@ET3D: Thanks for pointing that out, I simply posted them backward (275@738MHz and 250@633MHz), which is indeed wrong. I've corrected that in the post.

Also, I've added a preorder link and the card's MSRP ($350).

It's nvidia's way to let us know that they're still alive.
In my opinion an 250 is too much for just physx, an 220 could do the job just fine and the card would cost less and would have been more energy efficient.
Just as others said, i'm going to buy an dx11 card. i'm waiting for the prices for dx11 cards to drop a bit though.

I agree that the GTS 250 is just overkill for a Physx card, I thought Nvidia were promoting Physx on the basis that you could use a really old card to run it, with a newer and more powerful card doing the normal graphics processing.

I personally don't think that there are so many games, so intensive on the Physx part that, the price difference from a standard GTX 275 is justified. We will get, more heat, more consumption, a bigger price, for a marginal performance advantage on a few games.... Until i see some benchmarks that are showing me otherwise, i will see this product as a failed experiment.

That's not a bad price considering it has two cards in one. It would be interesting to see what level of card is needed for the PhysX portion. Maybe they're using the GTS 250 for future performance, I would imagine Nvidia did testing with different levels of hardware before deciding to go this route.

Seriously , when it comes to video cards , EVGA knows how to make it right . Hehe.... Wouldn't mind having these babies up in my house .

Technically, PhysX will run fine in a single GPU system... The days of needing a second physics processing card ended when nVidia acquired the PhysX engine and incorporated it into their GPU drivers. However, having a second GPU to process the physics code is much more efficient. The hybrid SLI system allows for different combinations, 1 GPU and 1 PhysX, sharing GPU and PhysX between cards, etc.

As for the "that processor choice is overkill for PhysX" comments, I believe the reason they went with that platform was the ease of integration with the main GPU - the interface was simpler than using an older / newer generation combination on one board.

Honestly, with the rise in titles using PhysX, it's the one thing that started making me consider coming back to nVidia's products. But ATi's new stuff is just too fast and power efficient, and I'm pulling for their open physics processing initiative to take hold. Fingers are crossed.

It's nice to see some innovation in the video card market (kudos eVGA), but did PhysX really ever take off enough to justify this card? How many games actually support it? With DirectX 11 being available now, it pretty much means that PhysX is dead, so I'd think twice before buying this card.

In order to play Batman Arkham Asylum at high PhysX setting, you need a seperate PhysX capable video card (at least a 9800GTX recommended). This card seems it is made exclusively for that game.