EVGA GTX 1080 w/ GTX 690 in Physx?

[mokrunka]

Just what the title says

I have my trusty 690 that will soon be collecting dust when I get my 1080. Wonder what would happen if I try to use the 690 as a physx card? I seem to remember some limitations on this of a few generations, but I don't remember where I saw that.

What's everyone's experience with generation gaps and using older stuff as a physx card?

 

[ATMINSIDE]

Nothing remotely worth the extra power draw...
Sell the 690

 

[Kenrou]

Not worth it, i tried to use my old 660ti along my 980ti and i actually lost fps.

 

[mokrunka]

haha, that's what I figured you guys would say. I'm so attached to that card though! I want it to be used! Maybe I'll give it to one of my brothers. Don't get me wrong, probably going to try it anyway

 

[Kenrou]

One thing i know that definitely helps in some cases is setting PhysX to CPU instead of GPU/auto on nVidia CP, higher fps overall and less spiky.

 

[EarthDog]

Gigantic waste of power there, no way... 1080 will be fine for physx and give great FPS. There hasn't been a true need for a PhysX card in years IMO.

One thing i know that definitely helps in some cases is setting PhysX to CPU instead of GPU/auto on nVidia CP, higher fps overall and less spiky.

This can also accomplish the exact opposite. I would leave it on auto unless one knows of a specific case(s) that it helps and toggle it for that title.

 

[Kenrou]

This can also accomplish the exact opposite. I would leave it on auto unless one knows of a specific case(s) that it helps and toggle it for that title.

Helps in all non-CPU intensive titles for me so far, offloads work from the GPU to the CPU.

 

[EarthDog]

A GPU can typically handle Physx calcs A LOT better than the CPU (hence why we have PhysX on GPUs) or back in the day, their own dedicated card.

Sometimes moving it to the CPU disables PhysX or it runs a different type of PhysX (like Havoc) all together (like what would run on an AMD card that doesn't have PhysX). So you may be getting better FPS, but are the same things happening? Maybe...maybe not.

There are plenty of articles/threads on the web covering this stuff.


In the end, my advice is still to leave it on auto, this way the most appropriate device for the job is chosen. With today's cards (hell even the past two gens+) there isn't a reason to play games with PhysX settings on teh CPU unless it is borked on auto or really killing FPS.

 

[Kenrou]

So wouldn't it be better to set it to GPU only ? you never know what game uses it properly or not

 

[ATMINSIDE]

So wouldn't it be better to set it to GPU only ? you never know what game uses it properly or not

No, using Auto is best. It allows the driver to allocate resources as needed.

 

[Woomack]

haha, that's what I figured you guys would say. I'm so attached to that card though! I want it to be used! Maybe I'll give it to one of my brothers. Don't get me wrong, probably going to try it anyway

I don't know how it's happening but my brother is usually getting better/newer card ... and I pay for that.

 

[wingman99]

What new games use PhysX?

 

[ATMINSIDE]

NVIDIA has a list... http://www.geforce.com/hardware/technology/physx/games

 

[magellan]

Just out of curiosity if the GTX 690 was employed as a dedicated PhysX card, would PhysX make use of both GPU's? Or just one of them?

 

[ATMINSIDE]

Just out of curiosity if the GTX 690 was employed as a dedicated PhysX card, would PhysX make use of both GPU's? Or just one of them?

It couldn't cause enough load to bed more than a small portion of one GPU core.