Nvidia physx games with AMD

[1984]

so I am thinking of buying navi 3 gpus equivalent of 2070 for the price of 1660.

Yet I have always used nvidia and love the nvidiaGPU control panel and experience program and there used to be a boom with games like Batman Arkham series using physx for cool flying newspapers and broken glass.

Nowadays many games use physx like something ordinary and to this I am concerned, If I have AMD card and the game features Nvidia meant to be played logo, does it mean that I will have lower FPS because it wasn't AMD designed for, and if it has Physx as a normal feature, will it simple not have anything to replace it with for AMD?

What about nvidia hairworks? Amd gets no cool hair in games like Tomb Raider?

What about older titles, will they glitch horribly for me because I will play them on AMD?

[Cloudy]

Just get a RTX 2080 instead, more powerful anyways.

[Cloudy]

Originally posted by ZERO KAY PER CENT:

Originally posted by Cloudy Canadian:

Just get a RTX 2080 instead, more powerful anyways.

250$ vs 750$

why bother? I got the money but lately I have been thinking into efficient money management. So what if it is 10% better. I can buy a new one next year

If you can get it for $250 than go for it, it sounds like you have already made up your mind.

[Cloudy]

Originally posted by ZERO KAY PER CENT:

Originally posted by Cloudy Canadian:

If you can get it for $250 than go for it, it sounds like you have already made up your mind.

well not really, I have been choosing my new build for a while. 1st with 2080ti then with 2080 then with 1660ti now with this. And still I cant quite decide which of those.

Depends what refresh rate and resolution you want for your main display, what your budget is, other parts of your PC, and how much you would actually use your PC.

[Cloudy]

Most games run off DX11 or DX12 so an AMD GPU wont run them quite as well. But if you are able to find one for a good deal and don't mind slightly lower frame rate it would still be a good choice. Plus AMD GPUs typically have more VRAM without having to pay as much. I wouldn't worry about the small features like ray tracing, DLSS, or hair works, none of those should be a deal breaker for what you choose.

[Omega]

In the past 2 years no games have released which use PhysX.

PhysX works on AMD, however AMD hardware can not accellerate PhysX using the GPU so everything will be run on the CPU.

[xSOSxHawkens]

Games will play just fine and PhysX is not in many things now days, despite the marketing claims.

[xSOSxHawkens]

Originally posted by ZERO KAY PER CENT:

Originally posted by xSOSxHawkens:

Games will play just fine and PhysX is not in many things now days, despite the marketing claims.

oh, okay. I remember seeing a recent game with logos showing PhysX.
In this case it just proves the point how Nvidia special features are just marketing and a waste of money. If they cancel physx which was a big thing then Ray Tracing will be left alone in a few years too making way for the next thing. Whereas it then makes more sense to buy a 12-16 core amd beast of cpu paired with amd gpu and just play and still it will be cheaper and more efficient than intel+nvidia

They tried *hard* for years to push hardware level PhysX after they bought out Ageia. Now days, few Devs will support the *hardware* level PhysX extensions because they dont want to alienate other users. If they do partner with nvidia they will often use software level PhysX routines instead of the hardware dependant ones.

I recently jumped to an AMD Vega 64, and ran a GTX-670 4GB in my system as a dedicated PhysX card (NV allows this now days). I have about ~180 games on steam and only 4 of them had hardware level PhysX, Mafia II (actualy good effects but old title), Metro, Metro LL, and Fallout 4, with the only one I currently play at all being FO4 and it *only* being used for the weapon debris off walls and such.

When it was in use it worked wonders, full PhysX in Metro @ 4K with maxed settings pushed my Vega 64 to max, plus high CPU usage (4790K @ 4.7) and about 68-75% compute usage on the 670. Was amazing to watch it all work together.

Then I realised I watched essentially a tech demo and nothing more. I have a game that I have already beaten with little interest in replay and its the *only* one that made use of the system proper. The other titles at best used ~25% of the 670 with FO4 barely touching it for more than a few seconds at a time.

Pulled the 670 and put it back in my third rate rig.

Also, if you dont want to wait on Navi there is currently Vega 64 (1080/2070) for ~380 on amazon ;)

https://www.amazon.com/Gigabyte-Computer-Graphics-GV-RXVEGA64GAMING-OC-8GD/dp/B079MFMQ8D?psc=1&SubscriptionId=AKIAI3VLI6HITR26KCBQ&tag=userbenchmark-20&linkCode=sp1&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=B079MFMQ8D

[Cloudy]

Originally posted by xSOSxHawkens:

Also, if you dont want to wait on Navi there is currently Vega 64 (1080/2070) for ~380 on amazon ;)

https://www.amazon.com/Gigabyte-Computer-Graphics-GV-RXVEGA64GAMING-OC-8GD/dp/B079MFMQ8D?psc=1&SubscriptionId=AKIAI3VLI6HITR26KCBQ&tag=userbenchmark-20&linkCode=sp1&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=B079MFMQ8D

The amount of 1/5 ratings for that GPU on Amazon are just sad

[Omega]

I heard really bad things about the Gigabyte Vega cards. Some people claim they have already got their card replaced 5 times. There is something wrong with the Gigabyte Vega cards which make them fail after a few days.

So avoid those like the plague.

[xSOSxHawkens]

Originally posted by Omega:

I heard really bad things about the Gigabyte Vega cards. Some people claim they have already got their card replaced 5 times. There is something wrong with the Gigabyte Vega cards which make them fail after a few days.

So avoid those like the plague.

hmm, hadnt heard that...

Originally posted by Cloudy Canadian:

Originally posted by xSOSxHawkens:

Also, if you dont want to wait on Navi there is currently Vega 64 (1080/2070) for ~380 on amazon ;)

https://www.amazon.com/Gigabyte-Computer-Graphics-GV-RXVEGA64GAMING-OC-8GD/dp/B079MFMQ8D?psc=1&SubscriptionId=AKIAI3VLI6HITR26KCBQ&tag=userbenchmark-20&linkCode=sp1&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=B079MFMQ8D

The amount of 1/5 ratings for that GPU on Amazon are just sad :lunar2019laughingpig:

Might have something to do with the above comment.

Aside from that, I have found a number of Vega cards get hit with bad reviews from people who dont know what they are talking about. Vega's have a tendancy to be power hungry and allot of negative reviewers will often explain symptoms that are highly indicitive of poor PSU's.

Buying a power hungry card and then giving it 1 star because it crashes on your 650-750w bronze PSU doesnt make the card bad, it makes that person a bad consumer :/

But, cant attest to Gigabytes quality.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Many games are hard-coded to do PhysX via cpu only and haven't used nvidia gpu PhysX for years, it's pointless to go grab a gpu based around wanting to use nvidia physx

And for AMD GPU I'd look strongly at MSI or Sapphire anyways, no one else