纯属好奇，关于NV的显卡做物理卡+AMD的显卡

zhaoqianji

现在NV放出了让8/9系列显卡做物理卡的驱动
不知道有没有人测试在NV的卡做物理卡的时候用AMD的卡做3d运算？

只为你存在

这个提议不错，等我的4870到了可以试试。

boris_lee

楼主这个创意不错:w00t):

kaicaysmic

兼容性要是解决，威力不是一般的YY{lol:] {victory:]

zajara

{titter:]低调低调，被nv看见了在驱动里做手脚你就想都不用想了

Diamond.Ball

拿N卡当物理加速卡
为什么不直接加一块物理加速卡？

ngzhang0

2块4870X2crossfire加上1块GTX280做物理运算是不是一个比较不错的配置？
跑在X38/48的双PCIE2.0 16X  + PCIE4x上

Al@n

原帖由 ngzhang0 于 2008-8-7 10:17 发表
2块4870X2crossfire加上1块GTX280做物理运算是不是一个比较不错的配置？
跑在X38/48的双PCIE2.0 16X  + PCIE4x上

想了一下功耗就有点汗了。。。

privater

原帖由 Diamond.Ball 于 2008-8-7 09:57 AM 发表
拿N卡当物理加速卡
为什么不直接加一块物理加速卡？

因为在运算能力上PhysX PPU不如Geforce 模拟PPU：
评测中采用的GPU是9800GTX 对比的参照是AGEIA PPU

• Processors: Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 Quad-Core 3.0GHz
• Motherboard: ASUS Maximus Extreme (X38-Based)
• Memory: OCZ 2GB Titanium DDR3-1600 (@ DDR3-1333, 7-7-7-20, 1.9v)
• Video: ASUS EN9800GTX 512MB
• Sound: Onboard HD Audio
• Storage: Seagate 7200.11 500GB
• Power Supply: Corsair HX620W
• Chassis: Antec P182 Mid-Tower
• Etcetera: Windows Vista Ultimate 64-Bit
• Cooling: Corsair Nautilus 500

The initial group of tests here were completed on non-overclockedparts. The first test was performed without PhysX-acceleration, whilethe second relied on the PPU, and finally, the third utilized the GPU.The PhysX driver used is 8.06.12, which was just released this pastWednesday.

No PhysX Acceleration - 17.09 ops/s

With no acceleration, all of the work is left up to the CPU,resulting in somewhat lackluster results... at least as far as physicscalculations are concerned.

PPU PhysX Acceleration - 28.50 ops/s

Surprisingly, adding in the AGEIA PPU did little to to increase ourscore. The boost from 17.09 op/s to 28.50 op/s might seem impressive,until we take a look at the GPU results.

GPU PhysX Acceleration - 125.14 ops/s

Yes... here's the reason that some people are up in arms. This is arather substantial increase, but again, I still feel it's deserved. TheGPU is so efficient at processing physics calculations that it blowsaway even the dedicated PPU by more than quadrupling the averageresults. As you can see, that boost also effects the overall 3DMarkscore by a fair bit.
From a technical standpoint, the GPU was obviously much faster athandling the most popular physics processing that PhysX offers, so itmight very-well be that the PPU is actually a lot less capable than wefirst imagined.
I next wanted to see what sort of effect overclocking had on theresults, on both the CPU and GPU. Which overclock would increase thephysics more? With the PPU installed once again and the CPU (QX9650)overclocked to 3.6GHz, we saw a 9.3% increase in overall physicscapabilities.

PPU PhysX Acceleration (Overclocked CPU) - 30.53 ops/s

On to GPU acceleration. I overclocked both the CPU and GPU to seewhich one had the greater effect. The first result is for the CPUoverclock, still at 3.6GHz. The differences are once again just under10%, at 9.6%.

GPU PhysX Acceleration (Overclocked CPU) - 129.46 ops/s

Finally, putting the CPU back to stock speeds and overclocking theGPU (+21% Core MHz, +7.8% Shader MHz) pushed us up to 134.35 op/s...resulting in yet another 9.3% increase.

GPU PhysX Acceleration (Overclocked GPU) - 134.35 ops/s

The increases to be seen here will of course scale with the size ofthe overclock, and it's more of a coincidence that both the CPU and GPUoverclocks gave the same % increases. If the CPU was overclocked to4.0GHz or higher, even greater differences would be seen.

ngzhang0

原帖由 Al@n 于 2008-8-7 10:21 发表


想了一下功耗就有点汗了。。。

420WX2（参考前一段测试的）+ 300W?
装2个1KW的电源就可以了吧。{lol:]

zhaoqianji

ls的在卖微波炉吗？

宝康

其实我也有楼主的想法，呵呵{victory:]

kdu

同意楼上！！！

somarizhou

对主板有要求吗？比如intel的P35主板，可以用4x的来插84gs吗？