Printable View
Released Benchmark DX9 and DX11
http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/975/96894993.jpg
downloaded from nZone
http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_lo...downloads.html
Performance
http://techgage.com/article/lost_planet_2_dx9_vs_dx11/2
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,76...on-Spiel/Test/
lol, the big weird thing got like 20% fatter with DX11
i dont really like how they used tessellation, the textures should align with the extra polygons, not just seem all random.
http://tof.canardpc.com/view/22eb8ac...40a270c5e8.jpg
1680X1050 :eek:
^ ^ 1920.1080
http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/8797/resultss.png
I didn't even know this game was coming out on PC.. :confused:
Why is DX11 that much slower than DX9?! FFS, DX10 and DX11 were supposed to be faster given the lack of legacy crap!
I see there seems to be a bit of tessellation, but still, nothing that should drop the FPS that low...
Why wont developers start coding a decent engine...
Also, I love how HD4xxx and GTX2xx and below are stuck with DX9 since they didn't bother adding a DX10 rendering path...
Downloading now. I'll give it a spin and see how much tessellation they used. If they used a lot, that could explain why DX11 is significantly slower.
I hope SLi works with this benchmark!
can you use wireframe view with the benchmark? or some nvidia tool?
SLI is working, at least DX9 for sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Carfax
I didn't see an option for wireframe.. The graphics were shoddy anyway. Some of the textures actually became transparent throughout the benchmark.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
Hardware:
i7 980x @ 4ghz
2x 5870 no overclock
rest in my Sig
results :
DX9, 2560x1600 , MSAA4x , everything else on high :
Test B : 80.8 Fps average
DX9, 2560x1600 , no AA , everything else on high :
Test A : 99.3 Fps average
Test B : 91.3 Fps average
DX9, 1920x1200 , MSAA4x , everything else on high :
Test A : 125.8 Fps average
Test B : 103.9 Fps average
DX11 will not work it crashes "stopped working" after the sponsors logos !!!!
Not in DX11. I just ran the benchmark and I got 40.8 average at 2560x1600 MSx4AA, everything on high including DX11 @ 850/1700/4200..Quote:
Originally Posted by spajdr
I checked MSI afterburner afterwards and only one GPU was being fully utilized. There was a bit of activity of the second GPU, but nothing like what you'd expect with true SLi.
Not surprising though, considering this is a new benchmark.
The amount of tessellation used distorts the creature. Appears to me they over did it. Also, the video is a stuttery mess. The FPS doesn't seem to fit the game.
A clear showing of the Fermi's faster tessellation performance. Overall looks very impressive graphically and doesnt seem to perform to bad.
I don't know about the graphics being very impressive. The textures seemed very dull to me, and throughout the benchmark, I noticed that they would sometimes become transparent.Quote:
Originally Posted by brandinb
The retail edition will undoubtedly look much better though I'm sure.
I love these over the top capcom games :p
Is Bayonetta coming for the pc as well ?
edit: (oh wait, capcom didn't make bayonetta but still... do want :) )
Are there any screenies comparing diff dxpaths +/- levels of tesselation ?
Recent optimalizations with games are becoming pretty crap...
Metro looks mediocre and works worse than crysis ,GTAIV looks crap works crap and so on ;-)
all these numbers will change when ATI & nVidia release update driver for LP2
When i first palyed BFBC2 i got 30 FPS average with 19xx driver , but i got +60 FPS with 2xx driver .
true; people were complaining about crysis' "inefficiency" yet newer games perform even worse with worse looks...Quote:
Originally Posted by RaV[666]
I don't think it looks "very impressive graphically". I honestly think DX9 looks just as good as DX11 in this demo. The DX11 part just looks overdone. There is waaaaaaay to much tessellation used and I suspect the reason is to make sure NV cards looks better. In some part of the demo only the water looks different when running DX9 vs DX11, but still the frame rate is much lower on DX11 which it shouldn't be unless they went overboard with tessellation. From a developer point of view they must have been carried away with all the tessellation power of the Fermi architecture.Quote:
Originally Posted by brandinb
http://www.nvidia.co.uk/object/nvidi...driver-uk.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by Carfax
Give that ago.Quote:
This version of the NVIDIA profile update should be used with v258.96 WHQL display driver or later.
It adds support for the following PC game:
* Lost Planet 2
Me want too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loque
Anyway DarkSiders is coming to the PC in Sept.
I'm getting an average of 49 FPS on my GTX 480 at 1920x1080, everything on full settings including AA on DX11. Haven't tried DX9, I remember running the first Lost Planet and running on DX10 compared to DX9 will give you lower framerates, WTF
So it looks like it utilizes 6 cores, nice.
MT Framework was always great at multi-threading, so it's not surprising, that 2.0 is even better at that.
/core scaling looks impressive; i'll give it a try once i get my final overclock up and runnng :D
That worked great thanks :up: SLi definitely kicked in after that update.Quote:
Originally Posted by Final8ty
Here's a screenshot of the results of Test B:
http://a.imageshack.us/img529/4118/lp21.th.png
Basically 60 FPS, which is pretty good for 2560x1600 with 4xAA and DX11..
I'll run Test A later and see how much SLi improves my scores. Without SLi, it was 40.8 FPS, but Test B is seems like it's more strenuous.
core scaling looks scary, do you need 6 cores at 3ghz to play the game? it would be nice to know what settings are utilizing the cores.Quote:
Originally Posted by generics_user
980x + GTX 480 SLI all stock speeds
1920 x 1200, settings High, 4xMSAA, DX11 features High
Test A 102.7fps
Test B 69.8fps
Disable crossfire ........ it work then .... ( the cfg in userfiles have a line SLI=OFF/ON , forget about CFX for now, it's an Nvidia game).Quote:
Originally Posted by quattro_
DX9 - 1920x1080 MSAA8x - High settings: I7930@4ghz ( i have not check if CFX was working )
http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/5614/dx9.png
DX11 fps divided by 4 from DX9.0........ i quote the text on the installer: " Nvidia and Developper have work close together for implement new DX11 Features, its why we recommend Nvidia GPU's for play to Lost Planet2.." lol great job
Look's like a good port to me,ps3/360 has 6 threads w/custom gpu.Pc w/ 980-1090 and 5870/480 show similar performance(min30/max60) in dx9.:shocked:
thanks will try it later today..Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanek
Something looks wrong with those PC Games Hardware benches.
For the system in my sig, 'cept 5850@840/1150 with 10.7 Cats. 1680x1050 No AA.
I get the following rounded average results
Win7x64:
Test A:
Scene 1: 37
Scene 2: 34
Scene 3: 43
Test B: 34
And for Windows XPsp3 DX9:
Test A:
Scene 1: 83
Scene 2: 73
Scene 3: 74
Test B: 40
The one from PCGH has AA on.Quote:
Originally Posted by s1nykuL
Ahh, OK my bad. Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by blindbox
What worry me the most is the min. fps you see in them bench , i believe they have let run fraps between each of the 3 tests, at this point you go from 10-20fps to 900fps, when you have the loading screen.... ( i use 1920x1080-8xAA . they use 1680x1050 and 4xAA)
the min. i get on Test A and B in DX9 is 110-115fps lol .. ( look well my screenshot and see what happend to the line on the start of the second bench part )