Patch Re-Enables PhysX When ATI Card Is Present 130
An anonymous reader points us to a forum posting with the inevitable followup to NVIDIA's crippling of PhysX for users of any other display adapter. "Windows 7 allows two display drivers to be used at once — like in Windows XP. Therefore, it is possible to use an NVIDIA card for PhysX and ATI card for graphics rendering. Sadly, since the release of 186 graphics drivers, NVIDIA has decided to block this feature anytime a Non-NVIDIA GPU is present in the system. In addition, for some incomprehensible reasons, the latest version of PhysX System Software also prevents PPU cards from working if a Non-NVIDIA GPU is present. ... A forum member by the name of GenL has released an experimental beta patch [that] intercepts disable-PhysX-if-Radeon-is-present-code. So far, according to user comments the patch delivers successful results." The forum post has a link to the patch for Windows 7.
Get it while you can (Score:5, Insightful)
Incomprehensible? (Score:4, Insightful)
Greedy maybe, but incomprehensible? I think it is pretty easy to understand, they want you to go buy another nVIDIA card. I don't agree with it either, but thats just a silly word choice.
Nvidia should make a sensible compromise (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Get it while you can (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, like what if your motherboard has an onboard ATI video chip are you screwed since you can't remove it?
Re:Incomprehensible? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Performance against cost (Score:5, Insightful)
Playing devils advocate here I can sort of see Nvidia's beef. Their attitude to features and drivers is quite progressive and starts back with the old TNT32 when competing with voodoo. IMHO, we now have a similar situation where ATI is making good performing card at cheap prices yet are not maintaining the robust driver feature set of NVidia. If a game is having a few glitches with shadows, chances are its with an ATI card. NVidia's point of difference are their drivers, and I can at least see engineers being a bit miffed.
If they honestly believed that ATI made inferior video hardware, they would feel no need to deliberately sabotage interoperability like this. That's especially true when merely a warning along the lines of "this feature works best with 100% nVidia hardware" would have been sufficient. No, this kind of deliberate and underhanded bullshit is the action of a company that has no confidence in its ability to compete in an open market on a level playing field. Personally I like nVidia's products and I am not eager to see another lawsuit in an already-litigious society. However, I hope they do get sued over this (by either their customers or the government) and I hope they lose big. This kind of shit needs to be made as expensive and unprofitable as possible.
Shoot all marketers! (Score:2, Insightful)
I swear, all tie-wearing brainless drones that come up with such bullshit need to be shot in the head!
I'm sick of those mouth-breathers standing in the way of good engineering.
Where could the world be if those slimy bastards wouldn't be holding back the bright people?
Re:Performance against cost (Score:3, Insightful)
They do not necessarily believe that ATI makes inferior hardware, they believe that ATI makes inferior software.
Re:Incomprehensible? (Score:3, Insightful)
As the ingenuity of GenL shows, it's not up to them. No matter what a company comes up with to try to get things to go their way, there is someone out there equally as smart and creative (if not more) that will break it.