Graphic enlargement

SeNSok3R

1- Thanks nemo, source concern removed.

2- I've read the recommendations of the 260 just for physics over the net so all good. Plus dedicated just for physics, it won't work at full, nor will it suck (w) in an exaggerated way no?

3- I'm searching for PX1 on google but I have no idea what it is:risitas: do you mind explaining me?

Thanks for the help you're giving me

CNCBCN

This Google Translate would be a matter of seeing which one performs better, a 260 or a PX1

incrediboy

I've seen two 570s running smoothly with that source, so you won't be short of source. As for PhysX performance, in theory it should improve when you put the 260, which won't consume much.

I think you should run some benchmarks just with the 560, and then run it again with the 260 for PhysX, although the latter option is likely to offer the best performance.

I suppose you know this, but in this type of configuration you don't have to put the SLI bridge between one graphics card and another

SeNSok3R

thanks for your answers.

I will pass some benchmark to see how it goes. If you knew about the bridge, my motherboard doesn't even support SLI :risitas:
but it's not a bad idea to remember, I'm a bit of a newbie. And while we're at it, I ask, should I have the drivers for both graphics cards installed at the same time?

regards

CNCBCN

what a weirdo the guy is :D:D I've never had an SLI or two graphics cards plugged into the same PC, but I'm saying that you'll need the drivers for both, each with their own, because otherwise I don't think it will work. but beware that I could be wrong, that's what I have a mouth for, but I don't think so :D:D:D
P.D every day you can learn something new ¿ what's up for today? :D:D
edit : after a trip with Mr. Firefox you install the drivers for both and the 260 you configure it as physx and run. here they comment on the topic http://www.elotrolado.net/hilo_activar-sli-en-placas-no-soportadas_1311382_s20

SeNSok3R

Interesting, according to the forum you posted, you can put 2 SLI even if the card doesn't support it? :|:| I had no idea.

SeNSok3R

can someone confirm this to me plz?

CNCBCN

¿el que?

_Neptunno_

A GTX260 for Physx is something exaggerated, today. You won't get the most out of it, at least that's my conclusion after analyzing some comments and tests from other users.
You're better off selling it and with that extra € you can get a slightly more powerful Nvidia and you can use Physx almost without problems.
As for SLI, I don't know if you'll be able to do it with your card, it could limit your performance compared to other platforms, but well.

On the subject of physics, the recommended thing is to use a G80 or G92, using a superior model, it seems that it doesn't pay off in terms of performance/consumption.

I've even seen the same real performance in physics from a GTX470, GTX295 and 8800Ultra for physics in various games, without hardly varying a few fps, not even in the minimum.
It seems that the explanation is somewhat simple and I hope to explain it well (or understand its explanation when they gave it to me), but if I get confused in any data, tell me
The G80 and G92 have the Alu units separated from the Shaders, so these can be used exclusively for Physx and the Alu units are wasted, reaching almost 100% of the GPU for physics, ok?
That's why if we OC the graphics card that we have dedicated to this task, it's better to increase shaders than the Core, because where we will really notice the improvement of the OC is here since the other is not directly "used", to put it in a way.

However, in the GTX400 (I don't know if the GTS450 changes this, honestly or the GT200... although they are different from the G80/92, but I don't have that much data), this changes a lot.
Inside each SM carries its own Alu and its cuda cores. The Teselator goes to the side, this doesn't influence.
What this does is that the graphics card isn't well used for physics, since the way its architecture is built makes it not get 100% of its performance.

All this talking about games (which seems to be the majority), use the Shaders for physics.
When we focus on the use of an application/game that uses the Alu for physics, the GTX400 crushes by knockout.

Anyway, I hope I haven't said something incorrect, although it's possible that I left something out, that is, if someone sees something more, don't hesitate to say it, we're all here to learn. And note, I know this because of what other people have told me and various readings on the subject.

Greetings!!

P.D: If I had time and "desire" I could do some tests to see that this is true firsthand (or maybe it's not like that :risitas:)
With the GTX470 and the 8800GT that I have, using them for physics with the HD6950 could be interesting the results that the tests would show.
But... ains how little desire to mess around lately!!

SeNSok3R

I edit because I hadn't seen the second page of the post xD

Good explanation Neptunno

CNCBCN

From what I've read, they say it's possible, but it doesn't perform the same as SLI (it performs less, in fact). Anyway, what would you use for SLI?

CNCBCN

a couple of pages that talk about the topic
Activate SLI mode on unsupported boards - Foro Vagos
Enable SLi on boards that do not support it • MundoBIP.com
http://www.elotrolado.net/hilo_activar-sli-en-placas-no-soportadas_1311382

from this, the teachers who think

SeNSok3R

The vagos forum has intrigued me a lot xD although I end up trusting it.

I don't know what to do anymore :nono:

CNCBCN