should i install physx on amd card to play games like mafia 2?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Sort by date Sort by votes
If you are trying to run the game with Apex PhysX, it will be using the CPU and will slow the system down. With an AMD card, be sure to disable PhysX.

Now, if you continue to have problems, you might want to install the PhysX software just in case, but still be sure to have it disabled in the game settings.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/physx-9.15.0428-driver.html

mafia2-settings.jpg
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Dedicated physx or not if the game itself try to install PhysX driver then just install it. As for advance PhysX effect normally it is disabled by default if you don't have nvidia gpu. In the past people often use nvidia card as secondary card so they can have physx effect even if they were using amd card to render the game. But that no longer possible since nvidia actively block physx from working whenever they detect non nvidia discrete gpu also present in the system.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Nothing shady about it. Just business decision. And before complete block from nvidia they even mention publically that they have no issue with AMD licensing PhysX from them (can't expect everything to be free right?)

AMD show no interest plus they also pushing for bullet as well as alternative to PhysX back then so nvidia block hybrid PhysX before they got into a mess and got laugh off by AMD afterwards. I mean PhysX is nvidia tech. Like it or not nvidia have to make sure PhysX to work in every combination including AMD gpu. What if physx driver conflicting with AMD drivers? AMD have no obligation to work with nvidia because PhysX is not their tech. So in the end nvidia have to do the extra work to make sure PhysX working properly with AMD card. So before they got into complicated mess might as well kill hybrid PhysX. User that use hack drivers to make hybrid PhysX work cannot blame nvidia because they do it at their own risk.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
In no way does Nvidia blocking hybrid PhysX related to them not wanting to need to support AMD cards. If they hadn't blocked hybrid PhysX, Nvidia would still have no obligation to deal with supporting AMD cards. It was strictly Nvidia not wanting to let people who have an AMD GPU use PhysX even if that person bought a Nvidia card too. Yes, it is also true that AMD has no obligation to deal with something they don't officially support either.

What happens if a hybrid PhysX setup conflicts with an AMD driver? Then the owner of the setup has to deal with it. The owner shouldn't be barred from the setup if they want to take the risk just because a company wants to dictate how their customer uses their product. It is true that the user can't blame Nvidia nor AMD if the setup doesn't work because of a conflict, but the user certainly can blame Nvidia if the setup doesn't work just because Nvidia added a switch to block it. That's the difference between Nvidia not supporting it and Nvidia actively blocking it.

That means that Nvidia doesn't care if you buy Nvidia cards as much as they care about you not buying an AMD card. No, that is not good business ethics.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
No difference between PhysX and MFAA, FXAA, TXAA, Shadowplay, HBAO+, or any other piece of software/graphics enhancement that Nvidia has developed for its customers. If you want to use it, don't buy AMD. If you want Mantle, Raptr, or supersampling AA, then don't buy Nvidia.

Not all graphics settings are equally supported by both brands and people shouldn't expect one company to support the other company's hardware.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
That is not complicated enough. True if things doesn't work well in hybrid PhysX then they have to deal with them. But did you think all user will think it like that? Remember it is nvidia that encourage to put gpu PhysX in game. And they should fully aware that some people want to use AMD gpu BUT at the same tine they stil want that gpu PhysX effect. As the company that responsible to put gpu PhysX in games nvidia have the resposibility to make gpu PhysX work flawlessly in every combination possible. AMD doesn't want to help nvidia so AMD gpu works fine with gpu PhysX? That is not user concern. All that matters is nvidia HAVE TO MAKE IT WORK. Nvidia refuse to do so? Then user can bring the matter to court because Nvidia refuse to support their product properly. So before it escaltes to that point then it is better for them officially block Hybrid PhysX. Other than that that is just business decision. Getting sour because you can't use your old nvidia card as dedicated PhysX with AMD GPU? Then vote with your wallet.

Actually things can be much simpler if AMD just licence PhysX and implement their own native support so GPU PhysX can run on their gpu natively. But i also understand AMD concern because license or not future PhysX development still fully controlled by Nvidia. That's why they try to push Bullet with OpenCL. Even that end up as nothing (despite the project still on going even now) because things are not going as what AMD have expected.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


It has nothing to do with an AMD card suporting PhysX because in hybrid PhysX, it is run on the Nvidia card. It has nothing to do with one vender supporting the other vender's software, Nvidia simply put in a little switch that flips when there is also an AMD graphics adapter in the system that you can't use PhysX. So what if someone simply bought an AMD APU and later wanted to upgrade to a Nvidia card; No PhysX for that Nvidia customer.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Nvidia is not required to make PhysX work on an AMD GPU and AMD doesn't want to pay Nvidia to get permission to run it on an AMD GPU. That's fine, there's nothing wrong with that as far as business ethics go. Whether or not AMD GPUs can run it has nothing to do with it (of course they can, AMD just isn't allowed to).

The simple solution should be being able to use a Nvidia card to run PhysX while the game is rendered with the AMD card, but Nvidia doesn't want to allow that. Again, Nvidia doesn't care about their own customers. They'll punish their own customers just because those people also buy something from AMD. That is poor business ethics and they shouldn't be allowed to do that. Nvidia should not have the right to dictate how gamers use products that gamers bought and own in such a way.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Still doesn't change the notion about some extreme user might bring the matter to court if nvidia refuse to optimize dedicated PhysX card usage with AMD card as primary card. So before it comes to that nvidia made their stance to only support system that only has nvidia gpu and telling the public if they choose with hybrid system nvidia will block gpu physx on purpose on that setup. Punishing their customer? Well everyone can take their own opinion. But no consumer will defend nvidia in court when worst case happen. That's why i also said 'vote with your wallet'. Don't like what nvidia do? Then simply go to another camp.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Some extreme user might bring Nvidia to court over Nvidia not allowing it rather than not supporting but still allowing it. Such what-if scenarios can't be helped because there's always a way for someone to try screw everyone else.

Go to another camp? So if I don't like my state legislation, I shouldn't try to appeal it, I should just leave? Extreme example, I know, but the just leave solution isn't right. This isn't a case where I can get the exact same thing (or close enough) somewhere else just because I don't like the behavior of the supplier. If I happen to like PhysX, then there is no other option.

Regardless, I wasn't saying anything about a solution (which would actually be similar to my legislation example, people would need to communicate with Nvidia en mass). I was disagreeing with you when you said it wasn't a shady and that it was just a business decision. Well, yes, it is a business decision, but not one that they should be able to make. It isn't even something like where you mention we shouldn't expect something for free because hybrid PhysX requires that you buy a Nvidia card. For Nvidia that isn't enough, they want to punish customers who don't only buy their product.

Again, this isn't about whether or not I think we should boycott Nvidia or anything like that. I don't let my personal feelings about them dictate what cards I recommend when someone asks for a recommendation.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
instead of blaming nvidia, why not blame AMD? the only thing they GPU accelerated (worth mentioning) is the pantene simulator in tomb raider.

the old physX adapter is way outdated by today's standards.

hell in the real world, the bank i'm working for was forced to move to Oracle Fusion because oracle bought out peoplesoft. and fusion suck major balls.


 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Nvidia chose to not allow it, therefor it is their fault. AMD is not responsible for Nvidia's choices just as Nvidia is not responsible for AMD's choices.

Nvidia keeps PhysX outdated because they know if they updated it for proper CPU multi-core support, then the GPUs wouldn't need to run it. Now this is something that, although I dislike, I will concede to being within Nvidia's rights, unlike their choice to disable PhysX running on Nvidia GPUs just because an AMD GPU is present in the system (even if it's not being used).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
you're not getting it. if particle simulation is really easy, AMD or intel should've done it a long time. intel has the havok license. AMD has/had bullet.

been here long enough to tell you that when nv acquired physx, AMD was talking about GPU acceleration as well. almost a decade and like what i've said all we got is pantene simulator.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


What am I not getting? How easy it is doesn't matter. Nvidia already made it multicore or it wouldn't work on GPUs much at all. Nvidia chooses to not do the same for the CPU version because they want people to buy their graphics cards to get it to run well, not because they don't want to put in a lot of effort. They already did the effort of making it multicore.

Yes, it's probably not easy, but how difficult it is to make an alternative to PhysX is far from the worst hurdle for these alternatives; the worst problem is getting game developers to use them. Many games have little to no support for PhysX and they still do well, so game developers generally have little incentive to support PhysX alternatives.

There are some games that use a few OpenCL or DirectCompute (compute functions with DirectX) features (primarily advanced lighting features) and there are many programs that use OpenCL for GPU acceleration, so it isn't like GPU acceleration never went anywhere (granted it was and still is a long and hard road). Nvidia's own CUDA and its wide usage is proof enough of that. I'll see if I can find a list of the games that use OpenCL or DirectCompute based features to show you.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
bottom line. AMD's greatest achievement is the pantene simulator (as far as GPU physics acceleration goes). mind you it only accelerates hair on a single character, which is Lulz for me.

directcompute is not AMD.

again if the competition is not doing anything (which i've been waiting since 2009 iric), you can't fault nvidia for protecting their patents and techs.


 
Upvote 0 Downvote


AMD is half the reason OpenCL and even DirectCompute see as much adoption as they have nowadays.

I never said DirectCompute was made by AMD, only that you see it and OpenCL in use in games and other software partially thanks to AMD pushing them.

Nvidia isn't doing things to protect its patents. Nothing regarding PhysX and how it works on CPUs and hybrid PhysX protect Nvidias patents and "techs". Nvidia disallows hybrid PhysX because they don't want to let their customers also be customers of another company and they treat CPU PhysX as they do because it makes their GPU PhysX look better despite it being unnecessary and pointless.

If Nvidia simply used the same multicore optimizations in CPU PhysX as they do in their GPU PhysX, then anyone with a decent quad core or better CPU would be able to enjoy PhysX with minimal frame rate drops except in something like BF4 with a 64 player map where the CPU can actually be loaded up on all cores. Even better, DX12's reduced and multicore overhead would further improve this (even under that worst case scenario).

So, yes, I can fault Nvidia for the choices they made. Lack of competition being able to compete in this makes no difference and certainly no excuse. Again, although I don't support it, their choice to not improve CPU PhysX is within their rights- it's just their choice to block hybrid PhysX that is truly wrong.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


naive. don't talk optimizations as if you actually code physics algorithm in real life, or even code at all. Or you should see the competing physics API do GPGPU physics more prevalent but you don't. shouldn't you be blaming them? havok ain't doing crap. and like what i've mentioned, AMD since 2009 just managed getting up a demo and then poof, nothing.

http://developer.amd.com/community/blog/showcase/bullet-physics/.



 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom