Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Posts
- 8,790
- Location
- Cornwall
Ubisoft, making dice look competent.
Let's not get carried away!
That's just crazy talk!
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Why 'Watch Dogs' Is Bad News For AMD Users -- And Potentially The Entire PC Gaming Ecosystem
- Thread starter LtMatt
- Start date
- Status
Let's not get carried away!
That's just crazy talk!
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 20,680
- Location
- The KOP
Guess you didn't have the save game bug? Or frame stutter on fc3? Which they blamed on the drivers lol
I got almost to the end of fc3 only for my save to corrupt known bug in most ubi games. Google it
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,704
- Location
- Surrey
Ubisoft, making dice look competent.
The Dice vs Ubisoft incompetency fight off.
I'd say its a pretty close call, Ubisoft handled the poor opening release day well. Lets see if they can continue to offer poor support over the coming months to match Dice.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 20,680
- Location
- The KOP
The Dice vs Ubisoft incompetency fight off.
I'd say its a pretty close call, Ubisoft handled the poor opening release day well. Lets see if they can continue to offer poor support over the coming months to match Dice.
Least dice have patch and fixed the game. Ghost recon Future solider on ps3 still don't work online lol fc3 online is broken and performance issues.
Ubisoft are bad, very bad and it's known all over the place they suck it's horrible how they still Continue to sell games.
I not bought a ubi game since fc3 and I'll continue not to but my girlfriend does want ps4 and she also wants bloody watch dogs lol
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
The likelyhood is that the gameworks code detects and AMD card and runs a significantly less optimised piece of code for AMD cards to the point where a 290x is on par with a 770gtx instead of a 780ti, which it simply is faster than in any non sabotaging Nvidia game.
1+1=2 but 1+8+69-74-10+8=2 also... if Nvidia are paying a dev to run the second much longer calculation to get the same answer, there isn't a huge amount AMD can do about it.
Yes I'm only guessing that is what they are doing, but firstly the performance difference between AMD/Nvidia for gameworks games alone is ridiculous, and considering Nvidia didn't have this advantage in other Nvidia sponsored but not gameworks using titles suggests they've done something VERY sneaky and they've gone over the top in hiding the code and only get away with using it when they pay the dev's millions.
As someone else said, IF a game dev wants to get millions for stupid effects(there is precisely nothing "fancy" in the game doable without gameworks, it's all pretty bog standard), then add them in as extra for Nvidia users, stop sabotaging AMD users. It's so despicably underhanded, but that is Nvidia for you.
Going out of their way to overuse tessellation in Crysis 2, paying for it, and hurting Nvidia users frame rates with the inefficient usage of tessellation just because it would hurt AMD users more.
I can't name anything AMD has done to hamper Nvidia performance.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
The Dice vs Ubisoft incompetency fight off.
I'd say its a pretty close call, Ubisoft handled the poor opening release day well. Lets see if they can continue to offer poor support over the coming months to match Dice.
they've got to fix 2 things every two weeks while introducing at least 6 new problems each time... otherwise they aren't even trying to win this competition.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 2,205
- Location
- St. Helens & Blackpool
I don't disagree, it just makes choosing my/your/our next upgrade all the more difficult. I don't want to lose out on fps or features just because the cards I choose to buy aren't the correct colour.
Unfortunately that seems the way it's heading, more and more.
Unless AMD is behind the latest games using more Vram than needed , which is unknown..
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,704
- Location
- Surrey
Isn't the latest case of the Vram munchies... Watchdogs?
Or am i just switching between too many war threads and getting confuse. (Honest question here)
Or am i just switching between too many war threads and getting confuse. (Honest question here)
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 24,292
- Location
- London
Well, it hasn't crashed yet, run at 12 fps yes, crash not yet
Poor release day perf is the staple of a solid ubi game, fc3 was broken for nearly a year before multi card users could touch it.
Im sure it's gona run pretty sweet for the green team.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 2,205
- Location
- St. Helens & Blackpool
It doesn't seem as drastic on this chart.
Bet op of the article had a 780 and couldn't tell the difference.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 24,292
- Location
- London
Im already inlove with this game. We have Alice Cooper on the radio!!!
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 24,292
- Location
- London
I understand AMD users being miffed if Nvidia have gimped it on AMD cards.... but it's nothing new people.
Give it time and AMD will sort it out. I think the game looks great!!
The issue I have is I don’t buy games at full price any more and just wait for them to reach sale price, so I'm finding it hard to hand over full price for this.
Give it time and AMD will sort it out. I think the game looks great!!
The issue I have is I don’t buy games at full price any more and just wait for them to reach sale price, so I'm finding it hard to hand over full price for this.
Why does everyone see it as AMD being crippled? The simple fact is AMD are late to the party to optimise it (just like Nvidia would be with an AMD gaming evolved title).
"But a 290X is struggling to beat a 770!!?!?!" And? That doesn't mean the 290X is being crippled, it could easily just be that NV Gameworks is so well optimised for nv cards that vs unoptimised code for AMD it runs on par.
if the 770 had relative performance to the 290X (say ~40% less) but AMD maintained the same FPS as they currently have (pre-driver release for them) then this article wouldn't exist.
The negative approach here is just to make it more news worthy and AMD took the opportunity to do so (which I don't blame them for). But really people it doesn't hurt to think about things for a moment...
"But a 290X is struggling to beat a 770!!?!?!" And? That doesn't mean the 290X is being crippled, it could easily just be that NV Gameworks is so well optimised for nv cards that vs unoptimised code for AMD it runs on par.
if the 770 had relative performance to the 290X (say ~40% less) but AMD maintained the same FPS as they currently have (pre-driver release for them) then this article wouldn't exist.
The negative approach here is just to make it more news worthy and AMD took the opportunity to do so (which I don't blame them for). But really people it doesn't hurt to think about things for a moment...
Better late than never, oh wait...
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Except the 770 doesn't have 40% less performance than the 290x in this game, the 290x is way down on the 780ti, that is the point.
Yes it wouldn't be this story if it was everything stupid slow, but that isn't the situation. The situation is once again that Nvidia's gameworks = AMD cards being suddenly 30-40% down compared to Nvidia cards. This on code they are pushing on the dev, which is completely locked out from AMD.
The sneakier part is, this isn't the first gameworks title, ultimately with the relatively same code in the various parts of gameworks, IE a physics engine doesn't change completely from one game to another. Why if AMD have optimised as far as they can for gameworks, has it changed this time around. why would Nvidia completely change up their own code, it was either optimised for their architecture before, or it wasn't. Minor changes, sure, big changes, no chance. When you're sabotaging, the code to make extra busy work is very simple, that would be VERY easy to change from game to game causing AMD a whole new set of problems with each new gameworks game.
While Nvidia insist on using absolutely closed code and pushing dev's to use it and locking AMD out from being able to work with the dev's to optimise Nvidia ARE sabotaging AMD.
AMD released tressfx, Tomb Raider used it, the code was absolutely not hidden from Nvidia, and Nvidia were not prevented by the dev's from optimising for it properly.
Yes it wouldn't be this story if it was everything stupid slow, but that isn't the situation. The situation is once again that Nvidia's gameworks = AMD cards being suddenly 30-40% down compared to Nvidia cards. This on code they are pushing on the dev, which is completely locked out from AMD.
The sneakier part is, this isn't the first gameworks title, ultimately with the relatively same code in the various parts of gameworks, IE a physics engine doesn't change completely from one game to another. Why if AMD have optimised as far as they can for gameworks, has it changed this time around. why would Nvidia completely change up their own code, it was either optimised for their architecture before, or it wasn't. Minor changes, sure, big changes, no chance. When you're sabotaging, the code to make extra busy work is very simple, that would be VERY easy to change from game to game causing AMD a whole new set of problems with each new gameworks game.
While Nvidia insist on using absolutely closed code and pushing dev's to use it and locking AMD out from being able to work with the dev's to optimise Nvidia ARE sabotaging AMD.
AMD released tressfx, Tomb Raider used it, the code was absolutely not hidden from Nvidia, and Nvidia were not prevented by the dev's from optimising for it properly.
Clearly you don't understand my point. You're saying the 290X is X% down (could be true? sure I'll give you that). The alternative is also likely too: the 770 is performing 40% better. Just to reiterate too, this is nv optimised vs non-optimised AMD. So the performance difference is fairly reasonable given the two different situations. Careful here, because I know you can argue the 290X is not achieving it's best which I completely agree with, I'm just disagreeing with "crippling", but a driver not been optimised for a game != crippling.
As for nvidia using a closed library, well that's up to them and honestly since they put so much work into it I don't blame them personally. Even the author of the article this thread is based on agrees:
Jason Evangelho said:
- Status