PhysX in Sacred 2: There, but not tremendously valuable

The first title on the chopping block? Sacred 2.

This was Ben’s type of game. It’s a Diablo-style RPG. It’s got a Metacritic score of 71 out of 100, which indicates “mixed or average reviews”.

I let ben play Sacred 2 for a while, first with PhysX disabled and then with it enabled. His response after it was enabled? “The game feels a little choppier but I don’t really notice anything.”

Derek and I were hovering over his shoulder at times and eventually Derek pointed out the leaves blowing in the wind. “Did they do that before?”, Derek asked. “I didn’t even notice them”, was Ben’s reply.


Sacred 2 without GPU accelerated PhysX


Sacred 2 with GPU accelerated PhysX - It's more noticeable here than in the game itself

We left Ben alone for him to play for a while. His verdict mirrored ours. The GPU accelerated PhysX effects in Sacred 2 were hardly noticeable, and when they were, they didn’t really do anything for the game at all. To NVIDIA’s credit, a Diablo-style RPG isn’t really the best place for showing off GPU accelerated physics.

Ben wanted a different style of game, something more actiony. He needed explosions, perhaps that would convince him (and all of us) of the value of GPU-accelerated PhysX. We moved to the next game on the list.

The Widespread Support Fallacy PhysX in Warmonger: Fail
Comments Locked

294 Comments

View All Comments

  • jeffrey - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    1) ATI driver - Was 8.12 really used? Why? 9.3 was released last month.

    2) Conclusion - The edge should have gone to the 4890 for being ahead of the 275 in most games at resolutions targeting the price point.
  • Gary Key - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    1. The 9.4 beta was used for the HD 4890 and the chart has been updated to reflect it. The 9.3 drivers are not any faster than the 8.12 HotFix for the other AMD cards in every test I have run but Crysis Warhead with a Core 2 Quad. A few improvements have been made for CF compatibility and video playback though.

    2. The conclusion has been updated to clarify our thoughts between the two cards.
  • can - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    An ATI gpu with and nvidia gpu doing physx? I'm curious to see results of this kind of arrangement. Not a dedicated PCI Physx card, but on a faster bus, with a more powerful processor, as a video card. I'm wondering about pitfalls and performance and the literal looks of the application.
  • SiliconDoc - Monday, April 6, 2009 - link

    Sorry bub, you're stuck with ati, and as far as curiosity for physx - uhh... don't worry, you're not missing much, anand only got addicted to it for a bit.
    If you want the driver hack for it, there's a thread at techpowerup.
    Some genius figured something out on it- not sure which os.
  • Jamahl - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    The conclusion in this review is awful beyond anything I have read before.

    How can the reviewer say the 275 is winning this one when the benchmarks clearly show dominance for the 4890 at most resolutions?

    Otherwise it was a good article but the conclusion leaves a sour taste in the mouth.
  • SiliconDoc - Monday, April 6, 2009 - link

    He could say it because he said it for ati for 6 months when ati won the top resolution. So his brain is in a "fart mode" that lied for ati for so long, he said it this time for nvidia - either that or he realized if he didn't he would look like an exposed raging red rooster fanboy.
    Good thing the reds started screaming NOW, after loving it for 6 months when their card was on top using the false method - because anand came in and saved the day - and changed the conclusion - for ati.
    LOL
    When nvidia doesn't give them a card for review again, it will be "them towing the line of honesty" that causes, no doubt, right ?
    BWAHAHAHAAAAAAA
    ( you all just tell yourselves that along with our dear leaders )
  • erikejw - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    "On the NVIDIA side, we received a reference version of the GTX 275."

    You wish.
    "since there is no 275 ASIC, NV is telling OEMs that they can make it from either a 280 or 260 board. One costs much more, and one performs better, so guess what everyone is going to use?

    That isn't necessarily bad, but how NV is seeding reviewers is. They are only going to be giving out a very special run of ONLY 280 based parts.

    Quite special 280 based parts at that. Reviewers beware, what you are getting is not what you can buy."

    http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/599/10515...">http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/new...ia-hoodw...
  • bill3 - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    A lot of people seem to be crying about lack of temp, power consumption, oc, and fan noise numbers..while I agree in a stand alone review these are glaring omissions, the fact is theres a dozen reviews around the web where you can get that info in triplicate. I would much rather have the insight on CUDA and PHysx!

    I mean, people act like the internet isnt free and we all arent a google search/mouse click away from that type of info! Geez.

    That said, I suppose reviews must be treated as "stand alone", however artificial a construct it may be. However if theres anything thats easily forgivable to be left out it's simple data numbers that can be found at a thousand other places. Which is exactly what temp, oc, etc are. I already know those numbers from a ton of other reviews. These people whining in the comments act like Anand is the only hardware review site there is. I would think if anybody was truly interested in laying out 250 to purchase one of these theyd be looking at more than one review!
  • SkullOne - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    I second the question about why did you use Catalyst 8.12 Hotfix? Other sites are using what appears to be an Beta Catalyst 9.4 driver so is your listing of Catalyst 8.12 a misprint?

    Also why do you care if AMD sent you an overclocked version? The HD4890 is directly targeted at the overclocking enthusiasts which is a realm that AMD has ignored up until now while NV embraced it.

    The HD4890 has already been taken to 1+GHz on it's GPU and up to 4.8GHz on it's memory on other sites. That by far makes it the better buy.
  • SkullOne - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link

    Forgot to mention that by having this extremely overclockable card AMD has opened up another entire SKU for themselves by selling "OC" cards with the 4890.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now