>bought freshly released high-end gpu
>want to enjoy maxed-out beauty at 1080p
>tfw framerate dips down to 27fps
I am currently at loss for words.. I mean, how the fuck is everybody okay with this? WHAT DO?
>>345456863
Turn that physx shit off and stop playing borderlands
>>bought freshly released high-end gpu
>>1080p
Kill yourself.
I have a gtx 960 and run this game at a stable 60fps on ultra settings, I know shit about computers but are you sure that it's not something else dragging you down?
>>345456970
thanks for a useful advice, champ
>>345456863
what happened in your life that drove you to play borderlands
SINGLE PLAYER
>Plays trash games
Master race, right?
Maybe CPU just sucks dick.
>>345456863
>>want to enjoy maxed-out beauty at 1080p
well there's your problem
youre playing borderlands 2
>>345457018
I know precisely the problem - Nvidia done fucked up with PhysX support after 600-series, but I can't help, but love shit blowing up in hundreds tiny particles in Borderlands.
Christ, this is a downer
>>345456863
Get a better CPU?
>>345457131
love for sparkly bits and the beautiful space vistas (in presequel, at least)
>>345457165
CPU is loaded less than 60%
>>345456863
Nice bait, I'll take it.
You probably bought a freshly released ATI HD 5670 from 2008 and your CPU is an i3 first gen. Go back to consoles.
>>345457598
uh, no >>345457379
>>345457201
idk man works for me
>>345457665
Prove that you aren't full of shit then.
>>345457759
specs?
>>345457845
how? i just posted my specs
>>345457857
>>345457958
well, good purchase then, my friend - stay away from 1000-series
>>345457941
Run a DXdiag and give me a screenshot.
>>345457941
Just ignore him, shills act like that.
You're probably just suffering Nvidia's piss port driver optimization for older games. I have a 660 and ran BL 2 on ultra back in the day with no problems. This is obviously a drivers issue.
>>345458040
hold on, what reasons are there not to upgrade from a 980ti to a 1070 if there are no additional costs involved? Isn't it just a matter of time for drivers to work through the small quirks?
>>345458040
I was just looking for a mid-range computer but I was pleasantly surprised by what this little machine can achieve because as I said I really don't know anything about computers, just googled every part and took the ones with 5 star reviews and threw them in the cart.
>>345456863
Holy fuck at first glance I thought this was a stillborn thread.
>>345458462
i've read that was the same issue with 980 ti, and that they also never solved that issue for them. If i knew about that shit beforehand, I swear I would stick to my trusty 560 until she'd keeled over.
>>345458512
yes, follow the statistics on reviews. One can shill, 10 reviewers can as well, but you can't just bribe everyone - so, if everybody is conventionally positive of the product (and the price is acceptable, and the brand is well known), then that would be a safe bet to purchase it.
>>345458512
Should have checked out the website Logical Increments before you build your own rig. Pre-tested components which should work well together.
Check the Nvidia control panel and make sure it doesnt have physx set to run on the CPU.
>>345459928
Trust me, if that would have been set to CPU - I wouldn't be able to capture that image (i.e. Physx settings are greyed out and set by default to low), unless I'd manually screw about with the config file to disable hardware advanced physics, or whatever the setting was called.
It was set to "Autodetect", then i set it to "GPU" w/o any different result.
I also tried out that solution to instal specific version of PhysX, found somewhere on nvidia forums, but it only has become slower (though apparently it worked for some 700-series cards)
