Nvidia FLEX feature

NVIDIA has released the source codes for Flow & PhysX GPU

Now here is a pleasant surprise. NVIDIA has just released the source codes for Flow and PhysX GPU. The source codes that are available for Flow and PhysX are V2.2.0 and V5.6.0, respectively.

As NVIDIA noted, this PhysX release has the complete GPU source code available under the BSD-3 license. As such, NVIDIA no longer provides binaries for GPU acceleration, and users have to build the GPU binaries from source.

What this means is that someone may be able to create a GPU layer so that PhysX GPU can now run on the RTX50 series GPUs. As we’ve reported in February, NVIDIA has removed the support for CUDA 32-bit from the RTX50 series GPUs. This means that all the 32-bit games that supported PhysX GPU are no longer compatible with them.

Since the RTX50 series GPUs still support CUDA 64-bit, there are two possible solutions. The first one is for modders to release patches that replace the older 32-bit version of PhysX GPU-hardware code with a new 64-bit version. The second is to create a GPU layer that can emulate PhysX GPU on the RTX 50 series GPUs.

Interestingly enough, the first option should also provide a performance boost to all existing GPUs that can run these PhysX GPU-accelerated games. Most of the 32-bit games that used PhysX GPU had numerous optimization issues. So, a 64-bit modded version should resolve some of them. I don’t know if this is possible. However, now that the PhysX GPU source code is out, it would be cool to see if something like that can happen.

You can go ahead and download the source codes for both Flow and PhysX GPU from this link. I’ll also be sure to let you know about any mods or patches that can enable PhysX GPU 32-bit on the RTX50 GPUs once – and if – we get any.

Stay tuned for more!

19 thoughts on “NVIDIA has released the source codes for Flow & PhysX GPU”

  1. "I’ll also be sure to let you know about any mods or patches that can enable PhysX GPU 32-bit on the RTX50 GPUs once – and if – we get any."

    Was my first thought. Not that I've got a 5090 yet and, to be honest, I may now skip.

      1. You'll have to convince Intel since that connector is part of the ATX 3.x power supply standard. It won't do any good to change the GPU connector without also changing the power supply connector which is now found on all ATX 3.x compliant power supplies.

        Intel has put everyone in a real bind here because if they have to change that ATX 3.x standard for that connector now then all the ATX 3.x power supplies made before the change will have to be scrapped. Nvidia going to two 12V2x6 connectors isn't an option either because the vast majority of ATX 3.x power supplies only have one 12V2x6 connector and the only exception I can find are top of the line 1500W units

        1. That's Nvidia's job, and lawsuits will flow over the next few years over this debacle.

          All PSU's will need new outputs and Intel are in for a world of hurt.

  2. I expect someone will eventually create some sort of translation layer (or whatever you call it) to make 32-bit PhysX games work with 64-bit CUDA, however I'm not certain that this SDK release will help. The PhysX GPU SDK and Flow SDK were already open source, and you can see the history of releases goes back to November 2022. Games that use 32-bit PhysX use much older versions (3.x and older if I remember the Gamers Nexus video correctly), and I don't see how these 5.x SDK versions would allow 32-bit PhysX to work on a GPU that lacks 32-bit CUDA support.

    I suspect that to get PhysX in 32-bit games to work on RTX 50 series, someone would have to create some sort of program that intercepts 32-bit CUDA API calls, and then somehow processes them using the 64-bit CUDA API. I don't even know if that's possible.

  3. I expect someone will eventually create some sort of translation layer (or whatever you call it) to make 32-bit PhysX games work with 64-bit CUDA, however I'm not certain that this SDK release will help. The PhysX GPU SDK and Flow SDK were already open source, and you can see the history of releases goes back to November 2022. Games that use 32-bit PhysX use much older versions (3.x and older if I remember the Gamers Nexus video correctly), and I don't see how these 5.x SDK versions would allow 32-bit PhysX to work on a GPU that lacks 32-bit CUDA support.

    I suspect that to get PhysX in 32-bit games to work on RTX 50 series, someone would have to create some sort of program that intercepts 32-bit CUDA API calls, and then somehow processes them using the 64-bit CUDA API. I don't even know if that's possible.

  4. I expect someone will eventually create some sort of translation layer (or whatever you call it) to make 32-bit PhysX games work with 64-bit CUDA, however I'm not certain that this SDK release will help. The PhysX GPU SDK and Flow SDK were already open source, and you can see the history of releases goes back to November 2022. Games that use 32-bit PhysX use much older versions (3.x and older if I remember the Gamers Nexus video correctly), and I don't see how these 5.x SDK versions would allow 32-bit PhysX to work on a GPU that lacks 32-bit CUDA support.

    I suspect that to get PhysX in 32-bit games to work on RTX 50 series, someone would have to create some sort of program that intercepts 32-bit CUDA API calls, and then somehow processes them using the 64-bit CUDA API. I don't even know if that's possible.

    1. Is clear you not a developer, as a SDK is not the same as source code.

      The NVidia repos are largely useless for anything other than implementing the features natively on our projects/engines with more fine grained control, the actual APIs are layered and closed source.

      NVidia releasing the source of PhysX 5.X.X is something they never done before, regardless is severely outdated and different from modern PhysX.

      1. The releases being Open Source is mainly for educational purposes to allow fledgling developers to use PhysX and Flow without having to pay a licensing fee. These days it is mostly used for simulation/modeling applications not games. I used Flow and PhysX for years to model fluid dynamics, in my case that fluid is air in large commercial HVAC systems

        1. PhysX is used in modern games, however is nothing like the old PhsyX 5.X.X, it was largely refactored and runs mostly on the CPU nowadays.

          I am however aware PhysX was entirely replaced in Unreal Engine 5. But Remedy Northlight pretty much relies on PhysX for Physics, and is used on their latest title Alan Wake II.

          I also agree that the source will be mostly used for educational and research purposes.

  5. I honestly expected better from a NVidia fanboy, the RTX 5000 Series already going to emulate the 32 bit instructions, confirmed by NVidia themselves due to the backlash.

    As for the source code is severely outdated, as PhysX has changed a lot since 5.X.X.

    1. those games using first version..that is super outdated and with clutter of optimization bugs in mirror edge, since 64bit came out…later games improved 295% better in optimising than 32bit games struggling due to address limitation in vram usage…

  6. You can't compile a 64 bit dll in to 32 bit game. Only Nvidia or AMD can make it work on a driver level. Maybe someone can improve this old physX dll to run on more than 1 CPU core. It will be faster than it is right now and it will work as a 32bit project.

    1. yes you can, its not that hard to do it, linux and windows users done it all the time with dlssg file and nvngx file…for amd user, there is no benefit to their cards since it required nvidia card to do it in 64bit vs amd have no support to begin with for over 20 years since games releases back then…its darn shame for amd gamers been playing games with settings off

  7. The much more significant news is that the creator of ZLUDA has reconsidered adding back PhysX support into the project, which would not only allow 32-bit games GPU acceleration on NVIDIA, but AMD as well.

    As he recently mentioned, he doesn't have time to do it himself right now, however he's willing to help along the way.

    Hopefully someone steps up to the task; who knows, maybe that person might even end up being hired by Valve, because they are always on the look-out for talented open-source developers…

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b1f9397ce8e769e258241d2c87271824785a10ab938417935334f66bac7c2a5e.png

  8. Modders aren't going to be able to fix this because that would mean modifying the drivers making them unsigned even if they were successful which is doubtful.

    The only real solution would be for the game developers themselves to upgrade the games to 64 bit and use 64 bit PhysX. The problem with 32 bit PhysX is the same problem with all 32 bit applications, a maximum 4 GB of addressable memory. No one makes 32 bit games anymore except a handful of Indie developers and even those are rare.

  9. Nvidia being Nvidia again killing off older technology as usual instead of incorporating it so people could play older games the way they were intended to. I was really upset when they killed off 3d vision having bought and supported 3dtv play back in the day. They keep removing features and the problem with that is losing support for older games. That is one of best parts of PC gaming, is being able to play whatever you own in theory at least and Nvidia is getting richer and richer as a company. The least they could do is support their users and not remove support for existing tech in their future drivers.

  10. nvidia made right choice to removed troubling 32bit library that limited vram usage in the engine when using physx materials that also need textures and shaders to make it work…with 32bit…it just limited only 4gb textures that makes blurry physx mess back then and resulted missing frames in engine due by that alone…is why later games using 64bit solved entire issue in optimization in mid 2010's and thanks to vista made 64bit a standard for all game releases that no game dev gonna go back …only idiots would limit themselves something so outdated like mirror edge

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *