What it means is that games that use PhysX engine will be able to run hardware accelerated with NVidia graphics cards. Of course support for that will have to be in the game, and there are very few games that have it now (most notable are the 2 GRAW games).
Also it remains to be seen what impact it has. My guess is that SLI will have to be used to get it to run well, as most graphics cards are under heavy load from modern games and don't have much spare power for a physics engine (which is what Jen-Hsun Huang also hinted on in the article).
I haven't looked at that, but I heard the Q6600 runs cold and overclocks like a beast.
Yeah, the Q6600 is great for O/C. The Q9450 is like a newer gen Q6600, but might be hard to overclock as much due to the lower multiple (higher default bus speed). But I will of course check tests of the Q9450 and I think it will overclock fine too.
I'm interested in the upcoming Q9450 (i.e. Quadcore 2.66MHz). It will be available at fairly good price when it's released (late March I believe). It will be a big CPU upgrade for me, and even though games don't gain much from Quadcore, I think it will be very nice overall.
nvidia has a history of buying competitor like 3dfx and ULi Technologies and simply let their products die.
Yes, of course the Ageia hardware will be phased out (and it wasn't any good either). And in the future, the API might change name to something like nPhysX or so. But NVidia will support Ageia HW for a while longer. Read an interview with NVidia where they talked about the acquisition and a bit about their plans.
they plan to do physics over gpu for years. They only bought Ageia to let their product die.
Wrong. Of course Ageia's hardware product has failed, but it was too expensive and not impressive either. But their software API is another matter. What NVidia has done is to buy the Ageia PhysX API which is already supported in a lot of games without the hardware even. This allows NVidia to get a successful API and change it to run on their GPU's too. Which they said will be done asap.
And NVidia has also already said that they will support the Ageia hardware in the future, letting it die off more slowly but still supported for those that bought it.
Not concerning WoW, but it will be interesting to see what NVidia will come up with now that they bought Ageia. They did say that support for GPU physics will come asap. I think that this can make SLI setups more interesting for the future. Like going for 2 somewhat less expensive cards instead of a single expensive one.
Everything I read said to wait until the next version of Windows to make the 64 bit jump. Vista 64 has several glaring flaws, poorly performing drivers only being one of them.
Just plain wrong. Vista x64 performs very close to both Vista x86. If there is some exception, feel free to post about it. I'd say if there is one, its because of some company that already before Vista sucked at doing good drivers (like Creative).
I'm not sure how good they get dispatched on a quadcore, but they are quite balanced on a dualcore. http://www.cranprod.com/~dafire/screen2.png
Of course there are heavy threads like the main rendering that will always run on one core .. but there are other tasks that can get distributed. If you plan to use fraps for example more cores make sense.
Since ram is cheap I suggest getting 4 gb of ram .. and therefor a 64bit operating system. I would suggest vista 64bit over xp 64bit since the xp-64 bit edition was a poor cousin of xp, based on a windows server 2003 kernel.. and getting drivers for it is harder then getting them for vista.
For true measurement of multi-core usage, remember to turn of support for threading in the graphics driver. Because NVidia (and I guess ATI too) drivers use multi-threading to optimize performance, and if you don't turn it off you will see the graphic driver use on several cores too, not only the game by it self. There is a setting for it in NVidia panel called "Threaded optimization", its on per default.
And as you say, if anyone is going for Vista now, I'd recommend x64. Driver support for Vista x64 has really matured and few deviced don't have drivers for it now. The performance is almost identical with x86 and you can have 4GB+ memory (I got 4GB which is great). Also x64 has slightly higher security than x86.
Quadcore, is that supported by anything at this time?
A few games does support multi-core setups, but they show little improvement anyway. Mostly it's great for encoding/rendering and things like that. And if you're a programmer using a multi-threaded compiler, you will get a nice boost too.
No its not, I got a single GTX 8800, and with everything turned up @1920x1200 + high AA/AF, I get below 20fps in some raid situations. So with a highres monitor, high AA/AF and max setting its fully possible to slow down WoW a lot.
Quad CPU is a bit overkill for WoW though, but having a very fast multi-core CPU is good for your overall computer and gaming performance.
Quote from Moon Witch »
What I would like to achieve :
- Run dual monitor set up. 1 for games etc (the "active" monitor in front of me, which would be the biggest of both) and 1 for sites. I hate alt-tabbing.
If you run full-screen on the first monitor you wont be able to pull the mouse out to the 2nd one without alt-tabbing or running Windowed. At least not in WoW afaik.