Hope you weren’t planning to play PhysX games on Nvidia’s new 50-series GPUs
-
That's misleading in the other direction, though, as PhysX is really two things, a regular boring CPU-side physics library (just like Havok, Jolt and Bullet), and the GPU-accelerated physics library which only does a few things, but does them faster. Most things that use PhysX just use the CPU-side part and won't notice or care if the GPU changes. A few things use the GPU-accelerated part, but the overwhelming majority of those use it for optional extra features that only work on Nvidia cards, and instead of running the same effects on the CPU if there's no Nvidia card available, they just skip them, so it's not the end of the world to leave them disabled on the 5000-series.
-
Ah, the good old days
having to manually fix drivers but with limited help from the internet -
My wife had to start laying her own.
-
The enshittification of green has begun
-
DECEARING EGG
-
Are there really any 32-bit era games that your CPU can't handle, especially if you have a $1k+ gpu? This post is honestly pretty misleading as it implies modern versions of PhysX don't work, when they actually do.
That being said, it doesn't make all that much sense as a decision, doubles are rare in most GPU code anyways (as they are very slow), NVIDIA is just being lazy and doesn't want to write the drivers for that
Well, at least you aren't on mac where 32 bit things just don't launch at all... (I think they might be playable through wine, but even in the x86 era MacOS didn't natively run any 32 bit games or software, so games like Portal 2 or TF2 for example just didn't work even though they had a MacOS version)
-
So you had an egg in these trying times, did you?
-
I disagree; people on the internet were a lot more helpful back then. These days it's difficult to get people to care about anything, let alone compel them to help.
-
Wow. I probably have played 4 or 5 on that entire list. And none of them in the past 5 or so years.
It's still a shitty thing to do for sure. Maybe there will be a new "thing" that starts getting used instead? Ray tracing has gotten way more coverage than PhysX ever did, and imo is like 3% as good or interesting.
Physics actually have gameplay interactions that matter. Ray tracing looks nice, but is so absolutely expensive computationally that (imo) is not even CLOSE to being worth the effort if turning on, even with compatible hardware.
Give us better physics, games! My main time sink rn is Rocket League, and that game is literally nothing but physics. Mostly simple physics, but stuff behaving in a logical way makes my brain a lot happier than better lighting ever did.
I like when y'all grass became an actual object that could be moved around by players, or when tossing an item on the ground actually does it tossed down and colliding with other objects while texting to them appropriately (as in fire starting, or weight holding something down a certain amount). That stuff is potentially game creating, definitely feature drinking.
Has anything AT ALL been affected by "pretty lights" beyond making them pretty? If it has, I've never heard of it.
Keep games about a gameplay experience, not just a visual feast. Save that tech for movies or playable stories (ie Telltale type). Focus only on the gameplay experience otherwise. Toss in some ray tracing when you can, but NEVER at the expense of physics. It just doesn't make any sense.
-
Lol keep buying Nvidia!
-
The eggs have insane physics reactions though. So I got that going for me.
-
mirrors edge drops to under 10 fps when breaking glass which generates physx objects... with a 9800x3d.
the current physx cpu implementation is artificially shit, the cpu can easily handle it nowadays but it depends on skilled community members or nvidia themselves to unshit it.
-
They laser off the vcpu feature from the chip just so you can't use it at the same time as another family member. They spend extra money to make it worse.
-
nVidia doesn't really have that many successful unshits, historically speaking, do they?
-
No those games are not fine on 50 series GPUs, they can actually drop down to 10 fps or lower
-
I've had enough of NVIDIA to the point I'm not planning on playing anything on one of their GPUs ever again.
-
Nvidia got what it wanted from Ageia when they bought PhysX, and that was improvements to CUDA.
-
Hmm, I was not aware of that. I've seen (not Nvidia related) simulations with probably tens of thousands of rigidbodies running on relatively old midrange CPUs in real time, so it's pretty crazy that it's that slow.
-
You never know when old games just don't work. For example I recently tried to play deus ex mankind divided. I have new hardware but I had to play on medium settings because anything higher would start killing performance despite the game being 5 years older than my hardware.
I wouldn't be surprised if some older games ran like shit on the 50 series cards whenever physx is concerned.
-
T [email protected] shared this topic
