Project cars benchmarks

_Alatar_ · 12 May 2015 at 13:30

No, they're just actively optimizing for Maxwell, their newest architecture. It's common practice.

Twirlywoos · 12 May 2015 at 14:11

MSTRBKR said:
Well the reason for not posting 'evidence' is because I wasn't expecting to be called a liar

Well without proof anyone who says they "think" they've maxed the game, not giving their resolution, not stating if they are running super sampling, what level of AA, what track, what time, what weather conditions, what number of opponents and yet they get 50FPS on old hardware is telling porkies.

humbug · 12 May 2015 at 15:00

Seems there is some info on the AMD issue with this Game on the PCars forum

Ian Bell
Head of Studio
It's a driver issue, there's little for us to work on internally in terms of code. The game was 30-40% faster with earlier drivers from AMD. Their latest drivers have caused the issue. We are working with them to remedy this.

That might be something to try as a quick fix ^^^

JediFragger · 12 May 2015 at 15:11

_Alatar_ said:
No, they're just actively optimizing for Maxwell, their newest architecture. It's common practice.

Remind me to switch to Pascal as soon as they're out

humbug · 12 May 2015 at 15:15

_Alatar_ said:
No, they're just actively optimizing for Maxwell, their newest architecture. It's common practice.

That would be understandable for Fermi, but they are still selling Kepler GPU's now.

Gregster · 12 May 2015 at 16:39

Looks like both have work to do....a GTX 680 matching a 290X is a joke lol and a 960 matching a 780 is also a joke.

pgi947 · 12 May 2015 at 16:46

humbug said:
That would be understandable for Fermi, but they are still selling Kepler GPU's now.

It's been an unfortunate reality since the 900 series launched, Kepler support has a whole has severely degraded.

Supernova · 12 May 2015 at 17:29

majnu said:
Well without proof anyone who says they "think" they've maxed the game, not giving their resolution, not stating if they are running super sampling, what level of AA, what track, what time, what weather conditions, what number of opponents and yet they get 50FPS on old hardware is telling porkies.

I'm not the only one who has posted a quick anecdotal comment on how it's running.

http://i.imgur.com/lurp9Zt.jpg - Visual FX

http://i.imgur.com/ZkIKEIF.jpg - Performance

Just did some fraps benchmarking with the above settings on a practice run, so zero opponents.

California Highway Stage 2
Weather = Rain
Time = 17:00
Camera = Inside Helmet
Frames: 7118 - Time: 169152ms - Avg: 42.080 - Min: 29 - Max: 52

California Highway Stage 2
Weather = Clear
Time = 17:00
Camera = Inside Helmet
Frames: 9779 - Time: 171898ms - Avg: 56.888 - Min: 37 - Max: 61

Yes, I know inside helmet is probably easier to render. That's how I like to play though.

Edit: Now with 19 opponents.

California Highway Stage 2
Weather = Clear
Time = 17:00
Camera = Inside Helmet
Frames: 6639 - Time: 174378ms - Avg: 38.072 - Min: 22 - Max: 56

California Highway Stage 2
Weather = Clear
Time = 17:00
Camera = Bonnet
Frames: 6921 - Time: 172428ms - Avg: 40.138 - Min: 22 - Max: 58

Make of that what you will.

whyscotty · 12 May 2015 at 18:07

pgi947 said:
It's been an unfortunate reality since the 900 series launched, Kepler support has a whole has severely degraded.

Joking aside, I had reduced performance on my Titans on the last few drivers.

Got to the point I was glad to sell the beggars.

Twirlywoos · 12 May 2015 at 22:26

MSTRBKR said:
I'm not the only one who has posted a quick anecdotal comment on how it's running.

http://i.imgur.com/lurp9Zt.jpg - Visual FX

http://i.imgur.com/ZkIKEIF.jpg - Performance

Just did some fraps benchmarking with the above settings on a practice run, so zero opponents.

California Highway Stage 2
Weather = Rain
Time = 17:00
Camera = Inside Helmet
Frames: 7118 - Time: 169152ms - Avg: 42.080 - Min: 29 - Max: 52

California Highway Stage 2
Weather = Clear
Time = 17:00
Camera = Inside Helmet
Frames: 9779 - Time: 171898ms - Avg: 56.888 - Min: 37 - Max: 61

Yes, I know inside helmet is probably easier to render. That's how I like to play though.

Edit: Now with 19 opponents.

California Highway Stage 2
Weather = Clear
Time = 17:00
Camera = Inside Helmet
Frames: 6639 - Time: 174378ms - Avg: 38.072 - Min: 22 - Max: 56

California Highway Stage 2
Weather = Clear
Time = 17:00
Camera = Bonnet
Frames: 6921 - Time: 172428ms - Avg: 40.138 - Min: 22 - Max: 58

Make of that what you will.

Thanks for your reply but that's not maxing it. Detailed Grass should be turned on and that alone decreases at least 10% of fps. Texture filtering should be at 16X, V-Sync - off, AA should be atleast DS2, SMAA - ultra etc.

When playing with opponents set the weather conditions to thunderstorm or heavy rain. But at the end of the day everyone is going to dial down/up settings to their cards capabilities.

The OP should really specify what he wants from a benchmark so that everyone's reading from the same page.

I personally test with 29 opponents with the weather set as thunderstorm at Spa. I'm going to make some videos tomorrow comparing Win 10 and 8.1

Gregster · 12 May 2015 at 22:44

whyscotty said:
Joking aside, I had reduced performance on my Titans on the last few drivers.

Got to the point I was glad to sell the beggars.

Yer and I noticed the same. Good job we moved on to Maxwell I say

JediFragger · 12 May 2015 at 23:16

Gregster said:
Yer and I noticed the same. Good job we moved on to Maxwell I say

Just don't hang around before moving to Pascal!! I'm sure nVidia are planning on a 5% drop per week with Maxwell once they're out

Final8y · 12 May 2015 at 23:45

mmj_uk said:
If AMD worked with the developer during development they could actually get any optmisations they need implemented for their customers prior to release, rather than blaming others after release and having their customers suffer sub par experience for 3mths whilst they ask developers to do certain things. They could even work to get their own pathways added which would bypass the GameWorks code which allegedly slows them down. The fact that they aren't interested until a game hits the shops leaves their customers with unoptimised experiences for long periods and leaves AMD themselves in no position to make any major changes to the game code/engine.

You are making a lot of stuff up with what AMD could have done, there has not been a single Gamesworks or TWIMTP title that AMD has been able to have prior access, so stop making stuff up.

layte · 13 May 2015 at 00:26

Final8y said:
You are making a lot of stuff up with what AMD could have done, there has not been a single Gamesworks or TWIMTP title that AMD has been able to have prior access, so stop making stuff up.

Apart from the whole 'devs reached out to AMD over the past 6 months and got ignored thing', yea.

hyperseven · 13 May 2015 at 00:38

layte said:
Apart from the whole 'devs reached out to AMD over the past 6 months and got ignored thing', yea.

and you have documented proof of this ? :rolleyes:

not running that well for me

, 40-50fps. Think I'll finish some other games off an come back to in a month or so.

layte · 13 May 2015 at 00:53

hyperseven said:
and you have documented proof of this ?

Posted earlier in this very thread: http://steamcommunity.com/app/234630/discussions/0/613957600528900678/#p1

Quotes taken directly from the developers themselves.

Best roll those eyes back in old chap.

humbug · 13 May 2015 at 01:10

Don't know what to make of this member, ~50 posts member since 2012 and a rep rating that looks like its way over his post count....

Paul Swanepoel
WMD Member
The SMS team are working with AMD to get the AMD drivers sorted, and the alpha drivers are showing great improvements - they should be out soon !- be assured Project CARS was never, and will never be intentionally crippled on AMD. Hope this puts you more at ease.

JediFragger · 13 May 2015 at 08:16

hyperseven said:
and you have documented proof of this ?

not running that well for me , 40-50fps. Think I'll finish some other games off an come back to in 6 months or so.

Fixed

hyperseven · 13 May 2015 at 08:59

layte said:
Posted earlier in this very thread: http://steamcommunity.com/app/234630/discussions/0/613957600528900678/#p1

Quotes taken directly from the developers themselves.

Best roll those eyes back in old chap.

You said it 'quotes', how about the full conversation, you can cherry pick the parts you want to show anybody in a bad light :rolleyes:

Who is GenBrien anyway, does he actually work for SMS or just some Steam random?

mmj_uk · 13 May 2015 at 09:56

hyperseven said:
You said it 'quotes', how about the full conversation, you can cherry pick the parts you want to show anybody in a bad light

Who is GenBrien anyway, does he actually work for SMS or just some Steam random?

Ian Bell posted it on the WMD forum but all the posts are hidden for guests, the full transcript is as follows:

“We’ve provided AMD with 20 keys for game testing as they work on the driver side. But you only have to look at the lesser hardware in the consoles to see how optimised we are on AMD based chips.

We’re reaching out to AMD with all of our efforts. We’ve provided them 20 keys as I say. They were invited to work with us for years, looking through company mails the last I can see they (AMD) talked to us was October of last year.

Categorically, Nvidia have not paid us a penny. They have though been very forthcoming with support and co-marketing work at their instigation. We’ve had emails back and forth with them yesterday also. I reiterate that this is mainly a driver issue but we’ll obviously do anything we can from our side.”

Even putting aside the way that AMD have ignored the developer it's pretty damning that they were actively supplied with 20 keys and still haven't lifted a finger since the beta, you'd think it might have occured to them that the game engine might just have been modified and need some more attention since a year ago but not AMD apparently.

humbug said:
Don't know what to make of this member, ~50 posts member since 2012 and a rep rating that looks like its way over his post count....

That's good to hear for AMD customers but it just sums up AMD's software support, reactive rather than proactive. This forum would still be blaming the developer and/or NVidia if the developer hadn't for once come out and defended their corner.