Lost Planet 2 DX11 - noticeable tessellation

tviceman

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2008
6,734
514
126
www.facebook.com

thilanliyan

Lifer
Jun 21, 2005
11,951
2,180
126
Isn't LP based around the consoles? If it is then i don't see tessellation making a large impact...but i hope i'm wrong.
 

waffleironhead

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2005
6,959
461
136
Some of the scenes looked better especially the underwater one, but the creature in the second set (triceratops?) just looked fatter imo. The sharp edges on it were all rounded over and made it look like a fatty.
 

tviceman

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2008
6,734
514
126
www.facebook.com
Some of the scenes looked better especially the underwater one, but the creature in the second set (triceratops?) just looked fatter imo. The sharp edges on it were all rounded over and made it look like a fatty.

Agreed. I hope tessellation is used (in the future) to improve static and environment stuff (like how it's used in the Unigine benchmark) more so than moving objects. It looks better and is more noticeable.
 

Skurge

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2009
5,195
1
71
Ok, this is what Pisses me off. They go and use DX11 to add one feature and then neglect the rest. If your going to add Tessellation at least improve your bloody texture to go with it.
 

Skurge

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2009
5,195
1
71
Wow those frame rates get pummeled when using DX11. Interesting though, the gtx460 is as fast as the hd5870, and gtx470 and 480 smoke everything. I'd like to see those benchmarks without AA.

Yeah, true. AA is unusable in that game. I might stick my bros 5770 in here and see what I can get, I assume 30fps is playable for a console port.
 

evolucion8

Platinum Member
Jun 17, 2005
2,867
3
81
Wow those frame rates get pummeled when using DX11. Interesting though, the gtx460 is as fast as the hd5870, and gtx470 and 480 smoke everything. I'd like to see those benchmarks without AA.

And here its quite the opposite.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,7...kkarten-und-CPU-Benchmarks/Action-Spiel/Test/

http://techgage.com/article/lost_planet_2_dx9_vs_dx11/2

Interesting results, none of those cards is able to cut through Lost Planet 2 like hot knife through butter.
 

evolucion8

Platinum Member
Jun 17, 2005
2,867
3
81
But seems that Tessellation is far from usable with ATi's and nVidia's current generation, nVidia's stronger Tessellation performance doesn't help much at all since it can't make a difference in playability, the GTX 480 is the fastest and yet, its barely playable at such low min fps at the low resolution of 1680x1050. It seems that we will have to wait next generation of GPU's to have Tessellation in a usable state.
 
Last edited:

Keysplayr

Elite Member
Jan 16, 2003
21,209
50
91
But seems that Tessellation is far from usable with ATi's and nVidia's current generation, nVidia's stronger Tessellation performance doesn't help much at all since it can't make a difference in playability, the GTX 480 is the fastest and yet, its barely playable at such low min fps at the low resolution of 1680x1050. It seems that we will have to wait next generation of GPU's to have Tessellation in a usable state.

You mean far from unusable on both counts. As I stated in the other thread, these framerates are even better than Crysis, and Crysis was perfectly playable even with teen digit dips from time to time. No worries.

Looks like the emergence of mainstream tesselated games is on our doorstep folks. Faster than I thought it would be.
 

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
Scales well with 6 cores and the gtx 460 is beating up a 5850 in directx 11.
The Nvidia cards look strong with directx 11. Mabe its the better tessalation performance?

Fermi architecture is far more forward looking/superior in performance (but not efficiency) to Cypress for DX11 (God Rays in STALKER; CoP, DOF in Metro 2033, Tessellation in any game such as Dirt 2). I agree with Evo though that using DX11 with any current gen brings a huge performance penalty, probably not worth the image quality enhancements. However, did you see GTX285 and 4890 beat a GTX460 1GB in DX9? That's just embarrassing! Looking at 3870 to 8800GT, it seems LP2 DX9 just runs better on ATI hardware since in most other games 8800GT is much faster than the 3870.

I am confident ATI will improve DX11 performance with 6000 series. :awe: I still think the most important part of DX11 is tessellation and current hardware just isn't powerful enough for game developers to really turn up the game detail just yet.

Phenoms whip Core i5/7s in minimum framerates - nice!
 
Last edited:

evolucion8

Platinum Member
Jun 17, 2005
2,867
3
81
yeah but intel i5/i7 quads still match or beat the 6 cores from AMD.

According to whom? Look at the link and these results;

LP2-CPUs-AMD-Intel.png


Anandtech showed this trend before, that in heavy multi threaded scenarios, the Phenom II X6 1090T was able to keep up with the likes of the Core i7 860 and 870.
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
According to whom? Look at the link and these results;

LP2-CPUs-AMD-Intel.png


Anandtech showed this trend before, that in heavy multi threaded scenarios, the Phenom II X6 1090T was able to keep up with the likes of the Core i7 860 and 870.
are you blind? the 2.8 i5 is matching and the 2.8 i7 is beating the 3.2 X6. not to mention the i5/i7 quads have a shit ton more oc headroom than that 3.2 X6.
 

3DVagabond

Lifer
Aug 10, 2009
11,951
204
106
Fermi only performs better by price. If you take the overall performance without comparing price and it's far worse. The 460 is about the same size and about the same power draw as the 5870. Performance is still below the 5870 overall. It was also about 9 mos. later to market and they still can't make a fully functioning chip. Something that ATI was able to do last Sept. The GF100 is 50 percent larger and uses about 50 percent more power for about 15 percent more overall more performance (for the top bin chip). ATI is almost onto their next gen. part and it most likely will be out before we see the complete Fermi line released. I don't see any superiority for Fermi, unless you solely base it on the fact that nVidia can't sell it for as much as ATI can sell Evergreen for. Look at how much the pricing for Fermi has plummeted in the short time since it's been to market! Let's face it, from nVidia's point of view, Fermi is abysmal.
 

brybir

Senior member
Jun 18, 2009
241
0
0

I think the real value for this game at least is the 470, not the 460.

Increase in average frames from 27.3 to 37 which is ~36% increase. 460 is $229 and 470 is $299 which is a a 31% increase in price, so you are getting near perfect price/performance scaling at least in this game.

I know we talk about the 460 SLI being the sweet spot, but in a lot of games, I think the 470SLI will be the sweet spot. 470 now for great single card performance in the most demanding games, another 470 in a year (should be $150 or less by then), and you will still have a super fast system.
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
I think the real value for this game at least is the 470, not the 460.

Increase in average frames from 27.3 to 37 which is ~36% increase. 460 is $229 and 470 is $299 which is a a 31% increase in price, so you are getting near perfect price/performance scaling at least in this game.

I know we talk about the 460 SLI being the sweet spot, but in a lot of games, I think the 470SLI will be the sweet spot. 470 now for great single card performance in the most demanding games, another 470 in a year (should be $150 or less by then), and you will still have a super fast system.
its the gtx460's overall characteristics that make it appealing. stepping up to the gtx470 brings way more heat, noise and power consumption.
 

brybir

Senior member
Jun 18, 2009
241
0
0
Fermi only performs better by price. If you take the overall performance without comparing price and it's far worse.

What? Maybe its too late for me but I dont know what you are saying here?

The 460 is about the same size

Beating the dead horse more will not make it any more dead

and about the same power draw as the 5870.

According to Bench, 460 draws 331w at load whereas 5870 draws 375. 460 is closer to the 5850 in power draw.

Performance is still below the 5870 overall.

This is true.

It was also about 9 mos. later to market and they still can't make a fully functioning chip. Something that ATI was able to do last Sept. The GF100 is 50 percent larger and uses about 50 percent more power for about 15 percent more overall more performance (for the top bin chip). ATI is almost onto their next gen. part and it most likely will be out before we see the complete Fermi line released. I don't see any superiority for Fermi, unless you solely base it on the fact that nVidia can't sell it for as much as ATI can sell Evergreen for. Look at how much the pricing for Fermi has plummeted in the short time since it's been to market! Let's face it, from nVidia's point of view, Fermi is abysmal.

If you had not added this last part, you may have had a valid post. However, the rest of this stuff is the usual pedantic crap tossed around on these forums and do not add to the discussion. Did I mention it has been repeated over and over?

Dont get me wrong, I am happy to ride the anti-nvidia train (or the anti ati train, whichever is leaving the station next), but is it not about time to drop these kinds of posts? Gets old.
 

brybir

Senior member
Jun 18, 2009
241
0
0
its the gtx460's overall characteristics that make it appealing. stepping up to the gtx470 brings way more heat, noise and power consumption.

Thats true, I just meant pure price/performance standpoint. I intentionally stay a generation behind the GPU curve (4850) as its a bit pricey riding the edge with refresh cycles ever 6-9 months.

However, of the heat, noise and power consumption the only one that would actually bother me would be the noise. I intentionally bought a 4850 that is quiet.

I am not worried about my electricity bill (my AC running all day when its 110 degrees makes my computers power usage seem....insignificant) and my case is very well ventilated so the heat does not concern me.
 

3DVagabond

Lifer
Aug 10, 2009
11,951
204
106
What? Maybe its too late for me but I dont know what you are saying here?



Beating the dead horse more will not make it any more dead



According to Bench, 460 draws 331w at load whereas 5870 draws 375. 460 is closer to the 5850 in power draw.



This is true.



If you had not added this last part, you may have had a valid post. However, the rest of this stuff is the usual pedantic crap tossed around on these forums and do not add to the discussion. Did I mention it has been repeated over and over?

Dont get me wrong, I am happy to ride the anti-nvidia train (or the anti ati train, whichever is leaving the station next), but is it not about time to drop these kinds of posts? Gets old.


I'll avoid the quotefest. This was in response to the statement that Fermi performs better than Evergreen. There's a lot to consider with the term perfomance. It's not simply $/fps. I'm not anti nVidia at all. I am anti Fermi though, with the exception of the 460. Even the 460 though isn't some engineering masterpiece. It's just competitive. They continue to reduce the price of the GF100 to try and get it competitive.

I've seen many power measurements for all of the cards. I did say, "about" the same. You can choose the one that you like better. If it's appreciably less for the 460 fine. I don't have a problem if it uses a bit less.