No probs.
Corrected my post as i linked the wrong petition, it seems there are two.
-
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.
CPR W3 on Hairworks(Nvidia Game Works)-'the code of this feature cannot be optimized for AMD'
- Thread starter tommybhoy
- Start date
No probs.
Corrected my post as i linked the wrong petition, it seems there are two.
Nothing at all to do with what we were talking about- R* not allowing the use of the known controversial techniques of certain specific GW's functions.
Last edited:
Nor should AMDMatt be commenting or hinting anything about a competitor.
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 4,408
- Location
- Rugby
What defines controversial techniques do you decide or random keyboard warriors? The vast majority of what in Gameworks works on AMD cards (I don't know about TXAA tbh).
It would be controversial if hairworks or gameworks as a whole simply didn't work on AMD cards but they do. Do you have to use hairworks ? no you don't.
Given the number of characters that can be on screen in a game like GTA plus the head ache of the customization options hairworks/tressFX would not be a option on current generation of cards for performance, bar maybe just your own character or just character in cutscnes.
I would love more games to have tech like hairworks/fur works/tressFX
Googlefu 'Nvidia Game Works Witcher 3'
The headlines decide what's controversial and by the lack of the inclusion into GTAV is a fair pointer to why they used what they wanted and weren't dictated to what they had to put in-succinct difference, much like the lack of acknowledgement that those techniques are harming ALL gpu's performance not just AMD...
@LambChop,
I'm not a mod mate, whether he's commented out with the vendor guidelines, it'l remain or be removed rtm it if you have issue.
The headlines decide what's controversial and by the lack of the inclusion into GTAV is a fair pointer to why they used what they wanted and weren't dictated to what they had to put in-succinct difference, much like the lack of acknowledgement that those techniques are harming ALL gpu's performance not just AMD...
@LambChop,
I'm not a mod mate, whether he's commented out with the vendor guidelines, it'l remain or be removed rtm it if you have issue.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 4,408
- Location
- Rugby
but why is Hairworks controversial and not TressFX? Why no/less **** storm over vendor locked features like HD3D/Mantel/3D Vision/sli/xfire etc. No wait its only Nvidia features that are bad and AMD can do no wronge.
If you don't like hairworks, don't use it its never required or forced, if you want TressFX talk to AMD and to a lesser extent a game developer.
I agree but it wasn't fair to CDPR when AMD asked a few weeks (and I mean a few) to add TressFX. I loved TressFX in TR and I love HairWorks in TW3 but these things take time to add.
'Switching it off' is a cop out mate.
I don't have a clue how AMD can harm Nvidia users using GW's, AMD does plenty wrong, that's why I'm running three Nvidia systems and zero AMD
.It's Nvidia writing GW's code causing massive impact on Nvidia performance, nothing to do with AMD.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 12,881
- Location
- Surrey
GTAV has technologies from both camps and performs fine. It contains GameWork effects, it is part of GameWorks whether Matt says so or not.
Just because it doesn't have particular libraries which use tessellation that don't use lower tessellation levels to suit the needs of AMD's inferior scaling - makes it not so? Not sure how that works.
Why move the goal posts, it's so stupid.
Just because it doesn't have particular libraries which use tessellation that don't use lower tessellation levels to suit the needs of AMD's inferior scaling - makes it not so? Not sure how that works.
Why move the goal posts, it's so stupid.
Spot on.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 12,881
- Location
- Surrey
I know what he might well be implying without incriminating himself but it has no bearing on how the game performs.
http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2015/04/14/grand-theft-auto-v/
Somebody should probably mention it to NVIDIA.
http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2015/04/14/grand-theft-auto-v/
Somebody should probably mention it to NVIDIA.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Posts
- 8,600
- Location
- Cornwall
My point being GTA V uses AMD Technology, Contact Hardening Shadows - which looks fantastic. However, this does not make it an AMD Gaming Evolved title. Hence, it's best to ask Rockstar and they will confirm.
Nvidia are calling ti a GameWorks title:
http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2015/04/14/grand-theft-auto-v/
Also, Rockstar DO consider it a Gaming Evolved title, if you look at the bottom of this page:
http://www.rockstargames.com/V/info/pc/specs
EDIT: Just realised this was the same Nvidia link posted above.
Last edited:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
Maybe GTA V was running well because AMD actually gave us an on time driver
You have hit the nail on the head there. They actually spent time with the devs on this game and the results speak for themselves. Runs well on both vendors as far as I am aware?
Confusion overload, I may be wrong but if you take matts reply based from the original topic:
Probably explaining why it runs fine on AMD, because GW/GE aren't exclusive to GTAV
Pre 15.5 Beta, the 970 was running smoother than 290X
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Posts
- 8,600
- Location
- Cornwall
Confusion overload, I may be wrong but if you take matts reply based from the original topic:
Probably explaining why it runs fine on AMD, because GW/GE aren't exclusive to GTAV
Pre 15.5 Beta, the 970 was running smoother than 290X
Matt said GTA V wasn't a Gaming Evolved game, but there's a Gaming Evolved logo on the game's website. So is it or isn't it?
Matt seemed to argue that GTA V had GameWorks in it, but Nvidia say it does.
So who do we believe AMDMatt or Nvidia & Rockstar?
Good to see Matt posting again now the drivers are out too. Communication was excellent just when users/customers needed it, give or take a couple of weeks...
Nvidia has huge lead in drawcalls over AMD, and that really shows in GTA5. When you start using advanced graphics with extended drawdistance you see amd losing gpu usage way earlier. Those modded drivers make huge difference to game smoothness even you might not see it directly in fps always.
It's like going uphill with 2 different cars under heavy load. One with V8 engine and one wth smaller engine. You most likely go same speed, but experience is very different.
It's like going uphill with 2 different cars under heavy load. One with V8 engine and one wth smaller engine. You most likely go same speed, but experience is very different.
It is a gpu agnostic title, it isn't exclusive to any one vendor, it is simply using techs from both camps without favouring either.
GameWorks/GE exclusive titles are vendor funded, GTAV isn't either.
If that doesn't make it any clearer for you, pm him./
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Posts
- 8,600
- Location
- Cornwall
It is a gpu agnostic title, it isn't exclusive to any one vendor, it is simply using techs from both camps without favouring either.
GameWorks/GE exclusive titles are vendor funded, GTAV isn't either.
If that doesn't make it any clearer for you, pm him./
So why have Rockstar put the Gaming Evolved logo on it?