PhysX in Warmonger: Fail

Cryostasis is a title due out this year, unfortunately there is no playable demo. Just a tech demo. Next.

Metal Knight Zero, MKZ for short, was another game on NVIDIA’s list. Once more, no playable demo, just a tech demo. We need real games here people, real titles, if you’re trying to convince someone to buy NVIDIA on the merits of PhysX.

Warmonger, ah yes, now we have a playable game. Warmonger is a first person shooter that uses GPU accelerated PhysX to enable destructible environments. Allow me to quote NVIDIA:

The first thing about Warmonger is that it runs horribly slow on ATI hardware, even with GPU accelerated PhysX disabled. I’m guessing ATI’s developer relations team hasn’t done much to optimize the shaders for Radeon HD hardware. Go figure.

The verdict here (aside from: I don’t want to play Warmonger), was that the GPU accelerated PhysX effects were not very, well, impressive. You could destroy walls, but the game itself wasn’t exactly fun so it didn’t matter. The realistic cloth that you could shoot holes through? Yeah, not terribly realistic looking.


Look at the hyper realistic cloth! Yeah, it looks like a highly advanced game from 6 years ago.

Warmonger itself wasn’t a triple A first person shooter, and the GPU accelerated PhysX effects on top of it weren’t going to make the game any better. Sorry guys, none of us liked this one. PC Gamer gave it a 55/100. Looks like we weren’t alone. Next.

PhysX in Sacred 2: There, but not tremendously valuable The Unreal Tournament 3 PhysX Mod Pack: Finally, a Major Title
Comments Locked

294 Comments

View All Comments

  • Psyside - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    Can anyone tell me about the testing metod average or maximum fps? thanks.
  • Jamahl - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    some sites have the gtx275 clearly winning at all games, all resolutions.
  • helldrell666 - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    You can't trust every site you check.especially since most of those sites don't post their funders names on their main page.You must've heard of Hardocp's Kyle who was fired by nvidia because he mentioned that the gtx250 is a renamed 9800gtx.
  • 7Enigma - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    I think this is due to Nvidia shooting themselves in the leg with the 185 drivers. With the performance penalty at the normal resolutions, anyone testing with the 185's is going to get lower results than someone testing with the previous drivers. And I'm sure you could find 10 games that all perform better on ATI/NVIDIA. That's the problem with game selection and the only real answer is what types of games you play and what engines you think will be used heavily for the next 2 years.
  • SiliconDoc - Monday, April 6, 2009 - link

    Well the REAL ANSWER is - if you play at 2650, or even if you don't, and have been a red raging babbling lying idiot red rooster for 6 months plus pretending along with Derek that 2650x is the only thing that matters, now you have a driver for NVidia that whips the ati top dog core...
    If you're ready to reverse 6 months of red ranting and raving for 2560X ati wins it all, just keep the prior NV driver, so the red roosters screaming they now win because they suddenly are stuck at the LOWER REZ tier to claim a win, can be blasted to pieces anyway- at that resolution.
    So - NVidia now has a driver choice - the new for the high rez crown they took from the red fanboy ragers, and the prior driver which SPANKS THE RED CARD AGAIN at the lower rez.
    Make sure to collude with all the raging red roosters to keep that as hush hush as possible.
    1. spank the 790 at lower rezz with the older Nvidia driver
    2. spank the 790 at the highest rez with the new driver
    _______________________

    Don't worry if you can't understand just keep hopping around flapping those litttle wings and clucking so that red gobbler jouces around - don't worry soft PhysX can display that flabby flapper !
  • The0ne - Tuesday, April 7, 2009 - link

    Can someone ban this freaking idiot. The last few posts of his have been nothing but moronic, senseless rants. Jesus Christ, buy a gun and shoot yourself already.
  • SiliconDoc - Tuesday, April 7, 2009 - link

    Ahh, you don't like the points, so now you want death. Perhaps you should be banned, mr death wisher.
    If you don't like the DOZENS of valid points I made, TOO BAD - because you have no response - now you sound like krz1000 and his endless list of names, the looney red rooster that screeches the same thing you just did, then posts a link to youtube with a freaky slaughter video.
    If I wasn't here, the endless LIES would go unopposed, now GO BACK and respond to my points LIKE MAN, if you have anything, which no doubt, you do not.
  • helldrell666 - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    According to xbitlabs, the 4890 beats the gtx285 at 1920x1200 resolution with 4x aa in Cod5, Crysis Warhead, Stalker CS, Fallout 3 and loses in Far Cry2.Here, the 4890 matches in Far Cry 2 and cod5 with some slightly lower fps than the gtx285 in Crysis warhead.

    Strange....
  • 7Enigma - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    That is crazy. There is no way variations should be that huge between the 2 tests, regardless of the area they chose to test in the game. Anandtech has it as essentially a wash, while Xbit has the 4890 20% faster!?! (COD:WaW)
  • 7Enigma - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    Just looked closer at the Xbitlabs review. The card they used was an OC variant that had 900MHz core instead of the stock 850MHz. In certain games that are not super graphically intensive I'm willing to bet at 1920X1200 they may still be core starved and not memory starved so a 50MHz increase may explain the discrepancy.

    I've got to admit you need to take the Xbitlabs article with a grain of salt if they are using the OC variant as the base 4890 in all of their charts....that's pretty shady...

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now