http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/borderlands-the-pre-sequel-test-gpu.html
Surprised to see the 780Ti beating out the 980 and even the age old Titan beating out the 290X. Playable for even older GPUs, so good work and a good fun game
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
GameGPU test Borderlands 2: The Pre-sequel
- Thread starter Gregster
- Start date
http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/borderlands-the-pre-sequel-test-gpu.html
Surprised to see the 780Ti beating out the 980 and even the age old Titan beating out the 290X. Playable for even older GPUs, so good work and a good fun game
A good example of a great modern title that doesn't need quad cards and silly vram at any resolution.
Even with physx on high/ultra I sit at gsync limit of 144fps.
Just need nvidia to pull their finger out and fix dsr with sli and the swift and I should be able to notch this up to 5k
Even with physx on high/ultra I sit at gsync limit of 144fps.
Just need nvidia to pull their finger out and fix dsr with sli and the swift and I should be able to notch this up to 5k
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 1,338
- Location
- South Shields
Nice it is a great game as well but saying that i like the full borderland series
I's obvious why this game plays so well, it's simple.
As for VRAM usage, seems off to me. I see above 800MB most of the time, frequently over 900MB and that's at 1920x1080
They do need to fix PhysX though, be it PhysX itself or how SLi handles it. On ultra on my GTX690 and dual 780s of my friend's, when in a heavy PhysX environment the GPU usage drops to 30-40% and the FPS plummet. Which is odd, the same happened on BL2.
With that said, looking at the Minimum FPS figures i don't believe that this benchmark/review gives a good enough example of the game's performance.
Edit: I noticed they had PhysX at Low settings for this. So ignore that last comment.
As for VRAM usage, seems off to me. I see above 800MB most of the time, frequently over 900MB and that's at 1920x1080
They do need to fix PhysX though, be it PhysX itself or how SLi handles it. On ultra on my GTX690 and dual 780s of my friend's, when in a heavy PhysX environment the GPU usage drops to 30-40% and the FPS plummet. Which is odd, the same happened on BL2.
With that said, looking at the Minimum FPS figures i don't believe that this benchmark/review gives a good enough example of the game's performance.
Edit: I noticed they had PhysX at Low settings for this. So ignore that last comment.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,754
- Location
- Planet Earth
I think it will run fine on most setups TBH,especially with the odd setting turned down.
Definitely getting it though.
Definitely getting it though.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,754
- Location
- Planet Earth
I can play it on my Dell Latitude E6540 with AMD 8790M
I ran BL2 fine on both an HD5850 1GB and my GTX660 fine. The humour in the game is fantastic IMHO.
Indeed! It is actually the funniest PC game i've played, the humour is spot on. Glad BL TPS had the same charm and humour, it's a shame that the Australian voice acting is awful and annoying and then there's Pickle.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,754
- Location
- Planet Earth
I know the previous game would allow CPU based PhysX although it would need a hefty CPU. Has it changed in anyway,ie,is the implementation any different or more efficient?? Not sure ATM,as there have been some big changes since the last BL2 was released regarding PhysX.
Barely. There's little point as it runs terribly on the CPU.
No changes, it uses the same physX version as BL2.
Ahhh okies but at least Intel and AMD get to see these great effects. Better than nothing I guess.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 30,113
It's literally a slideshow with physX on without an Nvidia card. Same at Arkham Asylum.
If they bothered to make a driver for them a modern CPU would have no problem doing those calculations. But that's Nvidia for you I guess.
If they bothered to make a driver for them a modern CPU would have no problem doing those calculations. But that's Nvidia for you I guess.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 15 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 3,417
A good example of a great modern title that doesn't need quad cards and silly vram at any resolution.
Even with physx on high/ultra I sit at gsync limit of 144fps.
Just need nvidia to pull their finger out and fix dsr with sli and the swift and I should be able to notch this up to 5k
It's the connection and your monitor.
DSR works fine for 90% of people with SLI, the problem is mainly related to people using G-Sync monitors or DP video connections.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,523
Should be within a single digit of the 290X
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 20,679
- Location
- The KOP
BL2 physX worked well for me. Think i had mine on Medium setting and completed the game on that setting.
Think I read about other was using Medium on this but most trick the games config to enable PhysX again.
Here video with not the best AMD hardware 260x and 8350 and performance isn't that bad. tried finding an i7 and couldn't
This guys here on the other hand 970 is getting shocking performance?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0k8-QElU_8
Think I read about other was using Medium on this but most trick the games config to enable PhysX again.
Here video with not the best AMD hardware 260x and 8350 and performance isn't that bad. tried finding an i7 and couldn't
This guys here on the other hand 970 is getting shocking performance?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0k8-QElU_8