@Phenom69ll Actually bro, 6990s have two cores. And thats exactly what i was talking about. And future GPUs such as the 7970 will be based of a brand new architecture using multiple cores.
GPUs have much greater processing power. That's why it's so cool that in the past few years people are able to use this power to do calculations and sh@t.
I used nvidia plenty of times before. And I do say there is a lot of power in there chips but there is also a lot of stability issues. There cards consume a lot of power over heat.. have a shorter Life span opposed to there competition.. and to top it off are pretty much overpriced. ATI on the other hand doesn't have as much of a kick... but there chips are stable run quite cool and don't consume too much power. And there prices are reasonable. So I suppose it depends on what your budget is like
lol you dont know what your talking about cpu & gpu are two completly different things. and you backward on intels stealing when amd was made from backward engeneering intels processors learn some history about the companys before you talk nonsense. all companys get sued 1000 times a day nothing new.
Although PhysX can be used on the CPU. PhysX can't "fully" use the CPU. PhysX uses x87 code so it uses only 1 core and can't even use that correctly so you would need a really fast CPU to get anywhere close to the Nvidia cards running PhysX. And to tell you how much Nvidia was an asshole to those without their cards if you were running PhysX with say ATI cards the gravity in the game was reversed (ie, if you fell you would fall up or jump would make you go down ect...)
the comparison was unfare they compered a hight end vedeo card 8800gt with a medle end prosessor dual core 2.4 intel they shulded used an intel dual quad core 2.4 ghz prossesor and you would duble the performance of the cpu or maybe an icore 7 3.2 ghz vs an nvidia 9800 or 295gt that would be fun
That´s not true. The 8800GTS was a high end product, around 4 years ago, not to day, Actually i have a 8800GTS that´s almost 4 years old, at that time the C2D was one of the fastest processors available, actually there was a hugely expensive 8800GTX to at the same time.
ok im not very technical so im don't really have a clue about what anyone is talking about so can someone give me it straight is a GPU better than a CPU for everything or just somethings?
@serenadezzz yes CPU is processing flash videos. but your GPU shouldnt be the best shit on the market. AMD processors accerlate & make flash videos better.
@serenadezzz Adobe are making efforts in the since the last couple of versions of the Flash player to utilize hardware acceleration using the GPU, though the results still suck really hard.Actually the whole Flash-thing sucks. Adobe has made it and spread it all over the Net, and yet for so many years they did not improve it a bit. The ideas behind it are old and it's full of bugs.Too many bugs, especially considering the importance of this thing on the Net for the last let's say 10 years or so.
@serenadezzz ? My laptop with slowest Core Duo CPU 1.66Ghz in 2006 can handel 1080p HD videos both on youtube with flash 10.1 (now 10.2) in vista and 7
hey!! look at my comment it was 1 year ago, and when i wrote that i had a 5 years old laptop (1.6ghz single core). I don't know if today flash is using GPU for processing but 1 year ago i think it had only CPU processing.
Unfortunately my old laptop died and now i have a quad core i7 and now i can see the difference.
@IAMTHEPROCESSOR when i wrote that comment i was using a ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 with 128MB video RAM in a 5 years old computer (with a Intel pentium M@1,6Ghz CPU)
For now i'm using a ATI Mobility Radeon HD5730 and of course i can watch the video without any problem.
@serenadezzz The difference isnt in detail. Its in the fact that the GPU can actually run PhysX smoothly.
This video just shows the GPU running it just as shit as the CPU though. Its meant to be crispy smooth from the GPU and jumpy and really poorly generated on the CPU
@SSJMegla The days where that was actually true were when the 9800GT was the best of the best. You are far better off without a lower end dedicated gpu for physx.
Then thats weird. Because I can run Crysis on my computer wich has CryEngine which is also a physics engine. And I can run Half-Life 2, and Half-Life 2: Episode 2, and Crazy machines 2....
If there is no gpu to process the physics simulation then the CPU takes care of it.
The CryEngine2 uses the CPU to process the physics.
However there are many titles that use "PhysX" as there primary physics engine, and in these titles the gpu takes over and the cpu can focuse more process time on other things.
@point6000x That's quickly ending. I have several games that use PhysX, such as Batman Asylum, Darkest of Days, Warmonger, and UT3. There are plenty of programs that use PhysX/Cuda especially decoders for video editing.
"of course CPU Physics do not win. Because PhysiX is deploved for GPU? and not CPU."
That is technically not right.
This physics simulation was developed for the CPU.
But due to GPU's parallel nature they are much more suited to compute physics. As you can see from the video.
Nvidia bought Ageia wich was the creator of PhysX and has implemented it into the CUDA platform,(I can't see any other graphics company doing similar) before that PhysX was like any other proprietary physics engine.
@SirThorgeir ATI is doing their own thing with Open CL. And if they manage it, it will be an Open source revolution. Cause ATM it has a lot more potential than PhysX, even tough the current version isnt quite as good yet.
@point6000x basically what ur saying is true, but in some cases CPU do win. But the NVIDIA part is not true, if u are a fan of ATI radeon be sad cuz they dont have Physx HAHAH!!!
@quangluu96 sorry i was wrong. this was 1 year ago when i wrote this.
as sirthorgeir said its developed for cpu. oh and. I will not buy an ATI again just because of the drivers =( The HD5970 has MUCH power. more than GTX480 but it causes bluescreens which is the only reason why i will buy an GTX485 when it releases.
@FOGoticus its clear that nvidia wants to offer the fastest graphics card on the market. its clear that they want to be number one. its clear that they only want money. this is why i buy ati.
Nvidia waits for ati to release HD6970 to improve their GTX595 so they have the best card on the market.
Nvidia just puts in power. the more the better. but they neither look @ the power consumption nor the gpu temperature or loudness.
their graphics cards are good but in my opinion overpriced.
@FOGoticus and i like physicx. i thinks its a great engine. but i also think that are engines which force you to buy a nvidia graphics card - ofc you can run on CPU too but only with 1 core supported. Fluidmark tried to unblock multicore support.
@tcgcrazy You sir must be high or stupid... I hate ATI. I've been using Nvidia cards for years and they have never had a single problem. Current 9800 GT is a tank.
@tcgcrazy You state your opinion like it's a fact... Don't do that. You ask for trouble. Opinions should usually start with "I think" or maybe "In my opinion" something of that sort. Not just that it's better.
i dont know but you seem to be just a little upset..?
so first:
no matter which graphic card you choose the graphics (in case you use the same settings) will be the same in every progam except the program uses something like PhysiX which is for Nvidia cards only. Nvidia does not allow non-nvidia users to use multiple cores for physiX calculation. which is why nvidia is a bollocksed company.
ATI has 3D. If you think ATI has no 3D please go home. =) I love you too.
@GustavoRodrigo15 my HD3870 runs stable @ 115°C when I was too lazy to clean the cooler from dust. It didnt smoke.
yes, the VERY old AMD processors began to smoke when overheated but all a bit newer CPUs have overheat protection: my AMD x6 1090T @ 4.2Ghz shuts down when it reaches 60°C
wheres the superprocessor by nvidia? I can't see?!
please explain what you mean.
I dont know why your insane but please dont argue with facts 7 years old oke?
This shit is Futuremark Arithmetic Test for analysing performance of your computer. In normal applications, physics elements such as soft bodies and particles systems are processed by your CPU. With the new nvidia CUDA api, you can process multiple threads in parralel with Nvidia GPU compaired to serial processing on the CPU. It dramaticaly improves rendering time (FPS).
This is why you should care, this means new in-game features like physics elements :)
lol you really wanna bet with me on that? because last time I checked, the 6970 had two cores, and the 6990 has 4 cores. Soo that voids your comment
Cloudstrife1188 1 month ago
Sooo show me the GPU rendering and using its cores!
Cloudstrife1188 5 months ago
@Cloudstrife1188 gpus have single core..
Phenom69ll 1 month ago
@Phenom69ll Actually bro, 6990s have two cores. And thats exactly what i was talking about. And future GPUs such as the 7970 will be based of a brand new architecture using multiple cores.
Cloudstrife1188 1 month ago
CPU physx ftw!
omfgg3tlost 5 months ago
single threaded processing vs parallel processing theres not much to say about it, of course the gpu wins on this one
floresm08 6 months ago
Mwahaha, I get 20 fps with flash player 1080p videos. I get 60+ fps in certain 1080p games.
Gimmt61 8 months ago
I know in Sony Vegas 10, my CPU (Core i7 970) blows away Cuda )GTX 275) without delay!
knowledgeiswhatsup 8 months ago
OMG nobody is looking at the date of my comment? it was 1 year, almost 2 when flash didn't use GPU acceleration...
serenadezzz 8 months ago 4
GPU designed to process graphic, and CPU to run the program
namraph 9 months ago
Nvidia Nvades
namraph 9 months ago
ohh god! what cpu are you using?
MrNorthPaw 11 months ago
@MrNorthPaw you see Core 2 Duo. Yes it lags too with Core i3.
MeongMeongMeow 10 months ago
I'm just wondering why this video is naturally lagging...
MatheusMK3 11 months ago
GPUs have much greater processing power. That's why it's so cool that in the past few years people are able to use this power to do calculations and sh@t.
rbaleksandar 1 year ago
I used nvidia plenty of times before. And I do say there is a lot of power in there chips but there is also a lot of stability issues. There cards consume a lot of power over heat.. have a shorter Life span opposed to there competition.. and to top it off are pretty much overpriced. ATI on the other hand doesn't have as much of a kick... but there chips are stable run quite cool and don't consume too much power. And there prices are reasonable. So I suppose it depends on what your budget is like
Saint924 1 year ago
CPU is for processing numbers,symbols and do calculations in more than 1billion times per second.And graphics card is post the colours to the screen.
meishongzai 1 year ago
Comment removed
kolle147 1 year ago
There are way too many corporate bloggers from Intel here doing over time.
Tell your CEO we are not idiots. GPU is a advancement to the stone age technology of Intel.
Now you have both Nvidia and AMD to contend with.
That is if Intel has time outside of court, constantly being fined for stealing technology and creating a monopoly.
dinnerandashow 1 year ago
@dinnerandashow
lol you dont know what your talking about cpu & gpu are two completly different things. and you backward on intels stealing when amd was made from backward engeneering intels processors learn some history about the companys before you talk nonsense. all companys get sued 1000 times a day nothing new.
deluxedookie 1 year ago
@deluxedookie
Let's face it. Society has never recognized your brilliance for a reason.
dinnerandashow 1 year ago
CPU.......
UltimateCPU 1 year ago
@UltimateCPU which CPU u got UltimateCPU?
point6000x 1 year ago
GPU has also a low framerate
llRoBoBinHoll 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@llRoBoBinHoll
"GPU has also a low framerate"
With far more objects...
Texnux 1 year ago
Although PhysX can be used on the CPU. PhysX can't "fully" use the CPU. PhysX uses x87 code so it uses only 1 core and can't even use that correctly so you would need a really fast CPU to get anywhere close to the Nvidia cards running PhysX. And to tell you how much Nvidia was an asshole to those without their cards if you were running PhysX with say ATI cards the gravity in the game was reversed (ie, if you fell you would fall up or jump would make you go down ect...)
PuLsE0o0 1 year ago
the comparison was unfare they compered a hight end vedeo card 8800gt with a medle end prosessor dual core 2.4 intel they shulded used an intel dual quad core 2.4 ghz prossesor and you would duble the performance of the cpu or maybe an icore 7 3.2 ghz vs an nvidia 9800 or 295gt that would be fun
stefanocelsi 1 year ago
@stefanocelsi
That´s not true. The 8800GTS was a high end product, around 4 years ago, not to day, Actually i have a 8800GTS that´s almost 4 years old, at that time the C2D was one of the fastest processors available, actually there was a hugely expensive 8800GTX to at the same time.
matsv201 1 year ago
Intel Dou? Some new processor? lol
Tobiasz931 1 year ago
mmm... AMD ftw
Maztercray 1 year ago
is still slow T.T (aun se ve lento)
imperiajor 1 year ago
ok im not very technical so im don't really have a clue about what anyone is talking about so can someone give me it straight is a GPU better than a CPU for everything or just somethings?
Huwzo 2 years ago
hmmm, my CPU can't handle 720p flash videos, so i can't see the difference... LOL
I think that flash use CPU processing instead of GPU.
serenadezzz 2 years ago 33
it does the gpu only makes sure it ends up on your screen the CPU does 99% of all the work in this case :D
uut0 1 year ago
@serenadezzz the latest nvidia drivers can handle 720p flash videos decoded on the Nvidia GPU (just FYI)
akshaybhasme 1 year ago
@serenadezzz Not with the new beta update...
gevelegian 1 year ago
@serenadezzz yes CPU is processing flash videos. but your GPU shouldnt be the best shit on the market. AMD processors accerlate & make flash videos better.
point6000x 1 year ago
@serenadezzz Adobe are making efforts in the since the last couple of versions of the Flash player to utilize hardware acceleration using the GPU, though the results still suck really hard.Actually the whole Flash-thing sucks. Adobe has made it and spread it all over the Net, and yet for so many years they did not improve it a bit. The ideas behind it are old and it's full of bugs.Too many bugs, especially considering the importance of this thing on the Net for the last let's say 10 years or so.
rbaleksandar 1 year ago
@serenadezzz wrong.
point6000x 10 months ago
@serenadezzz ? My laptop with slowest Core Duo CPU 1.66Ghz in 2006 can handel 1080p HD videos both on youtube with flash 10.1 (now 10.2) in vista and 7
chrischoy9 10 months ago
@chrischoy9
hey!! look at my comment it was 1 year ago, and when i wrote that i had a 5 years old laptop (1.6ghz single core). I don't know if today flash is using GPU for processing but 1 year ago i think it had only CPU processing.
Unfortunately my old laptop died and now i have a quad core i7 and now i can see the difference.
serenadezzz 10 months ago
@chrischoy9 you had a core duo, better than a single core CPU on win xp.
serenadezzz 10 months ago
@serenadezzz lol..... flash uses GPU :P
Schadenmaster 9 months ago
@Schadenmaster yes, today it uses GPU, 2 years ago... no.
serenadezzz 9 months ago
@serenadezzz oh yeah damn :D
didnt look to the age :S
Schadenmaster 8 months ago
@serenadezzz it use GPU acceleration
MrWarmesEis 8 months ago
@serenadezzz Flash can use CPU or GPU, as long as your card support direct x 10 or higher
cazablocki 8 months ago
@serenadezzz Please tell me what gpu were you using ?
IAMTHEPROCESSOR 7 months ago
@IAMTHEPROCESSOR when i wrote that comment i was using a ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 with 128MB video RAM in a 5 years old computer (with a Intel pentium M@1,6Ghz CPU)
For now i'm using a ATI Mobility Radeon HD5730 and of course i can watch the video without any problem.
serenadezzz 7 months ago
@serenadezzz LOL I am buying a gtx 590 right nowLOL you should upgrade when socket 2011 come out! see you later!
IAMTHEPROCESSOR 7 months ago
@IAMTHEPROCESSOR it was a laptop, so there was not much possibility for upgrading.
serenadezzz 7 months ago
@serenadezzz The difference isnt in detail. Its in the fact that the GPU can actually run PhysX smoothly.
This video just shows the GPU running it just as shit as the CPU though. Its meant to be crispy smooth from the GPU and jumpy and really poorly generated on the CPU
Exgaves 7 months ago
@Exgaves To be crispy smooth, you need a second GFX card in your system that only has the role of running PhysX.
SSJMegla 6 months ago
@SSJMegla The days where that was actually true were when the 9800GT was the best of the best. You are far better off without a lower end dedicated gpu for physx.
/watch?v=cbww3dhzK0M
Exgaves 6 months ago
Comment removed
point6000x 2 years ago
What has that to do with Nvidia... Then you just gotta use the GPU instead of CPU to render it?
mathyson 2 years ago
Nvidia using PhysiX.. but most games/programs are NOT using PhysiX. They use their own physics engine. and not "PhysX" - "cool..."
point6000x 2 years ago
well if nVidia can run PhysX then they can also run the other physics engines after they install it together with the games?
mathyson 2 years ago
Nvidia runs only PhysiX. ONLY Its a market joke...
point6000x 2 years ago
Then thats weird. Because I can run Crysis on my computer wich has CryEngine which is also a physics engine. And I can run Half-Life 2, and Half-Life 2: Episode 2, and Crazy machines 2....
mathyson 2 years ago
nope! loser:
Crysis is using themselves engine:
CryEngine2
point6000x 2 years ago
I know, but my computer can run that, so nVidia can run other physics engines too.
mathyson 2 years ago
ehhh nope
point6000x 2 years ago
If there is no gpu to process the physics simulation then the CPU takes care of it.
The CryEngine2 uses the CPU to process the physics.
However there are many titles that use "PhysX" as there primary physics engine, and in these titles the gpu takes over and the cpu can focuse more process time on other things.
SirThorgeir 2 years ago
@SirThorgeir PhysX is not a physics engine...
59summerset 2 years ago
PhysX is indeed a physics engine with a SDK and it can be integrated into other Game engines.
Al-tho PhysX is not a complete game engine it is a middleware for other engines and can be fully implemented.
For example: Unreal engine (which has fully implemented PhysX).
SirThorgeir 2 years ago
@SirThorgeir and unity 3
samm565 1 year ago
FAIL!
classic1144 2 years ago
@59summerset if it isnt what is it then?
Dominoes282 1 year ago
So, I should get i5 core, mabye readon 5890.
Avataryoutuification 1 year ago
cryengine is not a physx engine its a game engine there is a big difference.
TheDavPhil 2 years ago
@point6000x That's quickly ending. I have several games that use PhysX, such as Batman Asylum, Darkest of Days, Warmonger, and UT3. There are plenty of programs that use PhysX/Cuda especially decoders for video editing.
59summerset 2 years ago
"of course CPU Physics do not win. Because PhysiX is deploved for GPU? and not CPU."
That is technically not right.
This physics simulation was developed for the CPU.
But due to GPU's parallel nature they are much more suited to compute physics. As you can see from the video.
Nvidia bought Ageia wich was the creator of PhysX and has implemented it into the CUDA platform,(I can't see any other graphics company doing similar) before that PhysX was like any other proprietary physics engine.
SirThorgeir 2 years ago 30
@SirThorgeir Are you crazy? This is a GPU Test.. Futuremark is working for who you ask? FOR FUCKING NVidia!
Olazaika1 1 year ago
@SirThorgeir ATI is doing their own thing with Open CL. And if they manage it, it will be an Open source revolution. Cause ATM it has a lot more potential than PhysX, even tough the current version isnt quite as good yet.
SSJMegla 6 months ago
@point6000x you are stupid, you know shit, you sux.
Tobiasz931 1 year ago
@point6000x basically what ur saying is true, but in some cases CPU do win. But the NVIDIA part is not true, if u are a fan of ATI radeon be sad cuz they dont have Physx HAHAH!!!
quangluu96 1 year ago
@quangluu96 sorry i was wrong. this was 1 year ago when i wrote this.
as sirthorgeir said its developed for cpu. oh and. I will not buy an ATI again just because of the drivers =( The HD5970 has MUCH power. more than GTX480 but it causes bluescreens which is the only reason why i will buy an GTX485 when it releases.
point6000x 1 year ago
@point6000x "Never buy NVIDIA ..." Oh wow. You are so butthurt over the fact that nivida has something which ati doesn't.
And yes. I know I'm replying to a 1 year old comment.
FOGoticus 1 year ago
@FOGoticus its clear that nvidia wants to offer the fastest graphics card on the market. its clear that they want to be number one. its clear that they only want money. this is why i buy ati.
Nvidia waits for ati to release HD6970 to improve their GTX595 so they have the best card on the market.
Nvidia just puts in power. the more the better. but they neither look @ the power consumption nor the gpu temperature or loudness.
their graphics cards are good but in my opinion overpriced.
point6000x 1 year ago
@FOGoticus and i like physicx. i thinks its a great engine. but i also think that are engines which force you to buy a nvidia graphics card - ofc you can run on CPU too but only with 1 core supported. Fluidmark tried to unblock multicore support.
point6000x 1 year ago
@point6000x Ati radeon is way better than nvidia
tcgcrazy 1 year ago
@tcgcrazy You sir must be high or stupid... I hate ATI. I've been using Nvidia cards for years and they have never had a single problem. Current 9800 GT is a tank.
picassopainter2 1 year ago
@picassopainter2 0_0 I was just saying my opinion. I'm not trying to say that Nvidia is crap or anything.
tcgcrazy 1 year ago
@tcgcrazy You state your opinion like it's a fact... Don't do that. You ask for trouble. Opinions should usually start with "I think" or maybe "In my opinion" something of that sort. Not just that it's better.
picassopainter2 1 year ago
@picassopainter2 If people like you hate stupid comments so much then why do you even bother to reply?
tcgcrazy 1 year ago
@tcgcrazy To remove ignorance and promote intelligence and reason...?
picassopainter2 1 year ago
@picassopainter2 ok... sorry
tcgcrazy 1 year ago
@point6000x FUCK U MAN
NVIDIA (BEST GRAPHICS) WIN
ATI DONT HAVE 3D - NIVIDA HAVE
ATI DONT HAVE A GOOD PHYSICS, CUDA...
GustavoRodrigo15 1 year ago
@GustavoRodrigo15
ok..
i dont know but you seem to be just a little upset..?
so first:
no matter which graphic card you choose the graphics (in case you use the same settings) will be the same in every progam except the program uses something like PhysiX which is for Nvidia cards only. Nvidia does not allow non-nvidia users to use multiple cores for physiX calculation. which is why nvidia is a bollocksed company.
ATI has 3D. If you think ATI has no 3D please go home. =) I love you too.
point6000x 1 year ago
@point6000x oh man fuck u and shut up I PREFER NVIDIA
and if u dont know ATI when overloads, it smokes!!!!
ATI and AMD
Intel and Nvidia dont smoke, the GPU or CPU stop processing!!!
Nvidia have a super processor
ATI dont do a super processor
and I prefer Nvidia GPU!!!
soooo
fuck u, ATI and AMD
SHUT UP!!!
GustavoRodrigo15 1 year ago
@GustavoRodrigo15 my HD3870 runs stable @ 115°C when I was too lazy to clean the cooler from dust. It didnt smoke.
yes, the VERY old AMD processors began to smoke when overheated but all a bit newer CPUs have overheat protection: my AMD x6 1090T @ 4.2Ghz shuts down when it reaches 60°C
wheres the superprocessor by nvidia? I can't see?!
please explain what you mean.
I dont know why your insane but please dont argue with facts 7 years old oke?
point6000x 1 year ago
@GustavoRodrigo15 ATI has not a physics engine made for ATI but there very good or even better alternatives to nvidias PhysiX.
take a look:
/watch?v=xcdKHA6f7qM
havok dot com
CUDA is an computing architecture for Nvidia cards from 8xxx series on i think. ATI has a similar technoogy called ATI Stream Technology.
And yes NVIDIAs graphic cards are good but they're overpriced, are too much heating and have too great power consumption.
over all I prefer ATI.
point6000x 1 year ago
GPU WIN!!!!
serdarguy12 2 years ago
How i can enable CUDA Physx on my GTX 275 ?
Spectraaal 2 years ago
Choose enabl physX in nvidia control panel
gfcpettson 2 years ago
This shit is Futuremark Arithmetic Test for analysing performance of your computer. In normal applications, physics elements such as soft bodies and particles systems are processed by your CPU. With the new nvidia CUDA api, you can process multiple threads in parralel with Nvidia GPU compaired to serial processing on the CPU. It dramaticaly improves rendering time (FPS).
This is why you should care, this means new in-game features like physics elements :)
ocouture 3 years ago 3
Wtf is this shit? :D
Sixtehn 3 years ago