dedicated Ageia cards - at least until Nvidia changes its stance and re-enables support in the driver.

Do you think that Nvidia is being disingenuous with its reasons for disabling support for PhysX rendering in this case, or is the combination of ATI and Nvidia hardware so rare as to make the issue almost non-existent? Share your thoughts over in the forums.

85 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
proxess 28th September 2009, 12:15 Quote
You wrote AMD bought Ageia, you mean nVidia right?

This is sort of expected, tho I never really ever heard of anyone doing this. Anyhow just get one of the first nVidia integrated Physics and use an older driver... I guess.
Bauul 28th September 2009, 12:31 Quote
It was always going to be a long shot, but it's still a shame.
Hugo 28th September 2009, 12:38 Quote
I'm more surprised to learn that support was there in the first place, than that it is being taken away.
mi1ez 28th September 2009, 12:40 Quote
Grrr!
Rkiver 28th September 2009, 12:45 Quote
I remember asking this a few weeks ago on here, no one could say for sure. I emailed Nvidia, and they said "Wont work" but wouldn't say why.

Well now I know. Cheeky buggers.
Jack_Pepsi 28th September 2009, 12:45 Quote
Son of a bitches!

My friend and I were discussing this only the other day as I want to bung a 8400GS into my system so that I could use it as a PhysX card. He told me that nVIDIA are stopping that from happening but I part of me didn't want to believe him. Hopefully Lucid will release an add-in card of their Hydra 200 or something as I doubt we'll see a 775 board with the chip on board.

I hate you nVIDIA, I hate you!
Mentai 28th September 2009, 12:48 Quote
I was going to do this when I upgraded from my 9600GT to my 4870 1gb, however the 9600GT was such a significant upgrade for a mate of mine I ended up just giving it to him. I figured getting the drivers to be happy with each other would be too fiddly anyway, but it's still a shame now that there are a few decent titles getting physx treatment (just played through Batman).
Rkiver 28th September 2009, 12:50 Quote
Well I've an Aegia card en route to me, wonder if that'll do it?
perplekks45 28th September 2009, 12:52 Quote
Why are you angry? It's normal business!
McDonald's wouldn't start selling Whoppers just because some customers don't want to go to both "restaurants".
Rkiver 28th September 2009, 12:57 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45
Why are you angry? It's normal business!
McDonald's wouldn't start selling Whoppers just because some customers don't want to go to both "restaurants".

Analogy fail. Seriously how is it even remotely the same.

You have two graphics cards, one nVidia, one ATI. nVidia decide to purposefully disable a feature on their card if it detects an ATI one. That is not the same as McD and BK not selling each others items.
ano 28th September 2009, 12:58 Quote
That's a poor analogy perplekks45, it's more like you go to the D's to get a big mac then go round the corner to BK to get your fries but if you eat them together you get diarrhea.
Gareth Halfacree 28th September 2009, 13:05 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by proxess
You wrote AMD bought Ageia, you mean nVidia right?
Ooopsie - that's exactly what I meant. Cheers for pointing that out.
tejas 28th September 2009, 13:15 Quote
You are all getting angry for nothing. Nvidia own PhysX and they can do what they like with it. Same as Intel with Havok. AMD have not had a single GPU Havok accelerated game, because why should Intel help their competitor.

Just get over it with all your constant moaning.

+1 for perplekks45
kylew 28th September 2009, 13:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45
Why are you angry? It's normal business!
McDonald's wouldn't start selling Whoppers just because some customers don't want to go to both "restaurants".

That's not the same thing at all.

It's like McDonald's trying to tell you what you are allowed to do with your food once you've bought it. "No eating our Burgers with KFC chips"

As if they could even begin to think of saying that. Once you've bought your food and left the shop it's none of their business.

Same for nVidia, it's not any of their business what card you're using for rendering games.

Imagine if M-Audio suddenly decided that their audio cards had to be disabled if they realised your midi keyboard was from behringer?

It's about time nVidia get slapped with an anti-competitive lawsuit. They've been getting away with far too much lately.
perplekks45 28th September 2009, 13:21 Quote
Okay, maybe my analogy was weak. (I'm at work, damnit! Don't have overly much time to write that stuff up :p) Still I don't see why nVidia should act any different.
They own the rights to PhysX so it's their IP and they're allowed to protect it. If they don't think one of their cards should be used as a dedicated PhysX card then they can stop including it in their drivers. People who really want it just use older drivers and stop whining or grab an old Ageia card.

After all this decision affects less than 1% of the graphics market. Big deal.
kylew 28th September 2009, 13:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by tejas
You are all getting angry for nothing. Nvidia own PhysX and they can do what they like with it. Same as Intel with Havok. AMD have not had a single GPU Havok accelerated game, because why should Intel help their competitor.

Just get over it with all your constant moaning.

+1 for perplekks45

Remind me of who HAS had a Havok GPU accelerated game?

ATi GPUs (AMD) were the first ones to demonstrate GPU accelerated Havok physics which is to be ran using OpenCL and direct computer on ANY capable GPU.

There are only video demos of GPU Havok Physics.

They can do what they wish with their software or property within reason. What if they suddenly decided to issue a driver that severely gimped their older cards to make their newer ones appear faster in comparison?

Perfectly fine according to you.

When you buy something you should be able to do what ever you like with it.

When they're taking something away when competition's hardware is detected, that is completely wrong.

It's none of nVidia's business what other hardware is in your PC.

I don't see iPods needing Macs to charge or interface with.

Of course, if it was an issue that effected you, I'd bet your stance on this would suddenly become the opposite.
Greentrident 28th September 2009, 13:23 Quote
The logic here is that people are more likely to buy additional Nvidia cards if the function is disabled with ATIs. If this was a mainstream feature then that might work but for something only used by a handful of people who will probably simply remove their old Nvidia card when they upgrade to ATIs it won't affect sales in the slightest. So it seems like it is just a way to annoy a few people and illustrate a level of anti competitiveness the EU shouldn't tolerate!
Comet 28th September 2009, 13:24 Quote
If you ask me this is one hell of a stupid move by NVIDIA.
They loose customer satisfaction and sales for this move. Supporting physx is already hard if you take into count that you need an NVIDIA card to use it. Even more so if you are stuck to NVIDIA cards forever. And with Directx compute becoming a norm even more so.
Even if they don't give support for allowing physicx work along side any other graphics card they didn't need to disable physicx for non nvidia cards. A simple warranty would be sufficient to save them from the legal side.

But there is another thing. I think NVIDIA isn't quite ready for the next gen. Why? Because of the letter they sent to the press that there was little to no interest in DirectX 11 right now and that it didn't make sense buying one of the new ATI cards.
NVIDIA has just seen what ATI's next gen card is, and sends this type of statement? I think they did this because they have compared ATI's offering with what they are internaly building and realised that ATI is better. So they're trying to pass the idea that next gen graphics card isn't worth it.

I got two NVIDIA gtx 260-216 in SLI. I am planning to upgrade to a DirectX 11 graphics card once the two companies have their offerings on the table and when a decently priced Directx 11 card is able to surprass my current system. I am planning to use one of the GTX 260 on a media center PC I have. And the other one I would use for physix with a future DX11 card. But this way I think I'm going to sell it.
There is no point in maintaining a second graphics card just for physix if you have so many limitations.
kylew 28th September 2009, 13:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45
Okay, maybe my analogy was weak. (I'm at work, damnit! Don't have overly much time to write that stuff up :p) Still I don't see why nVidia should act any different.
They own the rights to PhysX so it's their IP and they're allowed to protect it. If they don't think one of their cards should be used as a dedicated PhysX card then they can stop including it in their drivers. People who really want it just use older drivers and stop whining or grab an old Ageia card.

After all this decision affects less than 1% of the graphics market. Big deal.


But that's the point, when you have a geforce card as the main renderer, then it's fine, you can use a secondary geforce card for PhysX.

Loads of people use their old 8800GTs/9600GTs for PhysX with the latest cards for the rendering side.

It's something nVidia actively push.

They just want to give the impression that Geforce means PhysX.

This is why proprietary standards fail quick. Only part of the market can make use of them.

Until there is an open Physics API that runs on all GPUs regardless of the manufacturer, PhysX will never be more than a gimmick.
perplekks45 28th September 2009, 13:27 Quote
If Apple could force you to buy a Mac to be able to charge your iPod they would. You can bet on that.

And both nVidia and AMD already screw with you if you have an older card: There are hardly any bug fixes or optimizations for newer games for older cards, are there?
I don't know where you live but clearly there is no competitive market around. Otherwise you'd know that by playing by the rules you won't be very successful.

Sad but true.

//edit: Havok is OpenCL based, so technically it is OPENly available and, as you already said, nobody uses it. It's a gimmick just like PhysX but nVidia at least use it. Of course it's a restriction and of course everything should be open for everyone but we'd hardly race ahead with that kind of speed in development if there wasn't that much pressure of competition.
kylew 28th September 2009, 13:28 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Comet
If you ask me this is one hell of a stupid move by NVIDIA.
They loose customer satisfaction and sales for this move. Supporting physx is already hard if you take into count that you need an NVIDIA card to use it. Even more so if you are stuck to NVIDIA cards forever. And with Directx compute becoming a norm even more so.
Even if they don't give support for allowing physicx work along side any other graphics card they didn't need to disable physicx for non nvidia cards. A simple warranty would be sufficient to save them from the legal side.

But there is another thing. I think NVIDIA isn't quite ready for the next gen. Why? Because of the letter they sent to the press that there was little to no interest in DirectX 11 right now and that it didn't make sense buying one of the new ATI cards.
NVIDIA has just seen what ATI's next gen card is, and sends this type of statement? I think they did this because they have compared ATI's offering with what they are internaly building and realised that ATI is better. So they're trying to pass the idea that next gen graphics card isn't worth it.

I got two NVIDIA gtx 260-216 in SLI. I am planning to upgrade to a DirectX 11 graphics card once the two companies have their offerings on the table and when a decently priced Directx 11 card is able to surprass my current system. I am planning to use one of the GTX 260 on a media center PC I have. And the other one I would use for physix with a future DX11 card. But this way I think I'm going to sell it.
There is no point in maintaining a second graphics card just for physix if you have so many limitations.

Most of what nVidia does is damage control, but in the process they generally highlight even more wrongs they've been committing.
kylew 28th September 2009, 13:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45
If Apple could force you to buy a Mac to be able to charge your iPod they would. You can bet on that.

And both nVidia and AMD already screw with you if you have an older card: There are hardly any bug fixes or optimizations for newer games for older cards, are there?
I don't know where you live but clearly there is no competitive market around. Otherwise you'd know that by playing by the rules you won't be very successful.

Sad but true.

My point wasn't whether they want to or not, but if they do or don't. Of course they'd love to do that, but they'd never get away with it. Which is why I don't understand how nVidia gets away with so much.

They're destroying their own reputation with each stunt like this.
perplekks45 28th September 2009, 13:32 Quote
They're still market leader, right?

I don't think it's ethically correct or very smart marketing-wise to do something like that but I can see why they do it. It makes sense business-wise.
bogie170 28th September 2009, 13:34 Quote
So you buy an Nvidia graphics card and they disable the physics if it detects an ATI card. So Nvidia is denying you use of the hardware you have brought.

This surely goes against the law. I bet someone could sue for this and i'm sure its only a matter of time before they do.

Lets start a boycott Phys-X and Nvidia until they enable theier cards to do what they are supposed to do.
sear 28th September 2009, 13:39 Quote
This is a dick move, and while I can see why they did it, it flies completely in the face of the traditional openness of the PC market. Open until we start making less money, right? I'm sorry that your new GT300 yields have been so terrible, NVIDIA, but this isn't the way to try to keep your customers. The market for discrete PhysX-dedicated cards is so absurdly low that it will likely have little to no impact on your bottom line. Now, it's possible there is a legitimate explanation - WQHL won't certify their drivers anymore, for example, if they don't remove the feature - but that they cite "business reasons" is extremely telling.
Goty 28th September 2009, 13:41 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by tejas
You are all getting angry for nothing. Nvidia own PhysX and they can do what they like with it. Same as Intel with Havok. AMD have not had a single GPU Havok accelerated game, because why should Intel help their competitor.

Just get over it with all your constant moaning.

+1 for perplekks45

You do realize that AMD has an active license to use Havok on their full line of products, right?
frontline 28th September 2009, 13:46 Quote
Probably sour grapes as they realise that PhysX in it's current form will be dead in a few months anyway. It would be like Havok based Physics only running on an AMD cpu if the motherboard chipset is also made by AMD, but not an AMD cpu running on an Nvidia chipset.
perplekks45 28th September 2009, 13:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by bogie170
So you buy an Nvidia graphics card and they disable the physics if it detects an ATI card. So Nvidia is denying you use of the hardware you have brought.
I think they classify PhysX as bonus ability of their cards and they still sell them as graphics cards.

Why don't you all start asking about why we can't combine AMD and nVidia graphics cards for renderin in some kind of Cross-SLI?
faugusztin 28th September 2009, 13:48 Quote
Actually i was planing to do exactly this - buy a passive 9500GT as a PhysX accelerator. Then i found out this issue and the result is not what NVIDA expects - i didn't bought the 9500GT, but neither will buy a GT2xx or GT3xx (when it will arrive). So they didn't got extra 300e which i'm going to spend on HD5870, but they also lost ~50e for 9500GT i didn't bought.
Jack_Pepsi 28th September 2009, 13:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45
I think they classify PhysX as bonus ability of their cards and they still sell them as graphics cards.

Why don't you all start asking about why we can't combine AMD and nVidia graphics cards for renderin in some kind of Cross-SLI?

Check out the Lucid Hyrda 200 chipset.
rpsgc 28th September 2009, 13:59 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45
I think they classify PhysX as bonus ability of their cards and they still sell them as graphics cards.

Bonus my ass! They actively advertise it and use it to make themselves look superior "Ooooh our video cards support PhysX, can yours?".

Alas, that's the way of the fanboy, when it's good for them, then X feature is THE BEST in the world but when it hurts them/makes them look bad then it's a "just a bonus", give me a f***ing break
Pete J 28th September 2009, 14:01 Quote
Although I'm an Nvidia fan, I find this decision very unfair on those who want to use ATI GPUs for rendering. Nvidia will not make any money from this: in fact, they will lose money from ATI users who would consider having a dedicated Physx card.

To be honest, I wouldn't mind seeing ATI suddenly emerge with a better alternative to Physx just to teach Nvidia a lesson!
tejas 28th September 2009, 14:12 Quote
While I agree that PhysX has a limited life in its current form with Direct Compute and OpenCL ready for adoption, I still don't see why Nvidia have to cater to ATI owners frankly. Nvidia are not forcing you to buy their cards. If you dont like their practices or the developers that include PhysX in their games then do not buy those games.. However games like Batman Arkham Asylum and Mirrors Edge are starting to show that PhysX as a technology has promise.

If I was Intel I would absolutely NOT help AMD with their GPU's and to be honest I think this is why there are next to no games announced using AMD GPU accelerated Havok. Remember that Intel has just ponied up over a billion Euros because of AMD and the Antitrust case.

Why in hell would they help AMD GPU's is beyond me.
Jack_Pepsi 28th September 2009, 14:12 Quote
I wouldn't be surprised if PhysX actually dies out or to save face - become like Havok. Still, nVIDIA won't be getting my money.
perplekks45 28th September 2009, 14:14 Quote
I'm not an nVidia fanboy and I don't think PhysX is anywhere near as useful/awesome as nVidia wants to make it look. If AMD got their acts together and finally started pushing OpenCL they way it deserves to be they'll finally catch up with nVidia in that field as well. They're already in the lead when it comes to performance/price and driver support lately.

I'll build a new PC around/shortly after Christmas and right now it looks like AMD might be the company to receive most of my money.

If you're trying to say PhysX is a main selling point for most nVidia customers though, you're either blind or lying to yourself. It's a gimmick. Nice to have but not the dicisive feature. End of story.
Paradigm Shifter 28th September 2009, 14:16 Quote
Wow, Slashgear covered this story, what, eight weeks after it happened? Definitely a bit slow there I think. End of July that thread was made.

Anyway, I don't like that nVidia are doing the naughty and locking PhysX out - but they are entirely within their rights to, they own the tech. Still, it seems what they're trying to do is force people to upgrade from nVidia hardware to nVidia hardware (using the older card as a dedicated PhysX card) which might well backfire. Time will tell, however.

Regardless, so long as you don't use the latest drivers, you can get away with ATi graphics and nVidia PhysX - to the best of my knowledge, the 182.xx drivers still allow the use of PhysX when an ATi card is present as the graphics card.
Sebbo 28th September 2009, 14:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete J
Although I'm an Nvidia fan, I find this decision very unfair on those who want to use ATI GPUs for rendering. Nvidia will not make any money from this: in fact, they will lose money from ATI users who would consider having a dedicated Physx card

my thoughts exactly, especially as i'm one of those ATI users who was considering getting a GeForce card just for PhysX. Now though, you can bet i'm not going to run nVidia cards only in my system just so i can have PhysX, i'm just not going to bother at all. It would have been a far better decision strategically to allow it, as it opens up an entire new market to nvidia which they now will never have

Lets see how quickly nvidia backpedals on this after finding out what proportion of ATI owners were willing to by a GeForce card to just get physx
Jack_Pepsi 28th September 2009, 14:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paradigm Shifter
... so long as you don't use the latest drivers, you can get away with ATi graphics and nVidia PhysX - to the best of my knowledge, the 182.xx drivers still allow the use of PhysX when an ATi card is present as the graphics card.

I'll have to give that ago, I just can't help but think that they'll lose custom over this.
Dave Lister 28th September 2009, 14:29 Quote
Dont know why Nvidia did that, seeing as nvidia said at the start when physx appeared, that they would be happy to let ATI use there cuda/physx software for nothing !

On a seperate note i tried to use my old 8800 ultra as a physx card along with gtx 280 for a gpu and couldnt make it work, my PSU is only 700W would that be the problem ? Ive looked all over nvidia's site for a guide but cant see anything.
rickysio 28th September 2009, 14:39 Quote
Disturbing yes, but I'm still remaining in the green camp, for at least nVidia makes sure it's partners have strict quality control. I only had to RMA a nVidia GPU once, and it actually ran fine on the distributor's systems (but they still sent it back and I had a spanking new card at the end of everything) unlike AMD, whose 4870 had to be RMA'ed 4 times.

I doubt I'd lose sleep over you legions of angry AMD fans.
Blademrk 28th September 2009, 14:41 Quote
nVidia should have just said it's there but not supported and left it at that instead of locking it out entirely.

I think this will cause a lot of ill feeling towards nvidia which could have been avoided, only a small minority of users have an ATI/nVidia combo, and leaving it unlocked may have created extra sales from ATI users wanting a 2nd (NV) card for PhysX...
l3w1z 28th September 2009, 14:42 Quote
After reading the comments, I'm not sure if I should be angry or hungry.
Goty 28th September 2009, 14:43 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by tejas
While I agree that PhysX has a limited life in its current form with Direct Compute and OpenCL ready for adoption, I still don't see why Nvidia have to cater to ATI owners frankly. Nvidia are not forcing you to buy their cards. If you dont like their practices or the developers that include PhysX in their games then do not buy those games.. However games like Batman Arkham Asylum and Mirrors Edge are starting to show that PhysX as a technology has promise.

If I was Intel I would absolutely NOT help AMD with their GPU's and to be honest I think this is why there are next to no games announced using AMD GPU accelerated Havok. Remember that Intel has just ponied up over a billion Euros because of AMD and the Antitrust case.

Why in hell would they help AMD GPU's is beyond me.

You're really not getting the issue here, are you?

There's no catering to be done here. NVIDIA is actively going out of their way to stop people from using NVIDIA cards in the same system as an ATI card for the express purpose of running PhysX instead of allowing it and just not actively supporting it.
People honestly aren't upset about not being able to run PhysX in the two games that implement it to any effect, they're upset about being denied choice simply because NVIDIA is currently reeling and would like to deny ATI all the sales it possibly can.

The problem is that they're failing miserably at their whole plan! I can guarantee that there are very few people willing to give up the extra performance currently provided by ATI simply to enable PhysX, so NVIDIA isn't going to get even the few low-end sales that they might have otherwise.

Honestly, the whole situation is tantamount to a little kid throwing a temper tantrum because he's only going to get a small ice cream instead of a big one.
kylew 28th September 2009, 15:10 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickysio
Disturbing yes, but I'm still remaining in the green camp, for at least nVidia makes sure it's partners have strict quality control. I only had to RMA a nVidia GPU once, and it actually ran fine on the distributor's systems (but they still sent it back and I had a spanking new card at the end of everything) unlike AMD, whose 4870 had to be RMA'ed 4 times.

I doubt I'd lose sleep over you legions of angry AMD fans.

Yeah because no one has to ever RMA an nVidia card multiple times.

**** happens, deal with it.

This QA you talk about, does that apply to laptops too? Or are you another one who pretends the whole mobile GPU failure thing didn't happen?
NikoBellic 28th September 2009, 15:22 Quote
I think Nvidias decision is a dumb one, if they left it the way it was, then maybe they could slowly turn the ATI fanboys, and then they would have done what I'd never have thought possible... (turn a fanboy!) :D

But now I think ATI look to have the best option for me when I next upgrade, because I would like to use all 3 of my monitors side by side as one big monitor! ;)
rollo 28th September 2009, 15:43 Quote
Whiny fan boy posts gogo

2 games total it affects 0.1% or less of people. Direct x 11 more
ms junk. The 5870 great performance at a huge price

I know plenty of peolple still on 8800 gtxs that can still handle
every modern game at the resolution they game at 1280 1024 19 inch moniters
are still the norm were most foke live.

Ati and nvidia are fighting for the 10% top end. were 60-70% of all graphics
sales are in the below £ 100 sector
Jack_Pepsi 28th September 2009, 15:55 Quote
Why are people that are 'whining' automatically fanboys?
Paradigm Shifter 28th September 2009, 16:11 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack_Pepsi
I'll have to give that ago, I just can't help but think that they'll lose custom over this.
I'm only reporting what I've been informed of, on the fact that 182.xx still works. I could try it, but then I'd actually have to care about PhysX. ;) And pull my 4850 out of one rig to put it in my 8800GT one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kylew
This QA you talk about, does that apply to laptops too? Or are you another one who pretends the whole mobile GPU failure thing didn't happen?
<sarcasm> What mobile GPU failure thing? That was an ATi plot to discredit nVidia! </sarcasm>
Quote:
Originally Posted by rollo
I know plenty of peolple still on 8800 gtxs that can still handle
every modern game at the resolution they game at 1280 1024 19 inch moniters
are still the norm were most foke live.
What happens when people upgrade? I think most monitors now are widescreen, whether you like it or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack_Pepsi
Why are people that are 'whining' automatically fanboys?
Because they don't agree with the posters world-view. Therefore: fanboy. That's the way it's always been, that's the way it's always going to be. *shrug*
Jack_Pepsi 28th September 2009, 16:15 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paradigm Shifter
Because they don't agree with the posters world-view. Therefore: fanboy. That's the way it's always been, that's the way it's always going to be. *shrug*

Dreaming 28th September 2009, 16:58 Quote
I don't agree really but it's a grey area because the Physx card is part of the nvidia card, so if you don't use the nvidia gpu for rendering i can see the argument that the other functions shouldn't be available either.

But imagine if Intel bought nvidia, and then next thing you know if you have an AMD CPU your nvidia graphics card runs at half speed or switches off or something. That would suck, and is anti competitive, which at it's heart what this physx thing is.
andrew8200m 28th September 2009, 17:34 Quote
Im currently using a pair of gtx295 cards for graphics and a seperate gtx285 for physx. Cant fault the set up however its worth a good £1000-1100 so I suppose you need to not fault it lol.

Andy
liratheal 28th September 2009, 17:44 Quote
Boohoo.

Some enterprising hacker will find a way around if, if they haven't already, just as they did with the SLI encryption.
FeRaL 28th September 2009, 17:50 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by ano
That's a poor analogy perplekks45, it's more like you go to the D's to get a big mac then go round the corner to BK to get your fries but if you eat them together you get diarrhea.

That's gotta be the funniest thing I have heard all day! Thanks.
thehippoz 28th September 2009, 18:01 Quote
simple in my eyes.. you are shafting paying customers- if you bought a nvidia card just for physx, and now you can't use it, it's just a brick sitting in your machine

this move really sealed the deal for me.. tired of nvidia, been tired of them for awhile.. I'm buying this christmas and having a look at that lucid board hopefully
DarkLord7854 28th September 2009, 18:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rkiver
Analogy fail. Seriously how is it even remotely the same.

You have two graphics cards, one nVidia, one ATI. nVidia decide to purposefully disable a feature on their card if it detects an ATI one. That is not the same as McD and BK not selling each others items.

Not really.. PhysX is part of the "Made for nVidia" and obviously if you're not using nVidia cards for video & PhysX then you're not getting the nVidia experience, and if something goes wrong because of the ATI/nVidia mixing, nVidia don't want to have to deal with it because it wasn't intended to work in that way.

Thus it's safer, easier, and better business logic for them to disable it for systems mixing ATI/nVidia.
FeRaL 28th September 2009, 18:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by tejas
While I agree that PhysX has a limited life in its current form with Direct Compute and OpenCL ready for adoption, I still don't see why Nvidia have to cater to ATI owners frankly. Nvidia are not forcing you to buy their cards. If you dont like their practices or the developers that include PhysX in their games then do not buy those games.. However games like Batman Arkham Asylum and Mirrors Edge are starting to show that PhysX as a technology has promise.

If I was Intel I would absolutely NOT help AMD with their GPU's and to be honest I think this is why there are next to no games announced using AMD GPU accelerated Havok. Remember that Intel has just ponied up over a billion Euros because of AMD and the Antitrust case.

Why in hell would they help AMD GPU's is beyond me.

I don't have a problem with what Nvidia did, that is as long as on their product packaging they put in big bold letters that it PhysX will not work when an ATI card is detected... Otherwise they are falsely advertising their product if you have to scour the internet to find out why your **** wont work when and ATI card is in your system also.
FeRaL 28th September 2009, 18:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by kylew
Yeah because no one has to ever RMA an nVidia card multiple times.

**** happens, deal with it.

This QA you talk about, does that apply to laptops too? Or are you another one who pretends the whole mobile GPU failure thing didn't happen?

Word, what planet was that guy from? Nvidia has tight QA? What ever...
Evildead666 28th September 2009, 18:41 Quote
I was a bit peeved that i couldn't get my 8800GTS-640 to work in tandem with my 4870, I gave it to a friend in exchange for his 880GTS-320Mb...
i still can't use it as a dedicated card.

I give advice to a lot of people who purchase new hardware, and I can't tell any of them to get Nvidia Hardware, be it mobos or graphics.
Intel or AMD all the way.

Nvidia is dead to me.
Even if they pull the fastest card out of a hat, they can keep it, and all the dev costs.
thehippoz 28th September 2009, 18:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeRaL
I don't have a problem with what Nvidia did, that is as long as on their product packaging they put in big bold letters that it PhysX will not work when an ATI card is detected... Otherwise they are falsely advertising their product if you have to scour the internet to find out why your **** wont work when and ATI card is in your system also.

;)
Rkiver 28th September 2009, 18:57 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeRaL
I don't have a problem with what Nvidia did, that is as long as on their product packaging they put in big bold letters that it PhysX will not work when an ATI card is detected... Otherwise they are falsely advertising their product if you have to scour the internet to find out why your **** wont work when and ATI card is in your system also.

+1 rep for that.
g3n3tiX 28th September 2009, 19:47 Quote
The problem is newer titles don't support anymore dedicated cards like the Ageia : it's mentioned in the Barman readme. Not that it might not work... (haven't tried it, no ageia here)
feedayeen 28th September 2009, 20:35 Quote
Nivida has been top dog in terms of performance for several years now. There is no reason for them to deliberately brick their functionality if they are still beating ATI's lineup. Perhaps they fear that ATI's cards will be better than theirs with DX11.
Paradigm Shifter 28th September 2009, 22:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by g3n3tiX
The problem is newer titles don't support anymore dedicated cards like the Ageia : it's mentioned in the Barman readme. Not that it might not work... (haven't tried it, no ageia here)

Yeah, I wonder how accurate that is. I've not opened my copy of Batman yet, so not had a chance to look at the readme... if newer PhysX games don't work on 'original' PhysX hardware, that's another reason to avoid PhysX like the plague in it's current 'closed' incarnation - what happens when nVidia decides they no longer wish to support 8 series or 9 series cards as PhysX processors? Or 'lower end' cards as PhysX processors?
sandys 28th September 2009, 22:36 Quote
The PCI Physx card seemed to work on my PC, couldn't cope with high but was fine on normal, I couldn't see the difference to be honest, still had thick smoke etc. whereas my 8800gt could run physx high no bother, though as mentioned could see no discernable difference as to why the Physx P100 choked on high.

Not yet got the full retail game though this is the demo.
Slizza 28th September 2009, 22:40 Quote
WOW!! Nvidia stabs it's own customers and renders there own products not fit for purpose.
FAIL!
mrbens 29th September 2009, 00:31 Quote
Wouldn't it be simple enough for somebody in the know (eg game crackers) to just disable the drivers from finding the installed ATi hardware?

I think nVIDIA could sell a lot more cards if they allowed them to work as Physx alongside an ATi card as GPU. I'd buy one.
leexgx 29th September 2009, 01:41 Quote
skiped the comments, i thought there was an way to hack the Physx to work on ATI any way did he ever complete it
Krayzie_B.o.n.e. 29th September 2009, 04:13 Quote
I agree with SEAR, this is a straight dick move by Nvidia. ATI has Nvidia on the ropes and is racking up the points. I actually was thinking about getting an Nvidia card for my DRAGON PLATFORM just so I could experience Physx. But then Nvidia pulls this Hoe move by disabling it's cards when it detects an ATI card. Then Nvidia has the nerve to release a press statement downplaying ATI's new beast the HD 5870 and the importance of Directx 11!! It's one thing to trash talk the competition but to bite the hand that feeds you is insane. Nvidia must be off it's meds?

I always bought ATI because their products were cheaper and almost as good as Nvidia. Plus every body had Nvidia so I wanted to be different. Well After watching Nvidia fall out of favor with Intel and remake the same card with a different name a dozen times, then down play the upcoming release of Directx 11 I'm glad I stuck with the red guys. Besides I have been paying attention to Physx every since those $299 Ageia cards came out and I have yet to see a game released using Physx that makes me say "Dam I gotta get that". Some good games released? Yeh! But the amount of Physx in the games has yet to MODE 7 my eyeballs.

Anyway I think Directx 11 will prove more viable to video games in the next 12 months than Physx will and if I'm wrong than Nvidia will still will be a loser cause by then ATI will offer a card with Physx. Nvidia get your act together and bring gamers together, cause having an Nvidia card in every rig whether it's rendering graphics or doing Physx sounds like profit to me.
lightfox 29th September 2009, 10:56 Quote
Disabling their product in the presence of competition, thus forcing people even more to buy their crap only, stabbing their own customers in the back in the process? How can they get away with this? I'm definetly not suporting nvidia now, my next high end card will be ATI.

That monopoly over PhysX can only be bad for customers in the end, it's not the kind of technology that should be owned by any GPU manufacturer. This is computers we are talking about folks, not video games consoles... Havok for the win!
Sebbo 29th September 2009, 14:35 Quote
just had another thought in regards to this... what happens if you put an nVidia card into one of the AMD 785G boards? because technically there's an ATI GPU in the system, is PhysX still disabled then, or is it only if the driver for the ATI GPU is detected?

if it is still disabled, alot of people are going to get quite pissed off
Jack_Pepsi 29th September 2009, 14:54 Quote
Very interesting point Sebbo - I can only hope that it works if the onboard GFX is disabled - interesting to see what does happen, any one care to test?
Rkiver 29th September 2009, 16:34 Quote
So I got a PhysX card from Ageia. Works fine with ATI.

Unfortunately it's not very powerful and drops my minimum fps in Batman from a lovely figure....to 8.
infi 29th September 2009, 21:05 Quote
the question remains if this will result in more or less sales for nvidia
some people might opt to skip ati alltogether and use nvidia for physics and graphics
and some might not buy a nvidia card now for dedicated physics because they want too stay with ati.
B1GBUD 29th September 2009, 21:18 Quote
Well I still own a BFG PhysX PCI card, it looks like I should keep hold of it should ATI steal a march on performance.
Chocobollz 30th September 2009, 09:05 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by ano
That's a poor analogy perplekks45, it's more like you go to the D's to get a big mac then go round the corner to BK to get your fries but if you eat them together you get diarrhea.

LOL very nice and accurate analogy :-D
rickysio 3rd October 2009, 19:45 Quote
At the rate this is going, you guys will start clamouring for Intel's chips to work with AMD chipsets, and vice versa.

nVidia spent the money. nVidia wants to maximize profits. Unless nVidia is a completely illogical company (there are some I can list) it is unlikely that they'd do something so stupid.

Think! Guy A has an AMD system, but he really wants PhysX. So he buys a nVidia card. nVidia earns.
Guy B has an AMD system, but he wants PhysX, but he still prefers AMD, so he slots both in, buying a cheaper nVidia card. ATI earns, and comparatively nVidia loses out.

Free rider = AMD if nVidia allows mixing, you know...
flibblesan 3rd October 2009, 20:00 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebbo
just had another thought in regards to this... what happens if you put an nVidia card into one of the AMD 785G boards? because technically there's an ATI GPU in the system, is PhysX still disabled then, or is it only if the driver for the ATI GPU is detected?

if it is still disabled, alot of people are going to get quite pissed off

Physx works once the onboard GFX is disabled.
flibblesan 3rd October 2009, 20:02 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rkiver
So I got a PhysX card from Ageia. Works fine with ATI.

Unfortunately it's not very powerful and drops my minimum fps in Batman from a lovely figure....to 8.

Better to buy a secondary NVIDIA card such as the 8800GT, 9500GT, etc, and use it for Physx. Oh, did NVIDIA block this? Good job it's been patched then, lol
thehippoz 3rd October 2009, 20:10 Quote
flibble.. it works on ati, just they literally turned it off and said in a statement- for business reasons lol sure they turned it back on, only cause peeps made a deal about it and after batman was out awhile.. most gamers play the game on release

&edit ah they did patch it.. think some guy did this in another thread on hardoc, mixed 2 drivers.. still whole thing really makes physx shine for what it really is.. a marketing tool
Abdul Hadi 5th October 2009, 09:57 Quote
ATI is winning over Nvidia. Disabling the physx is a fine example of leg pulling.
jim48509 5th October 2009, 14:15 Quote
I see there are patches to get round the Nvidia embargo on using other/ATI cards appearing, if it is that easy to get round why didn't Nvidia realize that it would be, just do the right thing
and not look like **** holes.
perplekks45 5th October 2009, 20:02 Quote
Is it that easy? Show me a working "patch" that doesn't shovel data to the CPU and thereby cripples performance please.

If you do, I'll take it all back and state the opposite from now on. ;)
Jack_Pepsi 6th October 2009, 11:49 Quote
I think I found the working 'patch' over 'ere!
Quote:
The patch applies to Windows 7 systems with multi-vendor graphics configurations only, and you can find download links for both 32-bit and 64-bit versions in this forum post. The installation packages also contain read-me files with troubleshooting tips alongside these installation instructions:

1. Install the needed GeForce driver package. Do not reboot when asked.
2. Use the mod (x86/x64) to patch all needed driver files.
3. Reboot.
perplekks45 6th October 2009, 21:13 Quote
The "mod" re-installs an older PhysX package, I guess?

//edit: Just had a "quick" read through the forum. Now I'm not so sure that that's what the "mod" does. If anybody could find out it'd be much appreciated.
proxess 6th October 2009, 21:23 Quote
As someone said before about Apple iPods not needing Macs, it's true, but they have several times tried to stop people from using software other than iTunes with it, with some funky firmware upgrades.

Unless there's something in nVidia's EULA about nVidia Physix and ATi GPUs, you should be able to do what you want. If not, then supposedly you were "previously" warned.

The fix mentioned above seems like a nice find tho, way to go!
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums