UPDATE: I did finally get an answer from Gearbox about the slow downs we were seeing on the AMD results. Apparently when larger collections of PhysX simulations are running on the CPU, those threads can take quite a bit longer than they would when running on the GPU. As a result, the CPU (and rest of the game engine code) becomes "blocked" waiting for a single thread to finish, which results in the lower CPU utilization we saw on the AMD results as well as the lower overall performance. Because PhysX is an NVIDIA engine, even if Gearbox chose to they likely couldn't add in additional multi-threaded capabilities to the PhysX code path so the slow down here is likely to stay
Â
Shame on you NVIDIA for gimping multi-core X86 CPUs.
Â
Â
Thanks for that info, now that you have posted the PhysX argument over 50 times it really makes it sink in better. (end sarcasm).
[QUOTE="V4LENT1NE"]What is it with AMD fanboys on this board honestly, we have a ton of them now.ronvalencia
What is it with NVIDIA fanboys on this board honestly, we have a ton of them now. The irony.
Â
And what have I said that has bashed AMD btw? You are the one who goes around posting hand picked benchmarks and constantly crying how Nvidia gimped PhysX in certain ways, like 50th time you have posted that argument now.
Just get a cheap GPU, a 7850 or anything more is overkill for that rig. The CPU is sorta weak and the res is pretty low, just go for something like a 6750 range card.
[QUOTE="V4LENT1NE"]What is it with AMD fanboys on this board honestly, we have a ton of them now.C_Rule
The AMD fanboys (CPU or GPU) seem to be more prevalent and obnoxious than any of the Intel/nVidia fanboys we may have. I dont think its possible on this forum anymore to not have either Blazn making up facts or ionusX trying to make Nvidia or World of Warcraft look bad.
Log in to comment