Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2025-12-06, 08:45:

That said, GPU load exceeding 50% while playing a game from 2009 on an RTX 5090 is kinda wild.

Well, if you run with uncap framerate, the engine is still gonna use all the resources at its disposal. 300 fps are a lot and probably are bottlenecked by the CPU. If you used an even faster CPU, you could approach 100% load at double that framerate.

DosFreak wrote on 2025-12-05, 01:23:

https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/bat … e-ready-driver/

Support For Select, Classic, 32-Bit GPU-Accelerated PhysX Games […]
Show full quote

Support For Select, Classic, 32-Bit GPU-Accelerated PhysX Games

GeForce RTX 50 Series GPUs launched at the beginning of the year, alongside the phasing out of 32-bit support for CUDA. This meant that PhysX effects in a number of older, yet beloved games were not GPU-accelerated on GeForce RTX 50 Series GPUs.

We heard the feedback from the community, and with the launch of our new driver today, we are adding custom support for GeForce gamers’ most played PhysX-accelerated games, enabling full performance on GeForce RTX 50 Series GPUs, in line with our existing PhysX support on prior-generation GPUs.

By installing our new GeForce Game Ready Driver, the full GPU-accelerated PhysX experience can now be enjoyed in:

Alice: Madness Returns
Assassin’s Creed IV: Black Flag
Batman: Arkham City
Batman: Arkham Origins
Borderlands 2
Mafia II
Metro 2033
Metro: Last Light
Mirror’s Edge

Support for Batman: Arkham Asylum is planned to be added in the first part of 2026.

the question is whether that is gona work with 5000 series only or with all following series too.

robertmo3 wrote on 2025-12-11, 19:51:

the question is whether that is gona work with 5000 series only or with all following series too.

I would assume so, as long as 64-bit PhysX continues to be supported.

Only if Nvidia will drop CUDA alltogether.

feda wrote on 2025-12-11, 20:11:

I would assume so, as long as 64-bit PhysX continues to be supported.

Considering is based on CUDA, which is a framework used by countless professionals in multiple fields, and the reason many of them (myself included) forked the price for a nVidia GPU... I think that 64-bit PhysX will remanin supported until nVidia goes belly up.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2025-12-11, 20:21:

Only if Nvidia will drop CUDA alltogether.

You ninjed me.

ok, so i guess we are waiting for a 32-bit d3d drop now? 😉

robertmo3 wrote on 2025-12-11, 20:35:

ok, so i guess we are waiting for a 32-bit d3d drop now? 😉

Now, I'm not sure if 32-bit d3d requires dedicated hardware on GPUs, but 32-bit CUDA did. That's why it got dropped: Because nVidia deprecated that part on the silicon itself. And also why, despite it being reintroduced, it relies on some sort of translation layer, meaning PhysX games will still run faster on older GeForce cards.
A 4090 is still much faster than a 5090 in 32-bit PhysX games, but now even the second one can achieve well over playable framerates, instead of relying on extremely slow software PhysX.

robertmo3 wrote on 2025-12-11, 20:35:

ok, so i guess we are waiting for a 32-bit d3d drop now? 😉

That's not for Nvidia to decide.

i think it was nvidia who dropped d3d1-9c in 400 series

You mean Fermi? That sounds silly, because Fermi had Windows XP drivers.

Anyway, nobody will suddenly drop 32-bit Direct3D application support, unless Microsoft will do it.

It's probably mostly gone technically.
All that's left is a thunking layer a hundred bytes long to feed 32 into 64, and return 64 as 32.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2025-12-13, 13:30:

You mean Fermi? That sounds silly, because Fermi had Windows XP drivers.

Anyway, nobody will suddenly drop 32-bit Direct3D application support, unless Microsoft will do it.

Nvidia could pull off something that Intel did 4 years back...

64-bit PhysX makes up a large pile of bricks in Nvidia's foundation, so it won't be going away or replaced by anything new, for the foreseeable future. It's used heavily in their AI portfolio, 3D animation, and scientific applications. Migrating some older 32-bit games to 64-bit and including the current iteration of PhysX is certainly possible, but it would be prohibitively expensive for the small range of titles (pretty much Unreal Engine stuff like the Batman games) that have that option available and with AMD's recent meteoric rise in gaming hardware builds, it would be foolish for anyone to revamp their old games and continue to go with PhysX, over something that just works on a variety of GPU hardware or CPU physics processing.

with AMD's recent meteoric rise in gaming hardware builds

People don't buy AMD. Not GPUs anyway.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2025-12-17, 05:41:

People don't buy AMD. Not GPUs anyway.

AMD is making them and selling them, just quantity is the question. Intel has also GPUs.

Yeah, and that quantity became very negligible in the recent years.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2025-12-17, 10:05:

Yeah, and that quantity became very negligible in the recent years.

ACKTHUALLY (not trying to be that 🤓 guy)

In several EU retailers 9000 Radeon series has been outselling Blackwell cards by a good margin.
nVidia cards have been pretty easy to find on shelves for MSRP (I snatched a 5090 at MSRP in June), while Radeon cards are a tiny bit harder to find and, if available, they go out of stock quite fast.

That's cute, but Nvidia still has market share over 90%.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2025-12-17, 17:51:

That's cute, but Nvidia still has market share over 90%.

Yeah, it takes years to erode such dominant market share.
People have been saying to get Ryzen for gaming for a few years alredy, and Intel CPUs went through two generations of their top chips frying themselves.
Yet just recently we've started seeing Intel's market share go down, with a 44/56 split on STEAM still in favour of Intel. Same thing it's happening in the professional and server sector.

Of course, this implies that nVidia will suffer another lukewarm launch next gen, which is not a given looking at past nVidia lukewarm launches. They are usually quick to respond.