ZOTAC Announces GeForce GT 520 in PCI and PCIe x1 Interface Variants

[newtekie1]

It doesn't. See the last picture (table).

I don't see where it says it doesn't support PhysX. AFAIK, any card that supports CUDA and has 32 Shaders/CUDA Cores, will support PhysX. Now these cards only having 48 might mean that PhysX isn't supported in future PhysX releases if nVidia decides to increase the requirements again, but as it stands right now these should work with PhysX just fine.

Having a x1 PCI-E interface is interesting and nichily useful. I'm just wondering if the x1 card can possibly have any worse performance than standard x16 one?

On a card this low end, probably not noticeably.

Also, why put the passive heatsink on the x16 version, but an active, whiny one on the x1 one? Makes no sense to me, should be the other way round, if anything.

The passive heatsink makes the card too large to be considered a low profile card, and will interfere with some slimeline cases. Plus I'd take a fan ensuring the card stays cool over passive relying on the airflow in a tiny slimline case anyday.

 

[[H]@RD5TUFF]

I bet it's just omitted from the spec sheet.

[H]@RD5TUFF is using one, TPU has a GT 520 review stating it's supported, and the only requirements that nVidia give are:



I can't see the manufacturer having control over PhysX (or CUDA) support.

This version of the card doesn't seem to have PhysX

This is the one I am using atm.

It doesn't say that it supports physx either, but I was able to enable it with nothing more than ticking a box, to turn physx on.

 

[n-ster]

This is the one I am using atm.

It doesn't say that it supports physx either, but I was able to enable it with nothing more than ticking a box, to turn physx on.

its right there in features

 

[[H]@RD5TUFF]

http://img.techpowerup.org/110927/Capture023.png

its right there in features

derp I missed that

*edit: yay post # 3k

 

[Thefumigator]

Now I can have a decent alternative to my 8200 IGP without populating the PCI-e 16X which I'll reserve for a RAID + USB3.0 controller or maybe just a RAID controller.

On the other side, it could be time to resucite some old systems!
could add this card to my old celeron 1100 mhz but not sure what for... It already runs horrible with an nvidia FX5500 AGP but of course it runs much worse without it.

it's always handy to have a PCI card around anyway, also I can imagine it should be better than IGPs, wherever is PCI or PCI-e 1x.

 

[ViperXTR]

is the PCI bandwidth enough for physx? or will it just make things worse?

 

[wahdangun]

we should ask U2K to bench it with his P3 system lol

 

[xBruce88x]

@viper... i dont think itll be an issue as far as physx goes. the original Agiea PPU was pci and later pci-e. btw it had 32 cores and 256mb, hence nvidias min req. (as in a stand alone ppu)

finally some decent pci/1x cards... if its not double the cost of the x16 model.

 

[Ikaruga]

It will be overpriced probably, but wonder why no s-vhs output, because people who doesn't have money to upgrade their system usually have old TVs as well.

also.: http://www.invisiblerobot.com/pcie_x1/

edit: Ah, I just saw it's around $65, not worth it imo

 

[Sasqui]

Where's the bloody AGP version?

 

[RadeonProVega]

LOLZ PCI, memories lol

 

[_JP_]

Where's the bloody AGP version?

There would be a higher chance of that happening if it were an ATi/AMD card.