-3

So I've tried playing borderlands expectant of seeing massive drops in fps at the lowest possible settings seeing as how I'm playing on an integrated 256mb amd GPU.

Its a notebook so I'm in a tight pinch.

Now I know overall in gameplay BL2 is much more saturated.

But is BL2 more optimized?

I receive an avg fps of about 24, min: 12, max: 32 in border lands 1.

Could I hope to receive a steady 30 in BL2?

I can play CS source at almost max settings with ample 30 fps breathing room, but borderlands 1 doesn't even offer that at its lowest settings.

I googled the question, it doesn't exist.

TL;DR: Is BL2 more optimized than BL1?

| improve this question | |
  • You have an integrated GPU; do you meet the system requirements for the game? – Frank♦ Aug 4 '16 at 2:41
  • @Frank At minimum, yes – DerpyLe Squid Aug 4 '16 at 2:42
  • 1
    Then your best bet is to try it and see; that's the whole point of system requirements. – Frank♦ Aug 4 '16 at 2:42
  • nope, BL 1 is "lighter" . – Rusted_Silver Aug 4 '16 at 3:15
  • @NamikazeSheena Darn – DerpyLe Squid Aug 4 '16 at 3:17
2

It really depends on more things than on the amount of MB. Some GPU have different algorithms implemented to calculate for example shaders.

If you set the Options to max, Borderlands 2 has the higher values. On minimum I don't know. But another important thing is, that Borderlands 2 has bigger and more maps, more weapon models, more skins, more everything... So it's also a reason of CPU and RAM. Without the other options, it is hard to tell. But usually it should run worse dan BL1. It also may differ on each map you're in.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.