Borderlands 2 with PhysX runs better on HD 7970 than on Gtx 680!

  • 76 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by kalipekona (2299 posts) -

A lot of people don't seem to know that PhysX can be run on your processor even if you own an AMD card. In the case of Borderlands 2 the AMD cards run extremely well with and without PhysX enabled.

PhysX.png

"With PhysX set to high, the GTX 680 became 19% slower at 1920x1200, averaging just 60fps instead of 74fps. Surprisingly, the HD 7970 did slightly better dropping 15% from 72fps to 61fps, and as far as we could tell, the PhysX effects looked identical on both brand of cards."

http://www.techspot.com/review/577-borderlands-2-performance/page5.html

#2 Posted by kalipekona (2299 posts) -

I did want to add, though, that results will vary dramatically depending on which CPU you have. Nvidia cards are generally going to perform much better with PhysX enabled. It's just neat that it can run on AMD cards if you have a decent CPU.

#3 Posted by ShadowDeathX (10623 posts) -
and this is what I was saying on the other thread. I dialed up PhysX on high using the CPU and I barely got any performance difference. I was going to use one of my Nvidia GPUs and run Hybrid PhysX but after I saw what happened, I didn't bother.
#4 Posted by C_Rule (9741 posts) -

I can't imagine nVidia being all too happy about that.

However, it's good that just because Borderlands 2 was an 'nVidia, the way it's meant to be played' title the devs did not ignore AMD optimization.

EDIT: Ah, they used a 3960X... That explains it a bit. Still great news for AMD owners, but this should't be blown out of proportion.

#5 Posted by way2funny (4570 posts) -

I can't imagine nVidia being all too happy about that.

However, it's good that just because Borderlands 2 was an 'nVidia, the way it's meant to be played' title the devs did not ignore AMD optimization.

EDIT: Ah, they used a 3960X... That explains it a bit. Still great news for AMD owners, but this should't be blown out of proportion.

C_Rule

Yeah I have a 3930k and can play borderlands 2 with physx on high with no issue, I was expecting to need a dedicated card for it but it ran just fine. Kinda cool though

#6 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6042 posts) -

well physx is bull shet anyways. I was expecting this to happen much sooner. But good to know my computer can handle "physx" no problem, even w/o an nvidia card. Also since cpu's are only getting more powerful, nvidia will need to bring out some new propriety BS maybe call it physx "X" and call it a day. Or perhaps nvidia will force devs not to code physx on cpu's. Either way, 2013 is going to be an interesting year.

#7 Posted by Postmortem123 (7674 posts) -

Nah, I've tested this out; they must have tested it in an area with little physx. At some points my fps was dropping to around 15 with physx set to Medium, I don't even wanna try it on High...

#8 Posted by Ben-Buja (2927 posts) -

Runs very well on my 680 GTX with physx on high and maxed out graphics settings so far. Almost constant 60 fps even during heavy firefights with lots of particle effects.

#9 Posted by C_Rule (9741 posts) -

Nah, I've tested this out; they must have tested it in an area with little physx. At some points my fps was dropping to around 15 with physx set to Medium, I don't even wanna try it on High...

Postmortem123
Specs?
#10 Posted by Postmortem123 (7674 posts) -

[QUOTE="Postmortem123"]

Nah, I've tested this out; they must have tested it in an area with little physx. At some points my fps was dropping to around 15 with physx set to Medium, I don't even wanna try it on High...

C_Rule

Specs?

7970@ 1200Mhz 2500k @ 4Ghz.

The CPU is holding me back a bit I guess.

#11 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

Let's not get too excited about this. They used a 3960x for a CPU in this test. 2 extra Sandy Bridge-E cores. These are not the results that 98% of us would get.

#12 Posted by C_Rule (9741 posts) -

[QUOTE="C_Rule"][QUOTE="Postmortem123"]

Nah, I've tested this out; they must have tested it in an area with little physx. At some points my fps was dropping to around 15 with physx set to Medium, I don't even wanna try it on High...

Postmortem123

Specs?

7970@ 1200Mhz 2500k @ 4Ghz.

The CPU is holding me back a bit I guess.

Oh damn. Well if PhysX kills a 4GHz 2500K and you need a couple of spare Sandy cores to run it, this article seems a bit irrelevant.
#13 Posted by clyde46 (46046 posts) -
I have graphics on my 580 and the PhysX done by my 460.
#14 Posted by wis3boi (31306 posts) -

their cpu is beyond what most poeple will ever have, of course it runs fine. The average person isn't going to be seeing such great performance if they're using an AMD card

#15 Posted by BPoole96 (22797 posts) -
I have a 6950 crossfire setup with a 2500k at 4.3Ghz and can't even run it on medium. I just leave it on low and stay locked at 60fps most of the time. The PhysX effects do look really cool though.
#16 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6042 posts) -

I have a 6950 crossfire setup with a 2500k at 4.3Ghz and can't even run it on medium. I just leave it on low and stay locked at 60fps most of the time. The PhysX effects do look really cool though.BPoole96

doesn't matter if you have crossfire or quad fire, physx is only run on the cpu if you have radeon graphics. Hopefully, my core i7 is strong enough to run physx at high or medium like the hex core sandy bridge.

#17 Posted by WWIAB (4352 posts) -

well physx is bull shet anyways. I was expecting this to happen much sooner. But good to know my computer can handle "physx" no problem, even w/o an nvidia card. Also since cpu's are only getting more powerful, nvidia will need to bring out some new propriety BS maybe call it physx "X" and call it a day. Or perhaps nvidia will force devs not to code physx on cpu's. Either way, 2013 is going to be an interesting year.

blaznwiipspman1
PhysX on Borderlands 2 is extremely impressive, some of the effects had me drooling

Nah, I've tested this out; they must have tested it in an area with little physx. At some points my fps was dropping to around 15 with physx set to Medium, I don't even wanna try it on High...

Postmortem123
I put mine on high with my setup, and in certain areas I was getting sub 20-FPS, but even on MId, it's real nice
#18 Posted by achilles614 (4851 posts) -

[QUOTE="BPoole96"]I have a 6950 crossfire setup with a 2500k at 4.3Ghz and can't even run it on medium. I just leave it on low and stay locked at 60fps most of the time. The PhysX effects do look really cool though.blaznwiipspman1

doesn't matter if you have crossfire or quad fire, physx is only run on the cpu if you have radeon graphics. Hopefully, my core i7 is strong enough to run physx at high or medium like the hex core sandy bridge.

Same, hope my i7 can handle this.
#19 Posted by GummiRaccoon (13605 posts) -

Sounds like we need moar coars after all

#20 Posted by C_Rule (9741 posts) -

Sounds like we need moar coars after all

GummiRaccoon
Moar CUDA cores.
#21 Posted by jonleeprice (1487 posts) -

I like the way all these AMD fanboys are always saying how crap and sh|tty physx is..........now they can run it a little bit they are wetting their pants with excitment :lol:

#22 Posted by LordEC911 (9972 posts) -

I like the way all these AMD fanboys are always saying how crap and sh|tty physx is..........now they can run it a little bit they are wetting their pants with excitment :lol:jonleeprice


Yet there is still no point to it, currently. Notice what people in this thread said about it....

PhysX on Borderlands 2 is extremely impressive, some of the effects had me droolingWWIAB


The PhysX effects do look really cool though.BPoole96


Ohhh... I get water that sorta reacts realistically and the same with cloth banners...
Until they get to the point where it actually affects gameplay, like HL2 when it came out, then it is nothing more than a gimmick.

#23 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

[QUOTE="BPoole96"]I have a 6950 crossfire setup with a 2500k at 4.3Ghz and can't even run it on medium. I just leave it on low and stay locked at 60fps most of the time. The PhysX effects do look really cool though.blaznwiipspman1

doesn't matter if you have crossfire or quad fire, physx is only run on the cpu if you have radeon graphics. Hopefully, my core i7 is strong enough to run physx at high or medium like the hex core sandy bridge.

Your Hyperthreading isn't going to help you.

#24 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

I like the way all these AMD fanboys are always saying how crap and sh|tty physx is..........now they can run it a little bit they are wetting their pants with excitment :lol:

jonleeprice

I was just thinking that and laughing to myself. It's hilarious.

#25 Posted by Toxic-Seahorse (4126 posts) -

I like the way all these AMD fanboys are always saying how crap and sh|tty physx is..........now they can run it a little bit they are wetting their pants with excitment :lol:

jonleeprice
Did you even read any of the topic? The physX isn't done by an AMD GPU, but rather the CPU being used. AMD cards only run it better if you have a good CPU.
#26 Posted by 04dcarraher (19514 posts) -
[QUOTE="jonleeprice"]

I like the way all these AMD fanboys are always saying how crap and sh|tty physx is..........now they can run it a little bit they are wetting their pants with excitment :lol:

Toxic-Seahorse
Did you even read any of the topic? The physX isn't done by an AMD GPU, but rather the CPU being used. AMD cards only run it better if you have a good CPU.

Also note that even with physx on high the GTX 680 hold up against the 7970 that's not doing physx....
#27 Posted by BPoole96 (22797 posts) -

[QUOTE="jonleeprice"]

Yet there is still no point to it, currently. Notice what people in this thread said about it....

[QUOTE="WWIAB"]PhysX on Borderlands 2 is extremely impressive, some of the effects had me droolingLordEC911



The PhysX effects do look really cool though.BPoole96


Ohhh... I get water that sorta reacts realistically and the same with cloth banners...
Until they get to the point where it actually affects gameplay, like HL2 when it came out, then it is nothing more than a gimmick.

Yeah it's nothing more than extra eye candy atm. I kind of wish I could run it on high but its definitely not going to have me running out and buying an NVidia card because of it.
#28 Posted by achilles614 (4851 posts) -
" It appears that TechSpot has erroneously tested PhysX on AMD cards using the CPU, which defaults to low settings. There is no way to run PhysX directly on an AMD card, and there is no way to run high PhysX on a CPU without significantly compromised performance." So was this test done using the low (CPU) phsyx? or were they able to turn it to high.
#29 Posted by Ben-Buja (2927 posts) -

[QUOTE="jonleeprice"]

Yet there is still no point to it, currently. Notice what people in this thread said about it....

[QUOTE="WWIAB"]PhysX on Borderlands 2 is extremely impressive, some of the effects had me droolingLordEC911



The PhysX effects do look really cool though.BPoole96


Ohhh... I get water that sorta reacts realistically and the same with cloth banners...
Until they get to the point where it actually affects gameplay, like HL2 when it came out, then it is nothing more than a gimmick.

Yes they are a gimmick feature, just like many graphic effects. But they're a real cool gimmick imo.

There's something oddly satisfying about all these particles lying around after having an intense gunfight.

borderlands22012-09-2x4jnm.png

#31 Posted by ashtontheguru (163 posts) -

How does the Physx work with AMD cards? isn't the option normally greyed out for AMD owners in most games?

i don't own the game so im curious.

Just watched this videohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWFkDrKvBRU

I swear im really starting to regret getting the 7970 on release day and not waiting for the 680. Physx use to seem like such a gimick before, but those liquid physx look immense.

#32 Posted by Toxic-Seahorse (4126 posts) -

How does the Physx work with AMD cards? isn't the option normally greyed out for AMD owners in most games?

i don't own the game so im curious.

Just watched this videohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWFkDrKvBRU

I swear im really starting to regret getting the 7970 on release day and not waiting for the 680. Physx use to seem like such a gimick before, but those liquid physx look immense.

ashtontheguru
If you would have read the thread you would know that all the physX is done by the CPU if you have an AMD card.
#33 Posted by 04dcarraher (19514 posts) -
[QUOTE="ashtontheguru"]

How does the Physx work with AMD cards? isn't the option normally greyed out for AMD owners in most games?

i don't own the game so im curious.

Just watched this videohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWFkDrKvBRU

I swear im really starting to regret getting the 7970 on release day and not waiting for the 680. Physx use to seem like such a gimick before, but those liquid physx look immense.

Toxic-Seahorse
If you would have read the thread you would know that all the physX is done by the CPU if you have an AMD card.

Also to note that the experience in performance will be different too not using an six core intel cpu for everyone else
#34 Posted by ashtontheguru (163 posts) -
[QUOTE="ashtontheguru"]

How does the Physx work with AMD cards? isn't the option normally greyed out for AMD owners in most games?

i don't own the game so im curious.

Just watched this videohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWFkDrKvBRU

I swear im really starting to regret getting the 7970 on release day and not waiting for the 680. Physx use to seem like such a gimick before, but those liquid physx look immense.

Toxic-Seahorse
If you would have read the thread you would know that all the physX is done by the CPU if you have an AMD card.

if you read my question you would have realised, i'm asking if it is just enabled by the options or if it is some kind of mod, as most games ive played it doesn't give you the option for phyx if you have a AMD card.
#35 Posted by Postmortem123 (7674 posts) -

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"][QUOTE="ashtontheguru"]

How does the Physx work with AMD cards? isn't the option normally greyed out for AMD owners in most games?

i don't own the game so im curious.

Just watched this videohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWFkDrKvBRU

I swear im really starting to regret getting the 7970 on release day and not waiting for the 680. Physx use to seem like such a gimick before, but those liquid physx look immense.

ashtontheguru

If you would have read the thread you would know that all the physX is done by the CPU if you have an AMD card.

if you read my question you would have realised, i'm asking if it is just enabled by the options or if it is some kind of mod, as most games ive played it doesn't give you the option for phyx if you have a AMD card.

Yeah you can enable it from the menu.

#36 Posted by ronvalencia (15110 posts) -

I like the way all these AMD fanboys are always saying how crap and sh|tty physx is..........now they can run it a little bit they are wetting their pants with excitment :lol:

jonleeprice

With Intel Sandybridge with 6 cores. Any results from AMD Bulldozer with 8 cores?

#37 Posted by way2funny (4570 posts) -

[QUOTE="jonleeprice"]

I like the way all these AMD fanboys are always saying how crap and sh|tty physx is..........now they can run it a little bit they are wetting their pants with excitment :lol:

ronvalencia

With Intel Sandybridge with 6 cores. Any results from AMD Bulldozer with 8 cores?

The results are bad because its only 8 integer cores, and all the physics is really floating point math (and bulldozer has only 4 floating point units), which would be no better than an i5.

#38 Posted by ronvalencia (15110 posts) -

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"][QUOTE="jonleeprice"]

I like the way all these AMD fanboys are always saying how crap and sh|tty physx is..........now they can run it a little bit they are wetting their pants with excitment :lol:

way2funny

With Intel Sandybridge with 6 cores. Any results from AMD Bulldozer with 8 cores?

The results are bad because its only 8 integer cores, and all the physics is really floating point math (and bulldozer has only 4 floating point units), which would be no better than an i5.

Note that AMD Bulldozer 8 core has 8 FMA FP(can do both FMUL or FADD) units. To process FMA type workoads, normal X87/SSE/AVX has to run two instructions. Not a big problem for SandyBridge's instructions issue rate.

Bulldozer's 8 FMA units is wasted for split FADD and FMUL instructions i.e. acts like 4 core CPU with split FMUL and FADD setup.

RISC processors such as PowerPC supports FMA from the start.

#39 Posted by ronvalencia (15110 posts) -

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"][QUOTE="jonleeprice"]

I like the way all these AMD fanboys are always saying how crap and sh|tty physx is..........now they can run it a little bit they are wetting their pants with excitment :lol:

04dcarraher

Did you even read any of the topic? The physX isn't done by an AMD GPU, but rather the CPU being used. AMD cards only run it better if you have a good CPU.

Also note that even with physx on high the GTX 680 hold up against the 7970 that's not doing physx....

Note that they didn't use the standard MS Direct Compute for physics type processing.

Horizontal compute bias GPUs has near zero benefits for lightweight DirectX 9c rendering games.

#40 Posted by Toxic-Seahorse (4126 posts) -

Borderlands 2 runs flawlessly for me until I turn the physX up from low. I get around 30fps with it dipping under in action parts on High. So those that were wondering if Phenom II Six Core CPUs would run PhysX on High well, the answer is no. I still have yet to try it on medium.

EDIT: even on medium it's almost unplayable.

#41 Posted by darksusperia (6911 posts) -

How does the Physx work with AMD cards? isn't the option normally greyed out for AMD owners in most games?

i don't own the game so im curious.

Just watched this videohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWFkDrKvBRU

I swear im really starting to regret getting the 7970 on release day and not waiting for the 680. Physx use to seem like such a gimick before, but those liquid physx look immense.

ashtontheguru
This vid is a better comparison IMO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9k1idbbr2pw
#42 Posted by ferret-gamer (17310 posts) -
#43 Posted by kalipekona (2299 posts) -

I was reallly suprised how well physx in bl2 runs on CPU. I can run it on medium over 30fps with my mediocre athlon 640

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hzZKfWTgbs

ferret-gamer

Hey that's not bad at all. I don't have the game yet, but I wonder how it will run on my i5 2500k.

Obviously Physx is going to perform much, much better on an Nvidia card. But it's kind of cool that owners of AMD cards don't necessarily have to miss out on the seeing Physx effects if it interests them. It's a nice little bonus in some games, but I still think it isn't a huge deal. It's used in few games and some games have performance issues with Physx enabled.

#44 Posted by Toxic-Seahorse (4126 posts) -

I was reallly suprised how well physx in bl2 runs on CPU. I can run it on medium over 30fps with my mediocre athlon 640

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hzZKfWTgbs

ferret-gamer
What settings are you running the game on? I have it maxed out at well over 60FPS and when I turn PhysX to medium it drops to below 30fps.
#45 Posted by BPoole96 (22797 posts) -

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]

I was reallly suprised how well physx in bl2 runs on CPU. I can run it on medium over 30fps with my mediocre athlon 640

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hzZKfWTgbs

kalipekona

Hey that's not bad at all. I don't have the game yet, but I wonder how it will run on my i5 2500k.

Obviously Physx is going to perform much, much better on an Nvidia card. But it's kind of cool that owners of AMD cards don't necessarily have to miss out on the seeing Physx effects if it interests them. It's a nice little bonus in some games, but I still think it isn't a huge deal. It's used in few games and some games have performance issues with Physx enabled.

I have my 2500k at 4.3Ghz and it still will dip into the 30s on medium. I dont consider it playable since the frame rate will constantly be fluctuating during a fight. It will go from 60 to 35 back to 60 in a matter of seconds. It really affects my aiming so I just leave it on low

#46 Posted by PernicioEnigma (5341 posts) -
On one hand you have the GTX680 rendering the graphics AND performing the physX calculations, on the other you have the HD 7970 rendering the graphics while a ridiculously expensive CPU does the physX processing, yet it only just comes out on top.
#47 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6042 posts) -

On one hand you have the GTX680 rendering the graphics AND performing the physX calculations, on the other you have the HD 7970 rendering the graphics while a ridiculously expensive CPU does the physX processing, yet it only just comes out on top.PernicioEnigma

its a good thing that physx can be run on any hardware...barely any games use it and the effects are usually minimal, but now maybe more developers will be more interested in using it, so this is a good thing overall. I want to see how borderlands 2 physics run on a core i7 3770k,should be interesting.

#48 Posted by 04dcarraher (19514 posts) -

[QUOTE="PernicioEnigma"]On one hand you have the GTX680 rendering the graphics AND performing the physX calculations, on the other you have the HD 7970 rendering the graphics while a ridiculously expensive CPU does the physX processing, yet it only just comes out on top.blaznwiipspman1

its a good thing that physx can be run on any hardware...barely any games use it and the effects are usually minimal, but now maybe more developers will be more interested in using it, so this is a good thing overall. I want to see how borderlands 2 physics run on a core i7 3770k,should be interesting.

It will be nearly same as an i5. HT does squat as long as the all the cores and 1st threadon each is being mostly used. the 2nd threads are just leftover cpu cycles not being used from the 1st thread. You will need a cpu with more then 4 real cores to see good physx performance.

#49 Posted by Toxic-Seahorse (4126 posts) -
I can actually run PysX on Medium most of the time. In some really intense fights it will destroy my FPS but for the most part it stays at 60 or slightly below. I get crazy frame rates with it on though. Like anything ranging from 110 to 30 in the most intense fights.
#50 Posted by kalipekona (2299 posts) -

I can actually run PysX on Medium most of the time. In some really intense fights it will destroy my FPS but for the most part it stays at 60 or slightly below. I get crazy frame rates with it on though. Like anything ranging from 110 to 30 in the most intense fights. Toxic-Seahorse

In that case I will probably just cap the framerate at a solid 30fps if I choose to play with PhysX enabled.