Wasn't the PC version meant to come with upgraded waves for the sea and other such Physx nonsense? Coes so far, what I'm seeing seems very console-y and not what the PC exclusive content developer diary they released a few weeks back showed. Or am I just missing it? Don't see any way to enable the features in the settings menu either.

Have you looked at the advanced gpu options? it has AO and GPU-geometry-water-thingy which looks quite impressive but you'll need quite the rig to run it with everything turned on.

I noticed SSAO but not the GPU-geometry-water-thingy. Then again, I'm using Nvidia's latest mobile card (the GTX 285m) so maybe it doesn't recognise my GPU and so assumes I have an ATI one so blocks it out? Or is CUDA available to ATI cards as well, unlike Physx?  
 
I'll check again but I spent the first 20 mins with the game tweaking the settings (can max it out without Vsync and SSAO at 1600x900 and it never drops below 30FPS - was playing the demo at similar settings at full 1920x1080 but here the performance impact for that res is HUGE- we're talking over 50% performance hit which shouldn't be happening. 10/20% is the usual downfall for that increase in res).

" I noticed SSAO but not the GPU-geometry-water-thingy. Then again, I'm using Nvidia's latest mobile card (the GTX 285m) so maybe it doesn't recognise my GPU and so assumes I have an ATI one so blocks it out? Or is CUDA available to ATI cards as well, unlike Physx?   I'll check again but I spent the first 20 mins with the game tweaking the settings (can max it out without Vsync and SSAO at 1600x900 and it never drops below 30FPS - was playing the demo at similar settings at full 1920x1080 but here the performance impact for that res is HUGE- we're talking over 50% performance hit which shouldn't be happening. 10/20% is the usual downfall for that increase in res). "

" @Vitor said:

" I noticed SSAO but not the GPU-geometry-water-thingy. Then again, I'm using Nvidia's latest mobile card (the GTX 285m) so maybe it doesn't recognise my GPU and so assumes I have an ATI one so blocks it out? Or is CUDA available to ATI cards as well, unlike Physx?   I'll check again but I spent the first 20 mins with the game tweaking the settings (can max it out without Vsync and SSAO at 1600x900 and it never drops below 30FPS - was playing the demo at similar settings at full 1920x1080 but here the performance impact for that res is HUGE- we're talking over 50% performance hit which shouldn't be happening. 10/20% is the usual downfall for that increase in res). "

Uh dude, I'm not trying to be a smartarse here but your GTX 285M is not the latest mobile GPU from Nvidia and it's based on the the older G92 core.  The latest Nvidia mobile GPUs, like the GTS 360M, are from the 300 series range, all based around GT215 Core. The full game has much larger maps and viewable distance so don't expect the same level of performance which the demo offered because it was less than 1/4 of the full game in terms of landmass.  That said, you should be getting decent performance, certainly better than my 9600GT provides me.  Try disabling VSYNC first.    Here's the GPU Water Simulation setting in case you missed it:- "

" @SeriouslyNow said:

" @Vitor said:

" I noticed SSAO but not the GPU-geometry-water-thingy. Then again, I'm using Nvidia's latest mobile card (the GTX 285m) so maybe it doesn't recognise my GPU and so assumes I have an ATI one so blocks it out? Or is CUDA available to ATI cards as well, unlike Physx?   I'll check again but I spent the first 20 mins with the game tweaking the settings (can max it out without Vsync and SSAO at 1600x900 and it never drops below 30FPS - was playing the demo at similar settings at full 1920x1080 but here the performance impact for that res is HUGE- we're talking over 50% performance hit which shouldn't be happening. 10/20% is the usual downfall for that increase in res). "

Uh dude, I'm not trying to be a smartarse here but your GTX 285M is not the latest mobile GPU from Nvidia and it's based on the the older G92 core.  The latest Nvidia mobile GPUs, like the GTS 360M, are from the 300 series range, all based around GT215 Core. The full game has much larger maps and viewable distance so don't expect the same level of performance which the demo offered because it was less than 1/4 of the full game in terms of landmass.  That said, you should be getting decent performance, certainly better than my 9600GT provides me.  Try disabling VSYNC first.    Here's the GPU Water Simulation setting in case you missed it:- "

The GTS 360M is a higher clocked GTS 260m and is far far FAR worse than the GTX 285m - Nvidia like to fool customers by renaming constantly in a confusing manner when actually, the mobile 3** series has yet to have its proper introduction. As is, my card is the fastest mobile single GPU solution you can get from Nvidia (the ATI 5870 is faster by about 10/20%). If it was the GTX 360m, then you'd have a point - that one letter change makes a world of difference in gaming. I disabled Vsync and that helped and the difference between 1920x1080 and 1600x900 isn't too huge and the performance boost for the lower res is substantial enough that I don't mind - I'd rather this and have nearly every setting maxed out than having to cut stuff down to medium if I were to play at full 1080.  Also, yeah, no options for CUDA or the filter anywhere - my card was only released mid-last month so is probably unrecognised. Then again, if the performance hit for those options is as big as people say, I probably wouldn't be able to toggle them anyway. "

" @Vitor:   Yeah but those tier lists aren't always correct as my 7900GTX in my Clevo was quite a bit faster in many games than mobile GPUs which are rated higher on those tier lists.  GTS 360M definitely has less stream processors and a smaller bus (128 vs 256) but it's GDDR5 and that means it can transfer almost 2x as much data as a 256bit GDDR3 bus equipped GTS260M in the same cycle.  Don't forget that the new Nvidia 470GTX and 480GTX cards are also GDDR5 with smaller busses than the previously 200 series top end cards and they are capable of much higher data throughput. The GTS360M is not less powerful than the GTS260M, power isn't only about Stream Processors, it also has to do with bus efficiency and being able to run longer at lower temps.  The GTS360M is a 45NM package which has a lower TDP and that means it will not be as prone to downclocks based on temp as your GTX285M or the GTS260M. "

It could be one of those 'trick' visual option games. Like some games you have to have everything turned on for just one of the options to work properly.

" It could be one of those 'trick' visual option games. Like some games you have to have everything turned on for just one of the options to work properly. "

 was playing the demo at similar settings at full 1920x1080 but here the performance impact for that res is HUGE- we're talking over 50% performance hit which shouldn't be happening.   

I WANT MY FANCY WAVES!
 
Anyone have a comparison video of the two? I'd like to see what physx could possibly add to wave simulation.