44 Comments(s). 1 Pages(s). Showing page 1. [ 1 ]

   #30. Posted at 09:41 PM on Oct 22nd 2008 Edit   Reply

Dual monitor in Starcraft 2 would be nice :)
collapse

   #38. Posted at 07:13 AM on Oct 23rd 2008 Edit   Reply

Do not get me wrong, if at all am I being an Nvidia fanboy. Still, you could be using an Nvidia card for PhysX acceleration and an ATI card for the graphics. ;)
collapse

   #40. Posted at 09:09 AM on Oct 23rd 2008 Edit   Reply

Say I have a 9800 GX2, could I use the 9800 GX2 for graphics and an 8800 GT for PhysX? I have a Intel P35 motherboard however, would it work??
collapse
#40, Probably yes.  :   (#41)  «

   #4. Posted at 02:01 PM on Oct 22nd 2008 Edit   Reply

in full-screen 3D mode, only the "SLI focus display" will render the game, and the secondary display will go dark.

So, with a single card, I can play a game on 1 monitor, leaving the other monitor up for email or whatever, but in SLI I still can't have the second monitor showing the desktop/apps?

Ok, does Crossfire do something this stupid?

I'll probably wait until next year to buy another video card, but I want the option to add a second card, but I don't want to lose my second monitor while gaming!
collapse

   #34. Posted at 03:53 AM on Oct 23rd 2008 Edit   Reply

i have a question :D Can i Dedicate a gpu to physics and .. then go do the rendering on a radeon?
collapse

   #5. Posted at 02:06 PM on Oct 22nd 2008 Edit   Reply

The big bang 2 is another big fart from N-vidia.It's all about supporting multiple displays in sli which has been offered by AMD for a long time now.And the whole physx on gpu thing is the most stupid idea N-vidia came up with.It's not gonna be applied any soon.We laready have gpus that are struggling in games with primitive texturing and geometry designs.Adding physx to that will make the things much worse.
collapse
#21, /bubblemouth  :   (#23)  «

   #26. Posted at 06:55 PM on Oct 22nd 2008 Edit   Reply

Funny that TR's front page pictures show Forged Alliance. A game that is heavily CPU-bounded. SLI and CF is worse for it because they require significantly more CPU-overhead than single-card output.
collapse

   #28. Posted at 07:03 PM on Oct 22nd 2008 Edit   Reply

robspierre6 has been banned for repeated personal attacks and rudeness to other users. Read the rules and follow them please, folks.
collapse

   #2. Posted at 01:50 PM on Oct 22nd 2008 Edit   Reply

What happened to OpenGL 3 support?
collapse
#19, i lol'd :)  :   (#20)  «

   #16. Posted at 03:49 PM on Oct 22nd 2008, Edited at 03:49 PM on Oct 22nd 2008 Edit   Reply

replying failure!
collapse

   #7. Posted at 02:09 PM on Oct 22nd 2008 Edit   Reply

That multi-but-not-SLi option provides for a nice Upgrade path, imo. Got that lousy 8600GTS? Buy a newer card and delegate the 8600 to PhysX. Nice.
collapse

   #1. Posted at 01:45 PM on Oct 22nd 2008 Edit   Reply

Let's say you have a powerful triple-SLI combo, like 3xGTX260. Is there really a point of dedicating a whole GTX260 just for PhysX processing, instead of splitting its load over physics and graphics processing?

It just seems like any one of the cards that support triple-SLI in the first place would be way too powerful just for physics processing.
collapse
44 Comments(s). 1 Pages(s). Showing page 1. [ 1 ]
 
Name/Password: / Remember
Reply to:
[click to clear]

[RED] [GREEN]
[BOLD]
[ITALIC] [STRIKE]
[UNDERLINE]

Notice: All posts should abide by the rules, please.
Note: Ctrl-Enter submits the post. (In IE)
DThread keys: Click on a reply to position the blue bar. 'A'/'Z' move it up/down.
Jazztags: (they MUST be closed)
    r{ red }r     g{ green }g     /[ italic ]/     *[ bold ]*
    _[ underline ]_     -[ strike ]-     s[ sample ]s     o[ spoiler ]o  q[ (QUOTE) ]q