Borderlands 2 - PC Performance Thread

Micerider said:
This game has a fantastic optimization.

Runs flawlessly on my laptop, with everything on High (except Physx on low) in 1366*768

Running on a I7 Q740m 4 GB of RAM and a Geforce 445m. Quite humble and yet it's constantly around 60 FPS.

I was even shocked that this remained playable (around 30 FPS) in 1080p or in the same settings as above + Physx on medium (except for the very heavy physics scenarios).
Click to expand...

Really? That makes me think I'm really limited by my dual core CPU (i5-2410M), since my GPU (GT 555M) is supposed to be a bit more powerful than yours and yet I'm certainly not getting a rock solid 60 fps with high settings at 720p. I do get that in the indoors environments most of the time, but in the open outdoors environments I'm typically at 40-50 fps, with some spikes up to 60 fps and some drops down to 30-35 fps when there's a lot going on.
 
So here is my results from tweaking shadows.

Find the line that says "ShadowCascades=3"

Change the value to 10

Now, underneath it sets the resolution of each sequentially lower resolution shadow map...we're going to use this to increase shadow resolution.

There should be 4 lines that say "ShadowSplit=x" where x is a different number. Make that 11 lines of that piece of text (yes, eleven, not ten).

It defaults to saying this
"
ShadowSplit=0.0
ShadowSplit=0.16
ShadowSplit=0.48
ShadowSplit=1.0
"

replace that chunk with this.
"
ShadowSplit=0.0
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.1
ShadowSplit=0.18
ShadowSplit=0.29
ShadowSplit=0.45
ShadowSplit=0.60
ShadowSplit=0.85
ShadowSplit=1.0

"

Note: The lower values control how sharp you want the shadows. Unfortunately penumbra size seems to shrink along with shadow texel size, so the shadows start to resemble idtech games at low values. The later numbers control the resolution at distance. This *probably* impacts performance, but I havent really noticed it much (i've tried it on a gtx680 as well as a 460M).

If this isn't raising the resolution of your shadows, find these lines and set them to the following values.

MinShadowResolution=2048
MinPreShadowResolution=2048
MaxShadowResolution=2048
MaxWholeSceneDominantShadowResolution=4096
ShadowFadeResolution=2048
PreShadowFadeResolution=512



Bonus: This is already well known, but worth repeating.

MaxProcBuildingLODColorTextureSize=2048
MaxProcBuildingLODLightingTextureSize=2048

Increases your texture resolution in some places.

This should all give you a nice clean image, even at distances. Adjust to find what works best for you.

a4df1685393f3cf89bd7a06c93487cd02c0983c5.jpg
 
So my game will get stuck in some infinite autosave loop where it doesn't actually save and the icon just stays in the corner until i force the game to end.
Anyone have an idea?
It basically stopped saving permanently now.
I can't travel between areas because it says the game is saving.
I've restarted the game multiple times and it's the same thing over and over.
I haven't started a new character yet but this one seems unplayable at this point.
 
Hawk269 said:
Thanks for this. I game on my 55" 1080p Sony 3dTV. I have a killer gaming rig (GTX690 on Water, I7Extreme3930x on Water, Ramage IV Extreme Mobo). So for me, using the above what will that net me. I heard of downsampling, but I am not sure what it really does and I know I sound like a noob, I want to try it out but want more info as far as how much better will my games look?

thanks!
Click to expand...

Downsampling is a lazy/poor mans Super Sampling.

The image is rendered at 2997 x 1873 or however high you can to go. And then the image gets downsampled errrr.....squeezed into your 1920 x 1200 frame effectively Anti-Aliasing it.

Downsampling plus in-game AA will yield very clean results....but Super Sampling is still the way to go IMO.
If a game has the flags and/or the ability to do it, there is no reason not to Super Sample.....but in the event there is absolutely no way to get SSAA then Downsampling is the next best thing.


P.S For someone with a Waterblocked GTX690 im somewhat saddened you dont already know about SuperSampling.....fuck Downsampling when you can SuperSampling x8 nearly everything out there.
 
Dreams-Visions said:
noted.

my friend fixed his by dropping PhysX from high to medium. Odd. Anyway, I'll pass that BIOS suggestion along to him. Thanks for the tip.
Click to expand...

While it's not quite the same, I've had strange graphical anomalies whenever I've had PhysX enabled on my 460. The bottom row of the screen would just display junk pixels which would sometimes be stuck glowing with whatever weapon effect I had used last. Disabling PhysX completely fixed that.
 
WHOAguitarninja said:
So here is my results from tweaking shadows.

Find the line that says "ShadowCascades=3"

Change the value to 10

Now, underneath it sets the resolution of each sequentially lower resolution shadow map...we're going to use this to increase shadow resolution.

There should be 4 lines that say "ShadowSplit=x" where x is a different number. Make that 11 lines of that piece of text (yes, eleven, not ten).

It defaults to saying this
"
ShadowSplit=0.0
ShadowSplit=0.16
ShadowSplit=0.48
ShadowSplit=1.0
"

replace that chunk with this.
"
ShadowSplit=0.0
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.1
ShadowSplit=0.18
ShadowSplit=0.29
ShadowSplit=0.45
ShadowSplit=0.60
ShadowSplit=0.85
ShadowSplit=1.0

"

Note: The lower values control how sharp you want the shadows. Unfortunately penumbra size seems to shrink along with shadow texel size, so the shadows start to resemble idtech games at low values. The later numbers control the resolution at distance. This *probably* impacts performance, but I havent really noticed it much (i've tried it on a gtx680 as well as a 460M).

If this isn't raising the resolution of your shadows, find these lines and set them to the following values.

MinShadowResolution=2048
MinPreShadowResolution=2048
MaxShadowResolution=2048
MaxWholeSceneDominantShadowResolution=4096
ShadowFadeResolution=2048
PreShadowFadeResolution=512

Snip-------
Click to expand...

Thanks for these settings. The shadows do look a bit better now with these settings. I still had to put ShadowCast_Near=6000.000000 to not get the shadows popping in, but now I have less of the jigsaw effect at the edges of shadows.
 
I did some extensive testing on dedicated PhysX GPUs with Borderlands 2. The results were surprising!

Test rig details:
i5 2500k @ 4.7 GHz (1.37v) / EVGA GTX 680 (1250 MHz boost, +300 Memory, 132% Power) / 16GB Corsair Vengeance LP DDR3 1600 MHz / 750GB Seagate Momentus XT SSHD / Lepa G900 Power Supply / CM 690 II Advanced Case
Windows 7 Ultimate with SP1 and latest patches (10/01/12) – x64
NVIDIA GeForce WHQL drivers 306.23
FRAPS 3.5.9

Game details:
Borderlands 2 / Steam / Updated on 09/30/12
All graphics details maxed (PhysX: High) – 1080p (1920×1080)

Testing Methodology:
Configurations:
GTX 680
GTX 680 + GTX 580 SC (dedicated PhysX)
GTX 680 + GT 640 (dedicated PhysX)

Bottom line is that the GT 640 gave around 20% FPS improvement! Very comparable to the GTX 580 SC. At around $100 and not requiring external power (along with GK107 efficiency) - the GT 640 is a great bang/buck dedicated PhysX card even for a GTX 680 that boosts to 1250 Mhz - there's no bottleneck!

More details here:
http://1pcent.com/?p=135
 
WHOAguitarninja said:
So here is my results from tweaking shadows.

Find the line that says "ShadowCascades=3"

Change the value to 10

Now, underneath it sets the resolution of each sequentially lower resolution shadow map...we're going to use this to increase shadow resolution.

There should be 4 lines that say "ShadowSplit=x" where x is a different number. Make that 11 lines of that piece of text (yes, eleven, not ten).

It defaults to saying this
"
ShadowSplit=0.0
ShadowSplit=0.16
ShadowSplit=0.48
ShadowSplit=1.0
"

replace that chunk with this.
"
ShadowSplit=0.0
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.1
ShadowSplit=0.18
ShadowSplit=0.29
ShadowSplit=0.45
ShadowSplit=0.60
ShadowSplit=0.85
ShadowSplit=1.0

"

Note: The lower values control how sharp you want the shadows. Unfortunately penumbra size seems to shrink along with shadow texel size, so the shadows start to resemble idtech games at low values. The later numbers control the resolution at distance. This *probably* impacts performance, but I havent really noticed it much (i've tried it on a gtx680 as well as a 460M).

If this isn't raising the resolution of your shadows, find these lines and set them to the following values.

MinShadowResolution=2048
MinPreShadowResolution=2048
MaxShadowResolution=2048
MaxWholeSceneDominantShadowResolution=4096
ShadowFadeResolution=2048
PreShadowFadeResolution=512



Bonus: This is already well known, but worth repeating.

MaxProcBuildingLODColorTextureSize=2048
MaxProcBuildingLODLightingTextureSize=2048

Increases your texture resolution in some places.

This should all give you a nice clean image, even at distances. Adjust to find what works best for you.

a4df1685393f3cf89bd7a06c93487cd02c0983c5.jpg
Click to expand...

Fantastic work, can't wait to try.
 
WHOAguitarninja said:
So here is my results from tweaking shadows.

Find the line that says "ShadowCascades=3"

Change the value to 10

Now, underneath it sets the resolution of each sequentially lower resolution shadow map...we're going to use this to increase shadow resolution.

There should be 4 lines that say "ShadowSplit=x" where x is a different number. Make that 11 lines of that piece of text (yes, eleven, not ten).

It defaults to saying this
"
ShadowSplit=0.0
ShadowSplit=0.16
ShadowSplit=0.48
ShadowSplit=1.0
"

replace that chunk with this.
"
ShadowSplit=0.0
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.1
ShadowSplit=0.18
ShadowSplit=0.29
ShadowSplit=0.45
ShadowSplit=0.60
ShadowSplit=0.85
ShadowSplit=1.0

"

Note: The lower values control how sharp you want the shadows. Unfortunately penumbra size seems to shrink along with shadow texel size, so the shadows start to resemble idtech games at low values. The later numbers control the resolution at distance. This *probably* impacts performance, but I havent really noticed it much (i've tried it on a gtx680 as well as a 460M).

If this isn't raising the resolution of your shadows, find these lines and set them to the following values.

MinShadowResolution=2048
MinPreShadowResolution=2048
MaxShadowResolution=2048
MaxWholeSceneDominantShadowResolution=4096
ShadowFadeResolution=2048
PreShadowFadeResolution=512



Bonus: This is already well known, but worth repeating.

MaxProcBuildingLODColorTextureSize=2048
MaxProcBuildingLODLightingTextureSize=2048

Increases your texture resolution in some places.

This should all give you a nice clean image, even at distances. Adjust to find what works best for you.

http://i.picpar.com/a4df1685393f3cf89bd7a06c93487cd02c0983c5.jpg[img][/QUOTE]

I did this yesterday and thankfully, it didn't appear to impact performance in any significant way on my machine. Thanks for the tip!
Click to expand...
 
sk3tch said:
I did some extensive testing on dedicated PhysX GPUs with Borderlands 2. The results were surprising!

Test rig details:
i5 2500k @ 4.7 GHz (1.37v) / EVGA GTX 680 (1250 MHz boost, +300 Memory, 132% Power) / 16GB Corsair Vengeance LP DDR3 1600 MHz / 750GB Seagate Momentus XT SSHD / Lepa G900 Power Supply / CM 690 II Advanced Case
Windows 7 Ultimate with SP1 and latest patches (10/01/12) – x64
NVIDIA GeForce WHQL drivers 306.23
FRAPS 3.5.9

Game details:
Borderlands 2 / Steam / Updated on 09/30/12
All graphics details maxed (PhysX: High) – 1080p (1920×1080)

Testing Methodology:
Configurations:
GTX 680
GTX 680 + GTX 580 SC (dedicated PhysX)
GTX 680 + GT 640 (dedicated PhysX)

Bottom line is that the GT 640 gave around 20% FPS improvement! Very comparable to the GTX 580 SC. At around $100 and not requiring external power (along with GK107 efficiency) - the GT 640 is a great bang/buck dedicated PhysX card even for a GTX 680 that boosts to 1250 Mhz - there's no bottleneck!

More details here:
http://1pcent.com/?p=135
Click to expand...

What area did you run this test in? I have a single 680/2600k@4.6 and would love to have 70fps minimum. I hit 40's regularly now at about 20 hours in.
 
RoadHazard said:
Really? That makes me think I'm really limited by my dual core CPU (i5-2410M), since my GPU (GT 555M) is supposed to be a bit more powerful than yours and yet I'm certainly not getting a rock solid 60 fps with high settings at 720p. I do get that in the indoors environments most of the time, but in the open outdoors environments I'm typically at 40-50 fps, with some spikes up to 60 fps and some drops down to 30-35 fps when there's a lot going on.
Click to expand...

Oh forgot to mention that i had ambiant occlusion off, which added a good 12 fps to the game. Otherwise yes i'm rather in the 40's with it on.

Oh and the 445m is superior to 555m in some games (dixit notebookcheck). Borderlands 2 could be one of those. Nvidia and their crazy laptop GPU classes....

Anyway playable in good conditions, that's what matters :)
 
Damian. said:
What area did you run this test in? I have a single 680/2600k@4.6 and would love to have 70fps minimum. I hit 40's regularly now at about 20 hours in.
Click to expand...

The info is in the link. It's the camp outside of the Sanctuary. It's only a 30 second segment.

I also ran benchmarks with longer play sessions - in those I hit low framerates from time to time - no matter the configuration.
 
DeMeester said:
Thanks for these settings. The shadows do look a bit better now with these settings. I still had to put ShadowCast_Near=6000.000000 to not get the shadows popping in, but now I have less of the jigsaw effect at the edges of shadows.
Click to expand...

You should be able to eliminate it by adjusting the values in the 11 shadow split settings. Keep the first at 0, and for the others, the LOWER the number the sharper the shadow. Each stage controls a drop off of resolution, so keeping more of them at the same value as the first should help to correct shadow popping as well.
 
Black_Stride said:
Downsampling is a lazy/poor mans Super Sampling.

The image is rendered at 2997 x 1873 or however high you can to go. And then the image gets downsampled errrr.....squeezed into your 1920 x 1200 frame effectively Anti-Aliasing it.

Downsampling plus in-game AA will yield very clean results....but Super Sampling is still the way to go IMO.
If a game has the flags and/or the ability to do it, there is no reason not to Super Sample.....but in the event there is absolutely no way to get SSAA then Downsampling is the next best thing.


P.S For someone with a Waterblocked GTX690 im somewhat saddened you dont already know about SuperSampling.....fuck Downsampling when you can SuperSampling x8 nearly everything out there.
Click to expand...

I know about Supersampling and use it whenever I can, I just was not sure what downsampling does. I appreciate the explanation however, I know there are some games that don't allow supersampling to be used, so I now that I understand downsampling a bit more I will try that. Thanks!
 
WHOAguitarninja said:
So here is my results from tweaking shadows.

Find the line that says "ShadowCascades=3"

Change the value to 10

Now, underneath it sets the resolution of each sequentially lower resolution shadow map...we're going to use this to increase shadow resolution.

There should be 4 lines that say "ShadowSplit=x" where x is a different number. Make that 11 lines of that piece of text (yes, eleven, not ten).

It defaults to saying this
"
ShadowSplit=0.0
ShadowSplit=0.16
ShadowSplit=0.48
ShadowSplit=1.0
"

replace that chunk with this.
"
ShadowSplit=0.0
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.1
ShadowSplit=0.18
ShadowSplit=0.29
ShadowSplit=0.45
ShadowSplit=0.60
ShadowSplit=0.85
ShadowSplit=1.0

"

Note: The lower values control how sharp you want the shadows. Unfortunately penumbra size seems to shrink along with shadow texel size, so the shadows start to resemble idtech games at low values. The later numbers control the resolution at distance. This *probably* impacts performance, but I havent really noticed it much (i've tried it on a gtx680 as well as a 460M).

If this isn't raising the resolution of your shadows, find these lines and set them to the following values.

MinShadowResolution=2048
MinPreShadowResolution=2048
MaxShadowResolution=2048
MaxWholeSceneDominantShadowResolution=4096
ShadowFadeResolution=2048
PreShadowFadeResolution=512



Bonus: This is already well known, but worth repeating.

MaxProcBuildingLODColorTextureSize=2048
MaxProcBuildingLODLightingTextureSize=2048

Increases your texture resolution in some places.

This should all give you a nice clean image, even at distances. Adjust to find what works best for you.

a4df1685393f3cf89bd7a06c93487cd02c0983c5.jpg
Click to expand...
The settings are borked. Shadows don't draw past a small ring around you.
 
Micerider said:
Oh forgot to mention that i had ambiant occlusion off, which added a good 12 fps to the game. Otherwise yes i'm rather in the 40's with it on.

Oh and the 445m is superior to 555m in some games (dixit notebookcheck). Borderlands 2 could be one of those. Nvidia and their crazy laptop GPU classes....

Anyway playable in good conditions, that's what matters :)
Click to expand...

Well, even at all low settings I don't get a constant 60 fps, so again, pretty sure my CPU is limiting me here. Low vs high settings (excluding PhysX and ambient occlusion) barely makes any difference at all to my framerates.
 
WHOAguitarninja said:
Check if you set shadowcascades to 10. Also check if it is fixed by adjusting the other settings mentioned in there with regards to shadow resolutions. Also make SURE that the last shadowsplit is 1.0.
Click to expand...

I check that and messed around with a few other settings and got it right. Thanks for the tips.
 
RoadHazard said:
Well, even at all low settings I don't get a constant 60 fps, so again, pretty sure my CPU is limiting me here. Low vs high settings (excluding PhysX and ambient occlusion) barely makes any difference at all to my framerates.
Click to expand...

Seeing that Gearbox made a truely great effort at PC optimization, I wouldn't be surprised that it would make good use of 4 cores indeed.

Note that, aside from Physx, resolution, distance of view (better on high than very high) and ambiant occlusion, the rest has a pretty limited impact on my framerate.
 
A little nugget for those on more moderate hardware, perhaps. I turned down the resolution (!) in BL2 to make it run smoother. The FXAA and outlines of the game make it hard to notice the jaggies, thankfully. Otherwise I'd never lower the resolution, ever. I've gone from 1920 x 1200 to 1680 x 1050. Makes a big difference on my HD6850 and Intel Pentium G630.

EDIT: seems BL2 secretly sets the resolution to max every time it launches. That's what makes it hardly noticeable, I guess. Hehe. Disregard!
 
WHOAguitarninja said:
You should be able to eliminate it by adjusting the values in the 11 shadow split settings. Keep the first at 0, and for the others, the LOWER the number the sharper the shadow. Each stage controls a drop off of resolution, so keeping more of them at the same value as the first should help to correct shadow popping as well.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I'll try that tomorrow when I've got some free time. And the new physx drivers (9.12.0807) as well.
 
I'm at work so I can't see try it for myself, but can anyone post screenshots of ambient occlusion on and off? I honestly couldn't tell a difference last time I checked. I've left it off since launch.
 
earvcunanan said:
I'm at work so I can't see try it for myself, but can anyone post screenshots of ambient occlusion on and off? I honestly couldn't tell a difference last time I checked. I've left it off since launch.
Click to expand...

The game itself makes it actually quite easy to compare for yourself! :) I didn't noticed it either at first but pause the game at any point in Sanctuary and while you toggle Ambient Occlusion off and on focus you eyes on the actual game-scenery you can see through the transparent menu. Though if you still want I could make two quick screenshots although the in-game way made it more obvious to me than screenshots ever could :/

EDIT: Here are the screenshots

Ambient Occlusion off:
g2zg1.jpg


Ambient Occlusion On:
4SpKJ.jpg
Click to expand...

You just have to look for the added shadows or open them both in separate tabs and switch around :)
 
SGSSAA makes everything look worse on my end. Downsampling together with various ini tweaks gives me AMAZING results.
 
Skyfireblaze said:
The game itself makes it actually quite easy to compare for yourself! :) I didn't noticed it either at first but pause the game at any point in Sanctuary and while you toggle Ambient Occlusion off and on focus you eyes on the actual game-scenery you can see through the transparent menu. Though if you still want I could make two quick screenshots although the in-game way made it more obvious to me than screenshots ever could :/

EDIT: Here are the screenshots



You just have to look for the added shadows or open them both in separate tabs and switch around :)
Click to expand...

Wow didn't know Ambient Occlusion added NPC:s [/sarcasm]
But yeah easiest way is to use different tabs and switch between them, but then if you have to do that to notice the difference, do you really need that =P
Well if your card can take it the answer is always "oh hells yeah!"
 
Runs fine on my rig except PhysX on high. As soon as some debris lies on the ground the framerate goes down. But I kind of expected that! :-/
 
Micerider said:
This game has a fantastic optimization.

Runs flawlessly on my laptop, with everything on High (except Physx on low) in 1366*768

Running on a I7 Q740m 4 GB of RAM and a Geforce 445m. Quite humble and yet it's constantly around 60 FPS.

I was even shocked that this remained playable (around 30 FPS) in 1080p or in the same settings as above + Physx on medium (except for the very heavy physics scenarios).
Click to expand...
It's running great for me too on my Dell XPS 17 (i7 2630GM, 6GB RAM, GeForce GT 555M). Running it at 1080p on high with Physx on medium. The framerate was a bit dodgy, but I turned ambient occlusion off and it shot up.
 
DeMeester said:
Thanks. I'll try that tomorrow when I've got some free time. And the new physx drivers (9.12.0807) as well.
Click to expand...

The new Physx drivers didn't make a lot of difference. I also tried changing the shadowsplit settings with minor differences in values like this:

ShadowSplit=0.0
ShadowSplit=0.01
ShadowSplit=0.02
ShadowSplit=0.03
ShadowSplit=0.04
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.06
ShadowSplit=0.07
ShadowSplit=0.08
ShadowSplit=0.09
ShadowSplit=1.0

The I put the shadowcast settings back to default:

ShadowCast_Near=3000.000000
ShadowCast_Far=6000.000000

But I'm still getting this popin (look to the left of the gun. Just next to the waving flags):

No shadow:

Ckfg5.jpg


With shadow:

7g6bX.jpg


If I set Shadowcast_near=6000.000000 then everything is good. Strange.
 
Anyone got some good nvidia inspector settings for BL2?

Also it seems like adjusting settings isn't affecting performance, even after a restart.
 
I get perfect performance with dips to the 40's with heavy action on screen no matter what I put my settings at for this game with a 680. Tempted to put PhysX to medium using my 2600k@4.6 and see how it fares until this elusive patch is released.
 
vocab said:
Getting fps dips into the 40's with my 670ftw. Sigh. Every game on UE3 with Physx performs this way. :(
Click to expand...

I get terrible dips too. Especially when phaselocking or using any sort of explosive weapon

There's definitely something wrong when the game runs well over 120fps then as soon as one of the physx effects kicks in it gets quartered on the spot
 
Whenver I see drops I see my CPU utilization cut in half or more. GPU usage stays pretty steady and rises a bit when a lot is happening on the screen. During my dips to 30-40 I see GPU at 75-85% and CPU only at 15-20%. Definitely a serious problem.
 
DeMeester said:
The new Physx drivers didn't make a lot of difference. I also tried changing the shadowsplit settings with minor differences in values like this:

ShadowSplit=0.0
ShadowSplit=0.01
ShadowSplit=0.02
ShadowSplit=0.03
ShadowSplit=0.04
ShadowSplit=0.05
ShadowSplit=0.06
ShadowSplit=0.07
ShadowSplit=0.08
ShadowSplit=0.09
ShadowSplit=1.0

The I put the shadowcast settings back to default:

ShadowCast_Near=3000.000000
ShadowCast_Far=6000.000000

But I'm still getting this popin (look to the left of the gun. Just next to the waving flags):

No shadow:

Ckfg5.jpg


With shadow:

7g6bX.jpg


If I set Shadowcast_near=6000.000000 then everything is good. Strange.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you're right. I thought you were referring to the sudden change in shadow aliasing, but there is a totally different shadow boundary for 'near' and 'far' objects, which is what the setting you're talking about controls. I didn't notice it before since I was mostly just running around Sanctuary when testing things.
 
sk3tch said:
Did another PhysX test - this time with a GTX 690 as base GPU and a GT 640 as a dedicated PhysX GPU - long story short, 9% performance gain with the GT 640 in as a dedicated PhysX GPU. No bottleneck! More info: http://1pcent.com/?p=151.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't it be better to dedicate one of the GTX 690 GPUs to PhysX? The game seems like it's severely CPU limited so 1 680 should be more than enough.
 
To be honest my framerate isn't all that great with this game:

Q6600 2.4GHz Quad Core
3GB RAM
HD6850 1GB
1440 x 900 monitor

Pretty sure I have PhysX turned off.
 
I just remembered i have an old gts 250 lying around. Would it be useful using that as a dedicated Physx card when my new pc arrives ?
 
Update v1.1.0
(Released 10/9/2012)
- Fixed some cases where the Logitech G19 screen would show incorrect information for the friends list.
- Fixed players losing ammo when reloading a savegame with max ammo and a stockpile relic equipped.
- Fixed the vendor UI sometimes showing a count of 1 less item in the player's backpack than is actually there.
- Fixed the favorite/trash icons in the inventory sometimes disappearing when scrolling the inventory list.
- Fixed players getting stuck in a white box when two people try to travel at once and one is in a vehicle.
- Fixed co-op players sometimes spawning at different places after a level transition.
- Fixed the "has abandoned your struggle!" message sometimes appearing with no player name.
- Fixed mini-map fog-of-war sometimes not uncovering correctly when first loading a saved game as a client.
- Fixed a rare crash when trying to select a menu item with the keyboard after playing the game with a gamepad.
- Added "(undiscovered)" entries to the challenge log for challenges that the player has not yet found.
- Fixed a rare crash in the launcher related to using a gamepad.
- Fixed client players sometimes seeing fired bullets fly off in random directions.
- Fixed a blocker in the "Do No Harm" quest. This fix prevents the bug and corrects the issue for any character hit by this bug.
- Fixed a case where players were sometimes being sent back to the main menu after their online status changed when playing a LAN game.
- Fixed a case where shields that reduce the player's health were sometimes not showing how much health they reduce.
- The inventory screen will no longer jump to the top of the list when using a customization item.
- Fixed a case where clients and servers would sometimes see different fast-travel stations available to them.
- Fixed a bug that could cause challenges to re-complete all 5 tiers over and over again.
- Fixed players who have lost access to their 3rd or 4th weapon slot erroneously.
- Allowed players to trade with each other when at maximum backpack capacity if they're trading the same number of items with each other.
Click to expand...

No mention of performance improvements. Can anyone confirm if this patch helps performance for the GTX 6xx series?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Borderlands 2 and The Ascent giveaways
10
290
EverydayBeast replied
[IGN] Crimson Desert Performance Preview (Tested on PC)
News 
11
293
saintjules replied
Final Fantasy XVI PC Performance Thread
2 3
138
16K
Rush2112 replied
Borderlands 4 Previews
2
55
96
Soodanim replied
Digital Foundry: Oblivion Remastered PC: Impressive Remastering, Dire Performance Problems
2 3 4 5
212
2K
Bojji replied
Top Bottom