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

  • Lonyo - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    I haven't checked the benchmark numbers yet, but you list Forceware 185's on the NV side, and Cat 8.12's on the AMD side.
    Any reason why you are using brand new drivers for one side and 4 set old drivers on the other?
    Sure, NV might not support a card on older drivers etc, but it's more useful to see newest driver vs newest driver, since there are performance changes from 8.12's to 9.3's in various games, but it just seems silly to use 3+ month old drivers which have been superseded by 3 revisions already. Would anyone buy a brand new card and then use drivers from 3~4 months ago?
  • Gary Key - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    The setup chart has been updated. We utilized previous test results from the HD4870 with the 8.12 HotFix drivers. The HD 4890 results were with the 9.4 beta drivers. I just went through a complete retest of the HD4870 with the 9.3 drivers and just started with the 9.4 betas on the AMD 790FX and Intel P45/X58 platforms. Except for a slight performance improvement in Crysis Warhead on the P45/X58 systems, the 9.3 drivers offered zero performance improvements over the 8.12 HotFix. The 9.3 drivers do offer a few updated CF profiles and improved video playback performance, but that is it.
  • Nfarce - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    "the 9.3 drivers offered zero performance improvements over the 8.12 HotFix."

    Not only that, but if you read the ATI forums, a lot of people have been having MAJOR problems with 9.2 & 9.3. I downloaded 9.1 for my new 4870 build and have had no problems.
  • SiliconDoc - Monday, April 6, 2009 - link

    Now now, ati doesn't have any driver problems, so don't you DARE go spreading that lie. You hear me ?
    Hundreds of red roosters here have NEVER had a driver problem with their ati cards.
    Shame shame.
  • Rhino2 - Monday, April 13, 2009 - link

    Stop posting, seriously, you're stupidity is causing me pain.
  • SiliconDoc - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

    Another personal attacker without a single counterpoint to the many lies I've exposed. Good job brainwashed fool.
  • Frallan - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    Thanx - good to know.

  • StormyParis - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    The Inq or The Reg is pretty adamant about the 275 being there just to spoil the 4890 launch, but never really in stores, and reviewers getting special hi-specs, hi-overclock hand by nVidia instead of the manufacturers.

    Did your card come from an anonymous purchase, or was it a special review sample ?
  • Gary Key - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    We mentioned in the article that we received a review sample from NVIDIA. The clock speeds are the same as the retail cards that should start arriving later next week with widespread availability around the week of 4/13. Our retail review samples will arrive early next week.

    As we stated several times in the article, this is a hard launch for AMD and yet another paper launch for NVIDIA, although according to the board partners the GTX275 is coming quickly this time around.
  • evilsopure - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    I also feel confused and somewhat misled by the conclusion that the GTX275 is "the marginal leader at this new price point of $250".

    That conclusion doesn't seem true outside of resolutions of 2560x (30" monitor). Plus, $250 cards aren't even targeted or seriously considered for gaming at that resolution.

    I came up with a different conclusion after thoroughly reading this review:

    At the $250 price point and 1680x or 1920x gaming resolutions (where these cards primarily matter), the 4890 holds the majority performance advantage. However, at 2560x the GTX275 performs a bit better than the 4890. Realistically though, at 2560x or on 30+" displays, you're best served by a dual GPU or SLI/Xfire solution.

    Something's fishy about the reviewers' conclusion.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now