Someone said physX is used in vbs2 for trucks with trailers and ropes (for fastroping). It'll be fine on the cpu as long as you dont have 20 fastroping helos at the same time. Besides, if there's a lot of physX going on there's a big performance hit on the rendering as well.
Bis just does this to improve vehicles and ropes without having to reinvent the wheel. No need to get all worked up about it.
I'm an ATI user, I don't think I would change my card for ARMA3 - even though I'v been with the series since the launch of OFP. I hope it is not going to be a requirement to have an Nvidea card to play Arma3 at its optimal performance.
I'd not going to be going with SLI or pumping any more money into this system. EVGA game out with a GTX 560 2GB for $250. I will wait for that to hit $200 and then that is it. I will keep this PC for another 2-3 years. It might be my last gaming PC for all I know.
Originally Posted by DMarkwick
Unless I had $1,800 to drop into a PC, I'd never go with SLI regardless.
But this is off topic. I will have a Physx capable video card most likely so that is all that matters. It is just a shame that AMD users will be left out unless they hack their drivers and buy an Nvidia card in addition to their AMD.
Private First Class
Originally Posted by Smurf
lmao.. you are joking right? a game in 2011 without even so much as ragdoll physics doesn't need to be created. Know why? because Free DLCs, free to play, hell even browser games can achieve such a simple and mindless task. like being offered a drink but no cup to put it in.
To implement anything less would be unacceptable. Like releasing a game that runs in msdos now. Its so ass backwards it would hurt them more than help. I for one am happy they creators are finally getting off thier duff and 1. adding some appeal to the game/franchise, 2. using newer technologies (well old now by the time they decided to actually do it) .
I wont get off into the amd,nvida thing simply because company's have the right to have what ever features they want to a product and if they happen to sponsor a game that wishes to use those features wth is the problem?
I never owned Arma because the numerous videos of it with the canned death animations. wonky, photoshop looking gfx just did not set well with me. but if they are turn a new leaf im more than willing to become a new customer with thier games, my GTX 560 wil be waiting for ya!
As far as I know (and I could be TOTALLY wrong so plz don't hold it against me) physX only works on a certain brand of GFX cards, and I think physX requires the proper hardware to be implemented in a game.So I have a question... if I don't have the right brand of GFX card with the special PhysX hardware included, can I not make use of most of the upgraded phyisics?
It's been said already, only some advanced effects could be reserved to Nvidia GFX cards. Most PhysX effects should be available for everyone.
I have HD4890 and what I did not like was the fact that I "can't" use it for A3.
They say 5770....
I'm not so worried about PhysX, since a new Nvidia card just for PhysX is about €38 and upwards.
And I think you can run the game without a dedicated PhysX card.
Seems to me that most AMD / ATI owners maybe must upgrade anyway??
Private First Class
hate how ppl assume physx only work with nvida pc's folk the damn feature works on all pc's you just wont have advanced options available. If you own Mafia 2 you know wtf im talking about. the game wont stop and exit out if your running an AMD ( though it should with all the crying going on).
An HD 4890 is a superior card to an HD 5770 in terms of memory bandwidth, and I believe performance - I wouldn't be worried about them suggesting the HD 5770 in their specifications sheet, because they've also suggested the older GTX 260, which only supports DirectX 10, rather than the newer DirectX 10.1 or 11 supported by the ATI cards.
Originally Posted by NoBrainer