which one would u go for a better sound card or the physx card in that last PCI slot?

H

Hanzu

New Member
upgrade from
High-Definition 7.1 Performance Audio - Standard

to


Sound Blaster® X-Fi® High Definition 7.1 Audio with XRAM Technology


or from nothing to Ageia PhysX Processing Unit w/ 128MB GDDR3

please discuss and give me your opnion, thanks
 
It all depends on what you prefer - gaming, or music. You're comparing two products which really have nothing in common with each other. Personally, I'd happily go without the PhysX card and instead lump for the X-Fi, in fact I own an X-Fi (see signature), and I have to say it's fantastic.

Plus the whole PhysX technology is quite new as of yet, I'd want to wait until the cards move up to perhaps a faster interface, and most of the games I play at the moment have no need for a PhysX processing card, but they can always make use of decent sound, and that X-RAM does give it a small edge in performance.
 
I've had virtually no performance issues with the Audigy 4 Pro model used here for both gaming and music as well as video. The notable thing about Creative's Sound Blaster line is a higher demand on system resources especially noticed in gaming. But I'll live with EAX features that the Audigy offers for the time being. But then the Sound Blaster X-FI is supposed to have an even more enhanced EAX then the Audigy line. http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/8313
 
I'm with magicman. The Physix card is very new. I wouldn't be suprised if it's a total flop, so don't waste your money on one just yet. If/when it's more supported, then look into it.
 
I'm certainly not in a rush for the added expense on top of a new line with only a few reviews on it at this time. When they get all the bugs worked out of it and it sees several good reviews I may then consider one for the next build I put together. I waited on the Audigy 4 series until the old Audigy 2 ZS Gamer suddenly quit during the first year. I then simply grabbed a fast replacement out of a local retail store for about the same price.
 
I didnt read anything on this post, but I would go with a X-Fi sound card. The Physx cards don't even work on games yet, so its useless.
 
Gee? And all this time I've been running the little old Audigy 4 Pro without heartaches to speak of. I couldn't say that about the Audigy 2 ZS Gamer however. That could wreck havoc when gaming at times. You would think it was a video driver when in fact it was Creative.(nnnaaa... that couldn't be.) Sure Sound Blasters do grab resources at times.
 
Last edited:
I would go for a USB sound card so you'll have room for a PhysX card later if they become popular. :P
 
The rush into any Phyx card would be too soon at this point since none of the games out are written for iit. You may see patches come out eventually for many of the newer releases. Softwares do have to keep up with the jumps in hardwares.
 
You don't Activision, 3DRealms, and others listed quite yet while Epic and a few others want to jump in fast. Will Phyx last? is another question asked.

"The main purpose of the PhysX chip is to allow for better visual effects based in physics such as explosions, cloth, foliage, character movement, and smoke. I can see how it will be useful, but I can't see it surviving that well as a standalone board for PCs. What really needs to happen is Nvidia or ATI pick-up the license, or even the company, and add the PhysX chip to the graphics card. Whether this will happen probably depends on how well the chip does initially and how much support it receives from games companies.

For more, please see GameSpot." http://geek.com/news/geeknews/2006Mar/bga20060323035443.htm
 
That will remain to be seen to some degree. One other reason why you see some game manufacturers releasing games this soon with support is that the hardware companies always ask the software designers to develop softwares for any new hardwares they come out with. They still need the software to work with and be available for anything new.
 
For the PhysX to be supported by both or either one or the other regarding ATI and NVidia it will have to live up to the higher level of graphics acceleration that has been promised. Note this early 2005 article.

"GDC 2005: PhysX Hardware Physics Accelerator Unveiled
Exponentially more stuff to blow to bits? Sign us up.
by Chris Roper
March 8, 2005 - AGEIA Technologies announced today at the Game Developer's Conference that it's doing to physics what hardware manufacturers did to 3D graphics back in the mid-90s: providing hardware acceleration for an exponential increase in the amount and complexity of physics objects in games.

Just as GPUs (graphic processing units) do with polygons, vertices and textures, the PhysX PPU (physics processing unit) will do for realtime phsyics. Instead of handling 50 or even 100 physics objects per scene like some games do now, games and applications that make use of the PhysX PPU will be able to handle many, many multiples of that. AGEIA is saying something around 30,000 to 40,000 physics objects per scene would be something that its PPU could handle.

If you like buzz-phrases, here are a few things that the PhysX processor is tauted to handle: universal collision detection, rigid body dynamics, soft body dynamics, fluid dynamics, smart particle systems, clothing simulation, soft-body deformation with tearing, and brittle fracturing for destruction of objects in gaming environments.

AGEIA's NovodeX physics API will be supported by its PhysX processor. Many developers, including Epic via its in-progress UnrealEngine3 gaming engine, are already implementing it so AGEIA expects that many PhysX-supported games will already be available by the time the processor is launched, which is scheduled to be released by Christmas 2005." http://gear.ign.com/articles/594/594446p1.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top