1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

    Dismiss Notice

Best passive cooled physx card to use with a 5850

Discussion in 'Graphics Cards' started by Greebo, 19 Oct 2009.

  1. Greebo

    Caporegime

    Joined: 20 Jan 2005

    Posts: 38,548

    Location: Co Durham

    What's the best performing passive Nvidia card to use a Physx card with a 5850?

    Thanks
     
  2. Lanz

    Soldato

    Joined: 26 Nov 2002

    Posts: 6,855

    Location: Romford

    There's a passive 9800GT on the market.
     
  3. Greebo

    Caporegime

    Joined: 20 Jan 2005

    Posts: 38,548

    Location: Co Durham

    Thanks but is that the best passively cooled card for physx? ;)

    Also my seach skills fail me as I can't find it. Who's the seller please?
     
  4. gurusan

    Capodecina

    Joined: 2 Sep 2006

    Posts: 13,489

    Location: Portland, OR

    Passive editions look really expensive, might be easier on the wallet to buy a 9800GT 55nm and fit an aftermarket passive cooler
     
  5. Rambo2683

    Gangster

    Joined: 1 Oct 2006

    Posts: 234

    i have a 8800gt and plan to get a thermalright passive cooler for it if I decide to hold onto it and use it for physx
     
  6. PermaBanned

    Capodecina

    Joined: 7 Jul 2009

    Posts: 16,239

    Location: Newcastle/Aberdeen

  7. gurusan

    Capodecina

    Joined: 2 Sep 2006

    Posts: 13,489

    Location: Portland, OR

    not sure how well a ddr2 9500GT would do with physx
     
  8. fornowagain

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 3 Nov 2004

    Posts: 9,833

    Location: UK

    [​IMG]
     
  9. elpedro

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 7 Feb 2008

    Posts: 1,196

    Location: Surrey

    Crap! just like my 8600GT lol

    Its still slowing down Batman AA, Mirror's edge seems to run fine though. It score around 3000 in the FluidMark PhysX benchmark.

    I'm grabbing an 8800GT off a mate soon, I'd go for nothing lower than an 9600GT, Batman recommends a dedicated 9800GTX for the maximum PhysX setting :eek:
     
  10. reflux

    Capodecina

    Joined: 15 Nov 2007

    Posts: 12,835

    Location: Enfield

    Max PhysX didn't run too well on my 8800GTS 320mb so you definitely need to be looking at something faster than that. Fabrics were ok but smoke was a bit too much.
     
  11. gurusan

    Capodecina

    Joined: 2 Sep 2006

    Posts: 13,489

    Location: Portland, OR

  12. Greebo

    Caporegime

    Joined: 20 Jan 2005

    Posts: 38,548

    Location: Co Durham

    Thanks fornowagain. I doubt I will find one of them 2nd hand.

    Therefore, bearing in mind 2nd hand, whats the fastest passively cooled nvidia card for physx with a stock passive cooler?
     
  13. fornowagain

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 3 Nov 2004

    Posts: 9,833

    Location: UK

    Passive 9600GT might suffice. I just ran the benchmarks in BAA with a 9600GT and 5870CF 1920x1200. Enabling Physx takes a big hit overall, but overclocking the GT scales well enough, but didn't make any difference to the minimums.

    5870CF 4AA16AF MAX settings, Physx off
    [​IMG]

    5870CF 4AA16AF MAX settings, Physx max 9600GT @ 600/900
    [​IMG]

    5870CF 4AA16AF MAX settings, Physx max 9600GT @ 675/1000
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: 19 Oct 2009
  14. Aegis

    Gangster

    Joined: 15 Sep 2009

    Posts: 103

    Location: London

    Holy crap!! (Batman :)) - didn't know PhysX caused that much of a hit - on a dedicated GFX card too!! That's just ridiculous!!
     
  15. Pendu

    Gangster

    Joined: 6 Nov 2005

    Posts: 160

    Because there is more to render i assume.
     
  16. fornowagain

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 3 Nov 2004

    Posts: 9,833

    Location: UK

  17. Aegis

    Gangster

    Joined: 15 Sep 2009

    Posts: 103

    Location: London

    Doesn't look like it! Check this:

    Dude's PC specs (!):
    cpu core i7 c0 @ 4.2ghz
    evga ftw295 quad sli + 285 *** for physx
    drivers 191.07 whql
    windows 7 64bit
    12 gb ram corsair @1600 8/8/8/24 settings
    1250watt enermax revolution 85+
    corsair h50 wtatercooling
    coolermaster haf932 case
    2 intel x25-e ssd's in raid 0
    sb xfi titianium pci-x

    Benchies:
    resolution 1920x1200 , 16xq antialiasing all detail to very high , physx highest

    min=61
    average=120
    max=180

    That's just f***in' ridiculous - 2 x 295s + a 285 for PhysX and a 4.2Ghz OC for a max of 180fps and a min of 61 - that's shocking! There another guy with 2 x 285s and a 4Ghz OC who gets:

    Min 54
    Max 138
    Avg 99

    Terrible performance imho - for comparison's sake, my 3.2Ghz i7 with a single 5870 (and no PhysX) gets the following (at the same res, though only 8xAA - all settings on v. high):

    Min: 64
    Max: 126
    Avg: 96

    The PhysX impact seems huge..?
     
    Last edited: 19 Oct 2009
  18. fornowagain

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 3 Nov 2004

    Posts: 9,833

    Location: UK

    It certainly does. That 295 system looks pretty sweet though.
     
  19. Greebo

    Caporegime

    Joined: 20 Jan 2005

    Posts: 38,548

    Location: Co Durham

    It does but you would still be gutted after spending all the money and only getting a min of 61fps in batman with physx.