Dark Void: benchmark and PhysX patch available
Dark Void page at nzone.com was updated with two new downloads:
Dark Void – PhysX Patch (337 mb)
GeForce users who purchased a retail (boxed) copy of Dark Void. In order to play Dark Void with enhanced PhysX features, a patch must be installed.
Dark Void – PhysX Benchmark (901 mb)
Download the Dark Void PhysX Benchmark and get a taste of this dynamic third-person shooter experience!
Important Notice: Benchmark does not include APEX Turbulence based smoke and particles, so effects amount is equal to PhysX “Low” in-game setting.
If you are insterested in full scale GPU PhysX effects overview, refer to out PhysX comparison video.
Update: Some details on CPU utilization (Intel Core 2 Quad 9400 used)
PhysX set to “Low” – calculations on CPU. Min fps – 4 | Avg fps. – 10
PhysX set to “Low” – calculations on GPU. Min fps – 57 | Avg fps. – 66
Lower overall utilization with PhysX effects calculated on CPU can be explained - probably, because of low fps other game threads (rendering, AI, sound) are waiting for physics to catch up every frame, and aren’t using CPU to full power. Still, additional PhysX effects are calculated on one core.
Let me explain this to everyone who reads this article:
nVidia has cripled their physx engine so that when you run it on CPU, no matter how fast the CPU is and how many cores it might have it WON’T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT!
Bottom line:
If you want all that fancy schmancy to function decently you MUST buy an nVidia GPU, that’s the dirty catch! Can’t wait to see them going bankrupt!
Paul
20 Jan 10 at 4:36 pm
“Let me explain this to everyone who reads this article”
Let me explain this even further – basic PhysX SDK engine isn’t cripled at all – it runs fast on CPU, is multithreaded, etc.
But extra PhysX effects, added specially for GPU acceleration – they just using one core, while running on CPU. Why ? Because they are developed by Nvidia content-engineers and used to sell their GPUs.
Zogrim
20 Jan 10 at 4:43 pm
5870 (990/1300) + 9800GTX+ (800/1988/1150) @ physx (High) lowest average ~45 fps
lowest ever seen – 29fps when fighting battleships with ~10 aliens attacking simultaneously and about 6-8 troops defending the excavation site.
While benchmark gives about 102 fps average at 1440×900.. quite inaccurate
Vlad
21 Jan 10 at 1:54 am
btw, as you can see 260 GTX gives a small boost in the performance versus 9800, I`d say, stick to 9800 or 260, but still, comfortable level would be 275 with OC and better (as a dedicated card)
Vlad
21 Jan 10 at 1:58 am
Can’t say I was looking on fps much – after half-an-hour I’ve enabled vsync and locked it on 30, othervise fps jumps are noticable via control smoothness changes
And, fps depends on CPU speed, of course – my C2Q was running only 2.66GHz
Zogrim
21 Jan 10 at 12:53 pm
@ paul
You should take a read here, your claim is false and based on ignorance I presume:
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=56045&page=4
Post 80 an onwards…
Lonbjerg
22 Jan 10 at 1:00 am
@ Zogrim
It actually more of a technical limitation, that stall the other parts of the engine by “high” PhysX, as other parts of the engine waits for the physics calculations to be done (slowy) on the CPU.
And physics dosn’t scale linear with the amount of CPU cores…the downside of the CPU’s design of “jack of all trades, master of none”
Lonbjerg
22 Jan 10 at 1:03 am
Hello. I downloaded and intsalled Dark Void physx benchmark and after that I have a problem with GPU@PhysX. All games which I owned(Batman, Mirrors Edge) and Warmonger(downloaded as part of PhysX Pack) doesn’t work with GPU@PhysX. They are still initialized to use CPU@PhysX. I checked my settings in NV Control Panel and everything is good. PhysX is enabled on GT240. Don’t you know why is this happening? Maybe in system registry is mistake. I don’t know. My OS is Vista Ultimate 64bit.
mareknr
22 Jan 10 at 9:13 pm
mareknr
Firsty check if “PhysX Game Software” is installed, if so – remove it. Then uninstall and reinstall PhysX System Software (last version)
Zogrim
22 Jan 10 at 9:36 pm
I dwnloading PhysX benchmark .. but i have question ..
Dark Void – PhysX Patch (337 mb)
GeForce users who purchased a retail (boxed) copy of Dark Void. In order to play Dark Void with enhanced PhysX features, a patch must be installed.
PhysX patch isn´t for demo ? ..
MicrO
22 Jan 10 at 9:50 pm
It works. Thanks for your advice. Why is problem with this SW and what is it purpose?
mareknr
22 Jan 10 at 9:50 pm
My result:
Min FPS: 21.32
AVG FPS: 29.66
PC Spec:
CPU: Phenom II X4 940 3GHz
RAM: 3GB 667MHz
GPU: 8800GT, GT240(Physx accelerator)
mareknr
22 Jan 10 at 9:57 pm
mareknr poď na icq
chcu pokecat ( teda pokud nejsi v práci )
btw. not bad result, hm x)
MicrO
22 Jan 10 at 10:00 pm
When I used 8800GT for display and PhysX:
Min FPS: 15.40
AVG FPS: 21.51
Game configuration:
All high, Vert. sync. On, PhysX Low.
mareknr
22 Jan 10 at 10:02 pm
MicRo. Teraz nemozem.
BTW.: PhysX Patch is for game. Benchmark already uses Physx and it doesn’t need any patch.
mareknr
22 Jan 10 at 10:04 pm
wow, 8800GT is on PhysX worst ?
btw. okok, but can i use PhysX patch on demo ? or full game only ?
MicrO
22 Jan 10 at 10:10 pm
Used patch only for game. Benchmark doesn’t need it. 8800GT render graphics and compute PhysX while GT240 compute only PhysX. Because of this there is difference.
mareknr
22 Jan 10 at 10:20 pm
mareknr
Why is problem with this SW and what is it purpose?
What is the purpose of PhysX System Software (also called PhysX Drivers) ? It’s package, that contains vital engine .dlls and some firmware – needed for every PhysX SDK based game to work (even on CPU).
In case of Dark Void, System Software it was installing may result in conflict with main PhysX drivers, and reinstall is easy way to fix it.
Zogrim
22 Jan 10 at 10:43 pm
Intristing is, that I uninstaled it but I didn’t reinstall main PhysX driver and it seems that everything works fine.
mareknr
22 Jan 10 at 10:52 pm
Yes, it may differ. For me Dark Void wasn’t even starting, until I’ve reintalled main PhysX driver after uninstalling Game Software.
Zogrim
23 Jan 10 at 12:03 am
hey, hmm i have problem
when i change PhysX in benchmark on LOW … i have fps 1,81 min and 4,47 AVG … its suck, wtf ?
MicrO
23 Jan 10 at 3:07 am
i got it … i un/instelled PhysX and my results – 16,43min and 23,59AVG … really bad, 8800gt + GT240 is better =-O and settings 1280×1024 (native) and medium (no Vsync)
MicrO
23 Jan 10 at 3:29 am
sry for spam
new and last result – off Vsync …
… GT240 ? x)
18,41 MIN and 25,71 AVG
i think that buy new graphic card on PhysX
MicrO
23 Jan 10 at 3:33 am
GT240 will be good.
My results was with everything high an resolution 1920×1080.
mareknr
23 Jan 10 at 4:15 pm
lol WTF ? 8800gt with GT240 is better with LOW Physx than GTX260 OC ? .. ou may gad !
MicrO
23 Jan 10 at 6:09 pm
You guys just don’t get it, what’s the point of launching such an aggressive marketing campaign on a product such as Physx without expecting a huge increase in sales??? Do you think that they’ve bought Ageia just willing to contribute to the gaming community by further expanding it to not only PPU but GPU and CPU? GPU for sure because that’s what they sell, John Carmack has already stated that it is not a good approach to optimize only for GPU/PPU when the CPU technology keeps improving every day, today we have blazing fast processors that even the most demanding applications won’t take advantage of all those cores, the developers have to sweat on their code to make these babies cry otherwise it will be just a wast to adding more and more cores. Any case the point is, it’s their right to not optimize Physx for multi-core cpus, they own the product, in fact they’ve optimized for the PS3, Wii, XBOX360, but won’t do it for the PC because they can’t compete with ATI, you’ve got to agree that that’s not the way to go, not how it’s meant to be played!
Proudly owner of an ATI HD5870. btw I also own an Ageia PPU card which now is useless because of the new driver limitations.
Paul
24 Jan 10 at 5:36 pm