Best card for CPU intensive gaming?

  • Thread starter Thread starter John Doe
  • Start date Start date
J

John Doe

Can you please tell me what are the common qualities (like memory
size, clock speed, pixel pipelines, and memory interface) that will
help reduce strain on the CPU while playing a game?

I hope that's a valid question, I vaguely recall hearing that
discussed somewhere.

While playing I want to maximize CPU processing power and I'm less
interested in eye candy, I can play with graphics settings turned
down if necessary.

Thank you.
 
That would be the nVidia GF7900GTO for top gaming and
greatest reliability and compatibility. The advanced ATI cards
are really struggling in the new games. I think it is because
their standards have not been adopted by the game coders
for some reason.

johns
 
* John Doe:
Can you please tell me what are the common qualities (like memory
size, clock speed, pixel pipelines, and memory interface) that will
help reduce strain on the CPU while playing a game?

I hope that's a valid question, I vaguely recall hearing that
discussed somewhere.

While playing I want to maximize CPU processing power and I'm less
interested in eye candy, I can play with graphics settings turned
down if necessary.

In games that are CPU intensive the gfx card doesn't make much of a
difference. Lots of functions have to be done by the CPU, they can't
just be passed to the gfx card. Today, eye candy is usually processed by
the gfx card while most other game functions are done by the CPU. You
can't have the gfx card do some of the CPUs jobs.

Benjamin
 
Benjamin Gawert said:
* John Doe:


In games that are CPU intensive the gfx card doesn't make much of a
difference. Lots of functions have to be done by the CPU, they can't just
be passed to the gfx card. Today, eye candy is usually processed by the
gfx card while most other game functions are done by the CPU. You can't
have the gfx card do some of the CPUs jobs.

Benjamin

AGEIA PhysX
http://usa.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=19&l2=102&l3=0&model=1137&modelmenu=1

Luck;
Ken
 
* Ken Maltby:
AGEIA PhysX

Yeah, right. A f**king expensive PCI card which is supported by a
handful games only and which doesn't really produce that great effects.
Just a waste of money...

Benjamin
 
Benjamin Gawert said:
* Ken Maltby:


Yeah, right. A f**king expensive PCI card which is supported by a handful
games only and which . Just a waste of money...

Benjamin

Sounds like what they said about my first voodoo 1000
cards. They are listing more games than there were games
that supported Glide, when the Voodoo 1000 3D acceleration
add on cards were first coming out.

You have used one of the AGEIA PhysX cards? If not
how can you say it "doesn't really produce that great effects"?

Have you seen a demo somewhere? Have you seen the demo
comparison at the ASUS site?

$260 is steep, but not exactly "f**king expensive". It is not
something essential, it's just a toy for those who can afford it.
You didn't need even one Voodoo card to play Tomb Raider,
but having two sure made a difference.

Luck;
Ken
 
* Ken Maltby:
Sounds like what they said about my first voodoo 1000
cards.

Well, times and situation is very different to when the first Vooodoo
card (3DFx Voodoo Graphics) came out.
You have used one of the AGEIA PhysX cards?

Yes, I have. A friend of me bought one (BFG) for his gaming rig...
If not
how can you say it "doesn't really produce that great effects"?

Because I have seen it?
Have you seen a demo somewhere? Have you seen the demo
comparison at the ASUS site?

Yes, I have. But Demo != real games...

Have you ever seen the PhysX card with any _real_ game? Probably not...
$260 is steep, but not exactly "f**king expensive".

IMHO it is f**king expensive, especially since physics simulations is
clearly going to be done by the GPU in the future. The PhysX card simply
is a one way road with dead end...

Benjamin
 
Benjamin Gawert said:
* Ken Maltby:


Well, times and situation is very different to when the first Vooodoo card
(3DFx Voodoo Graphics) came out.


Yes, I have. A friend of me bought one (BFG) for his gaming rig...


Because I have seen it?


Yes, I have. But Demo != real games...

Have you ever seen the PhysX card with any _real_ game? Probably not...


IMHO it is f**king expensive, especially since physics simulations is
clearly going to be done by the GPU in the future. The PhysX card simply
is a one way road with dead end...

Benjamin

You could be right about PhysX's future, I never even saw a
game that used the "T-Buffer", but I don't see where there is any
evidence to support that prediction. Do you have some press
releases, announcements, interviews that say the game publishers
already signed up, are dropping their support?

Unfortunately I don't, conveniently, have any friends with a
PhysX card, and it is one toy, over my current allowance. I may
get one soon though. (Perhaps after I've fixed up my garage, or
added a water softener/filter.) I try not to spend all my money
on toys.

Luck;
Ken
 
Ken Maltby said:
You could be right about PhysX's future, I never even saw a
game that used the "T-Buffer", but I don't see where there is any
evidence to support that prediction. Do you have some press
releases, announcements, interviews that say the game publishers
already signed up, are dropping their support?

The T-buffer is used by the Voodoo4/5 to do FSAA, which is implemented at
the driver level and works with all games. If you are referring to the
T-buffer motion blur and soft shadow effects, there was one mod for Quake3
by 3DPulpit that enabled them. Nowadays those effects are doable by any
nVidia or ATi card that supports multi-sample AA. There are quite a few
games with soft shadows (FEAR, Oblivion, Chaos Theory...), whether they use
the AA buffer or pixel shaders, really doesn't matter to the end user.

There is a difference between the T-buffer and PhysX. The T-buffer was a
enhancement feature for a video card. Games that didn't use the T-buffer
effects still utilized 3D acceleration from the Voodoo4/5. If a game doesn't
use PhysX, the Ageia card sits idle, just producing heat and taking up room.
 
First of One said:
The T-buffer is used by the Voodoo4/5 to do FSAA, which is implemented at
the driver level and works with all games. If you are referring to the
T-buffer motion blur and soft shadow effects, there was one mod for Quake3
by 3DPulpit that enabled them. Nowadays those effects are doable by any
nVidia or ATi card that supports multi-sample AA. There are quite a few
games with soft shadows (FEAR, Oblivion, Chaos Theory...), whether they
use the AA buffer or pixel shaders, really doesn't matter to the end user.

There is a difference between the T-buffer and PhysX. The T-buffer was a
enhancement feature for a video card. Games that didn't use the T-buffer
effects still utilized 3D acceleration from the Voodoo4/5. If a game
doesn't use PhysX, the Ageia card sits idle, just producing heat and
taking up room.

Most of that has absolutely nothing to do with the point being
made. It never was a comparison of the relative value of Voodoo
cards and PhysX cards. ( I have all the 3DFX cards up to and
including the Voodoo 5 5500 AGP) I was using the "T Buffer"
effects as features that had to be implemented by software
designers and basically never appeared, just to show that I am
aware of that possibility for the PhysX card as well. The fact
that there weren't "T Buffer" enhanced games out when I was
pre-ordering my 5500 AGP didn't enter into my purchase
decision (even the fact that 3DFX was in its last days, didn't)

The PhysX cards will work with a couple of games that I will
be playing, now. It has gained support with developers and
there are commitments for it to be included in games from the
likes of: Epic and Ubisoft, soon.

From an Anandtech review:
"Currently, rather than a direct hardware API, the features of the
PPU will be accessed via the NovodeX SDK. This physics engine
was bought by AGEIA and built to use either software physics
simulation or the PhysX hardware. This gives developers some
flexibility to develop software that works with or without the
hardware.

AGEIA would like to have hardware support from other SDKs,
but currently only their in house engine adds hardware support.
Of course, there are already some games that are built using
NovodeX. And more are coming. Epic and Ubisoft (among
others) announced that they will be using NovodeX and
building in support for hardware accelerated physics through
the PhysX PPU. With future Unreal Engine 3 and Ubisoft games
supporting a PPU, AGEIA has a good start ahead of them."

"We like the idea of the PPU a lot. But like plasma television
(which has been around for decades), just because good technology
exists doesn't mean vendors and consumers will adopt it. We hope
PhysX or something like it leaves a lasting mark on the PC industry.
As unpredictable as they are, it's about time we had another
revolution in game design."

But to make the point again , we are talking about a new toy,
nothing else. Some toys spend little time out of the closet, before
a new one takes its place. Some become part of a lifelong
pastime.


Luck;
Ken
 
Back
Top