Single 680 not so great with this, but SLI is awesome

#1Links_Big_KeyPosted 3/28/2012 9:02:17 PM(edited)
I love this game, but have found DX11 maxed unplayable, even with AA and physx off on my GTX 570 Classified. I played DX11 off for so long, I was ready to give it another go:

I was really disappointed yesterday whe I got my two 680s (planning to sell other) Her's my very early results.STOCK clocks on both 680s.

I just decided tonight to not Ebay my second 680 and keep it. pretty sweet too. with only one 680 I got really bad frames on Arkham with DX11 maxed only 2xMSAA,NO physx, everything else max.

But SLI I get rock-solid 60FPS with 8XMSAA (looks amazing) DX11 max, Physx normal everything else max

My test was Jokers Funhouse EXTREME Brawl challenge map. I was getting big dips into low 30s for fps at given settings,drops to 40s if I rotated the camera on wave ONE (which only has 5 goons) VS. rock solid 60 through all waves when adding 2nd card at noted increased settings.

Note that Physx HIGH doesnt play nice with DX11 max regardless of single or SLI. SLI with same settings same challenge map, I got massive dips into 30s when maxxing Physx. I will try sometime soon to find the sweet spot (if any) between DX11 and physx both max through various AA settings, but this will have to wait since its such APITA having to go back to desktop to change settings.

It is also fun to pile the 4XMSAA on top of high FXAA Ultra and not miss a beat 60FPS with 64 man Conquest on Karkland in SLI. A single 680 could do 60 frames majority of time but dropped to 55 on a few occations. Note this single 680 result was only Karkland Deeathmatch 24 man match.

I recommend getting a second after you find a first. Especially if DX11 Arkham is important to you.
---
CMStormtrooper//SLI GTX680//2500k@4.2//8GB RAM //256GB+128GB Crucial M4s//AW Optx AW2310 in mail
#2farigontiPosted 3/29/2012 8:26:08 AM
Cool
---
FC= 3265-4867-8550
#3Frag_ManiacPosted 3/29/2012 11:17:24 AM
There's FAR better examples to base an SLI or single GPU decision on regarding 680 performance, esp since you hinge it on enabling DX11 in this particular game. Everyone knows DX11 in this game isn't even worth enabling since Ivy's vines are about the only thing that look different and the DX11 performance is too inefficient in this title. There's nothing to justify it causing frame rates to dip so much.

Honestly there's WAY too many people basing their GPU decisions by insisting on max settings in certain games. There's just SO many games where certain features are either poorly coded or make the game actually look worse. The blur of Metro 2033 at Very High, the blur and ambient occlusion of Crysis on High or more Shader settings, etc, etc.

The smart ones are those whom buy no more than they need to for good image quality in games and don't pay any attention to the hype. Otherwise you can easily waste several hundred dollars.
#4Links_Big_Key(Topic Creator)Posted 3/29/2012 12:18:55 PM
"There's FAR better examples to base an SLI or single GPU decision on regarding 680 performance"

yeah, but this is the Arkham City board. With all the complaints about DX11 performance, I think this is a nice thing to let people know.
---
CMStormtrooper//SLI GTX680//2500k@4.2//8GB RAM //256GB+128GB Crucial M4s//AW Optx AW2310 in mail
#5Frag_ManiacPosted 3/29/2012 3:20:01 PM
"With all the complaints about DX11 performance, I think this is a nice thing to let people know."

I understand what you're trying to do, but let's look at the facts. We aren't just talking about poorly optimized DX 11 performance in this game, it also has VERY little actual DX11 visual improvements in it in the first place. That combined with the fact that most here have already mentioned they feel enabling DX 11 in this game isn't worth it, and that you're advocating spending $1000 on two GPUs to see what little there is of it with acceptable frame rates, and it makes it rather obvious that what you're letting them know becomes of little value. It really doesn't even take an expensive experiment to figure that out either.