View Full Version : BFG Tech BFGRPHYSX128P PhysX Processing Unit
BFG Tech BFGRPHYSX128P PhysX Processing Unit 128MB 128-bit GDDR3 PCI Physics Card - Retail
Model#: BFGRPHYSX128P
Does anybody have this?
Do you like it?
madhatR
05-26-06, 09:29 AM
had it and returned it .. not worth the cost ..
no temp sensor .. cell factor is cool .. but thats it ..
chevro1et
05-26-06, 09:40 AM
Yea, the concept of the PhysX card is really cool, just hasn't been fully exploited for implementation yet (ie. a game designed around the card, and built from the ground up for the PhysX engine)...
PottaCoola
05-26-06, 04:07 PM
There is a new ASUS one out same price but tis got 256mb memory, so looks like there all starting to do it. http://www.overclockers.co.uk/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_PhysX_Accelerators_594.html
Overclocker.IL
05-28-06, 03:34 PM
I'd buy them .... In a year or so .... when they will release the 3rd/4th generation of this cards .... It's too early and nothing supports them yet ...
I'd buy them .... In a year or so .... when they will release the 3rd/4th generation of this cards .... It's too early and nothing supports them yet ...
Thats a good point nothing really out for this yet.
BF2 nothing HL2 nothing, no really main stream games that I play at least..
I don't think there will be a 3rd or 4th generation of the cards. They said the whole point was to have driver updates without having to have new hardware bought. waiting for more games to support it is a good reason though. ;)
They are utterly useless. Their only contribution to games is to add more not change. A dual core CPU will accomplish the same thing.
Another strike against them is those added details are much more strenious on the GPU. You video card will now need to render all those added details.
Yet another strike is the lack of support for the above cited reasons.
HungryForHertz
05-31-06, 07:48 AM
They are utterly useless. Their only contribution to games is to add more not change. A dual core CPU will accomplish the same thing.
Another strike against them is those added details are much more strenious on the GPU. You video card will now need to render all those added details.
Yet another strike is the lack of support for the above cited reasons.
It may have to render those details but it and the CPU no longer have to process the physics.
Didn't Agia (or something like that) come up with this concept first.
ocing newbie
05-31-06, 07:57 AM
I had heard a pci-e version would come out eventually, I'll wait for that.
White_Pawn
05-31-06, 12:26 PM
I had heard a pci-e version would come out eventually, I'll wait for that.
i'm waiting for that too. Right now the pci slot bottlenecks the PhyX card. Once the pci-e version arrives then i'll start concidering to buy it. Now someone said that you can accomplish the same thing by having a dual core cpu but that may not be the case in future games. Games that require the ppu in the future will need the PPU to do the physics stuff. The cpu will only be then incharge of the AI. However, it is true that you need a more powerful GPU in order to get the most out of having one of these cards.
I'm hoping that the PCI-E version will fare much better. I can't say for sure that the PCI bus is a bottleneck, but given how the framerate drops for a split-second before the card is used I'd be willing to bet it is. A faster interface, and the ability to communicate directly with the graphics card (w00t for PCI-E switches!) should help aleviate that problem. Also by the time that a PCI-E version comes out the game support and drivers should be improved so hopefully overall performance will be as well.
JigPu
White_Pawn
05-31-06, 07:18 PM
I'm hoping that the PCI-E version will fare much better. I can't say for sure that the PCI bus is a bottleneck, but given how the framerate drops for a split-second before the card is used I'd be willing to bet it is. A faster interface, and the ability to communicate directly with the graphics card (w00t for PCI-E switches!) should help aleviate that problem. Also by the time that a PCI-E version comes out the game support and drivers should be improved so hopefully overall performance will be as well.
JigPu
exactly
I'm hoping that the PCI-E version will fare much better. I can't say for sure that the PCI bus is a bottleneck, but given how the framerate drops for a split-second before the card is used I'd be willing to bet it is. A faster interface, and the ability to communicate directly with the graphics card (w00t for PCI-E switches!) should help aleviate that problem. Also by the time that a PCI-E version comes out the game support and drivers should be improved so hopefully overall performance will be as well.
JigPu
Good statement..
It may have to render those details but it and the CPU no longer have to process the physics.
Didn't Agia (or something like that) come up with this concept first.
I don't see how thats a good thing... CPU will start slacking off and before you know it will start taking drugs and hang out with a very shady crowd.
Then the GPU becomes overworked due to all the extra triangles it has to render, with all the added stress it resorts to drinking. Personally I wouldn't want to sit around while my GPU is recovering at the Betty Ford center.
josephtischer
06-04-06, 02:44 PM
The Physics design was meant to offload work from the CPU to allow the video card and the CPU to work more efficiently. This in turn would allow the CPU to add more effects with no penalty to the program being run. Unfortunately for the Agea, nVidia and ATI are both narly complete with their own designs which will utilize the cards currently in the system and use parts not being used by SLI/Crossfire to do this same task. Add to this mixing pot the proliferation of CPU on one die and Agea is in the wrong business.
SAVE YOUR MONEY FOR BETTER HARDWARE. $0.02
Richie P
06-04-06, 05:07 PM
IMO Ati is gonna be the winner in this.
Why? Because nVidia and Ageia are currently scrapping over the first implementations, Ageia with a PCI limited, 'doesn't add much', dedicated card...and nVidia are trying build in software support to their SLI platform so one of the GPU's is used to handle the physics - HavokFX (IIRC).
Meanwhile ATI are currently developing their RD600 architecture of motherboards which will support 3x PCIe slots (rumoured all 16x). 2 for crossfire and the third for physics. Now get this, you can use any X1xxx series card to do the physics! So buy 2 X1900's for your bestly graphics set up and a X1600/X1300 (depending on which performs better for the $$$) as the budget physics card. Then when upgrade time comes...flog one X1900 and the X1600/X1300 using the other X1900 as your physics with the next set of crossfire cards.
Physics is the next big thing in games...people don't have larger and larger displays to keep up with the amount of pixels these SLI and CF platforms can shove out, so Physics will bring greater reality to the resolutions we do have available. Hence why I think nVidia is going in the wrong direction with their Quad-SLI setups.
Don't get me wrong, I'm in no way a fanboy, my next gfx card will be a 7900GT when I buy my desktop, but don't underestimate ATI...it took them a long time to iron out the bug's to be able to release the X1xxx cards and they took a beating for that, and nVidia rightly capitalised with they're awesome 6x00 series and then with SLI and their 7x00 series cards they really rubbed it in. ATI will be back with vengence tho, mark my words :D
ATI will be back with vengence tho, mark my words :D
you are correct. thats why im not going with the G80 and waiting for the rd600. but ive always been a nvidia fan :(
redrumy3
05-11-07, 11:46 AM
you are correct. thats why im not going with the G80 and waiting for the rd600. but ive always been a nvidia fan :(
and what made you bring back a thread from 06-04-06?
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.