• 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.

Project cars benchmarks

https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/c...eworks_project_cars_and_why_we_should/crc3ro1

The assumptions I'm seeing here are so inaccurate, I feel they merit a direct response from us.

I can definitively state that PhysX within Project Cars does not offload any computation to the GPU on any platform, including NVIDIA. I'm not sure how the OP came to the conclusion that it does, but this has never been claimed by the developer or us; nor is there any technical proof offered in this thread that shows this is the case.

I'm hearing a lot of calls for NVIDIA to free up our source for PhysX. It just so happens that we provide PhysX in source code form freely on GitHub (https://developer.nvidia.com/physx-source-github), so everyone is welcome to go inspect the code for themselves, and optimize or modify for their games any way they see fit.

Rev Lebaredian
Senior Director, GameWorks
NVIDIA

Shots fired!!! And I showed how PhysX is run on the CPU but ignored in favour of brand bias.
 
This whole situation has been disgraceful. Both from the nonsense being made up by people trying to blame SMS for poor AMD performance and the disgusting tweets coming from Roy at AMD.

I have been a member at WMD for 3 years and an owner of AMD cards for most of that time. The graphics guy at SMS, Martin, has done a stellar job of optimizing for AMD hardware. Everyday we were getting increases in FPS due to his fine work.

The blame for this whole situation lies with AMD. They had no contact with SMS for about 6 months prior to release and their latest driver undone all of Martin's great work. Then to rub salt into the wound, their VP Roy starts putting the blame on SMS.

Now AMD Roy is posting on twitter insinuating that the poor performance is due to AMD working with Nvidia and using Physx.

How about this Roy, stop wasting your time whipping up fanboy wars via twitter, show a little humility and admit that AMD have dropped the ball (again) and get some drivers out ASAP.

AMD is not in a position to be alienating customers but that is all this whole situation has accomplished.
 
Seeing Roy's tweets and stirring it up with The Witcher 3 really had me shaking my head. He should be concentrating on what AMD is doing instead of making himself look silly 'yet again'. And at the end of it, it is the guys who support AMD by buying their products who are missing out.
 
On this i'm in agreement with Nvidia, CPU PhysX should run the same on AMD as Nvidia, it has nothing to do with the GPU.

It just so happens that Nvidia have better DX11 Driver overheads, not just in PC but some other games too.

With those Driver optimisations Nvidia are less susceptible to the DX11 Draw Call limits than AMD, For that reason Nvidia can get more performance, or rather AMD are more Bottlenecked by the CPU.

AMD get significantly better performance in Windows 10, the reason for that is better call threading in Win 10.

I'm all for giving Developers and Hardware vendors a hard time where shenanigans exist, its us the users who suffer when they behave like #### ### ####!

But our complaint when its made has got to be right, this isn't right.
 
The blame for this whole situation lies with AMD. They had no contact with SMS for about 6 months prior to release and their latest driver undone all of Martin's great work. Then to rub salt into the wound, their VP Roy starts putting the blame on SMS.

Now AMD Roy is posting on twitter insinuating that the poor performance is due to SMS working with Nvidia and using Physx.

How about this Roy, stop wasting your time whipping up fanboy wars via twitter, show a little humility and admit that AMD have dropped the ball (again) and get some drivers out ASAP.

AMD is not in a position to be alienating customers but that is all this whole situation has accomplished.

They should just have the decency to keep quiet given how little work they do behind the scenes but why ignore a tactic of blaming others that has been so successful for years already? developers are usually professional enough not to get dragged into playing blame games with AMD so it's only usually AMD's side of the story that we hear, I'm not saying SMS are unprofessional by responding it's just they obviously have much closer ties with the public so something was bound to leak out.
 
They should just have the decency to keep quiet given how little work they do behind the scenes but why ignore a tactic of blaming others that has been so successful for years already? developers are usually professional enough not to get dragged into playing blame games with AMD so it's only usually AMD's side of the story that we hear, I'm not saying SMS are unprofessional by responding it's just they obviously have much closer ties with the public so something was bound to leak out.

Yes the open nature of pCARS development has shined a light on AMD's BS. As an insider on pCARS and someone who put a lot of money and time into it, it hurts when an outside company who has had so little involvement comes along and takes a huge dump on three years worth of work just to try and cover up their own shoddy work.
 
http://forum.projectcarsgame.com/showthread.php?26370-Project-CARS-On-AMD-GPUs-Clarification

For the past few days, erroneous information posted on Reddit and other websites has spread misinformation with regards to Project CARS’ performance on systems using AMD GPUs.

To correct the wrongful assumptions regarding Project CARS’ performance on AMD GPUs, the MADNESS engine and the degree of involvement from our third-party technical partners, Slightly Mad Studios feel compelled to point out the following facts:

• Project CARS is not a GameWorks product. We have a good working relationship with NVIDIA, as we do with AMD, but we have our own render technology which covers everything we need.

• NVIDIA are not "sponsors" of the project. The company has not received, and would not expect, financial assistance from third party hardware companies.

• The MADNESS engine runs PhysX at only 50Hz and not at 600Hz as mentioned in several articles

• The MADNESS engine uses PhysX for collision detection and dynamic objects, which is a small part of the overall physics systems

• The MADNESS engine does not use PhysX for the SETA tyre model or for the chassis constraint solver (our two most expensive physics sub-systems)

• The MADNESS engine does not use PhysX for the AI systems or for raycasting, we use a bespoke optimised solution for those

• The physics systems run completely independently of the rendering and main game threads and utilises 2 cores at 600Hz

• The physics threading does not interact with the rendering, it is a push system sending updated positional information to the render bridge at 600Hz

• Any performance difference with PhysX would not be reflected with differences in comparing rendering frame rates. There is no interaction between PhysX and the rendering

• Overall, PhysX uses less than 10% of all physics thread CPU on PC. It is a very small part of the physics system so would not make a visual difference if run on the CPU or GPU

• Direct involvement with both NVIDIA and AMD has been fruitful in assisting with the game performance at various stages of development. Both AMD and nVidia have had access to working builds of the game throughout development, and they have both tested builds and reported their results and offered suggestions for performance improvements.

• Testing of the game with different driver versions has produced a variety of performance results on both nVidia and AMD hardware. This is entirely to be expected as driver changes cannot always be tested on every game and every card, and this is the reason why both companies produce game-specific driver profiles, to ensure that they can get the best out of the game.

• Project CARS does not use NVIDIA specific particle technology - the system we use is a modified version of the same technology we used on the Need for Speed : Shift and Shift Unleashed games, and was entirely developed in-house. The reason the performance drops when there are a lot of particles on screen is simply because processing a large number of particles is very expensive.

• In game there are a number of company logos used, e.g. on billboards around tracks. These are simply there as recognition for the work done by those companies in helping to promote Project CARS at a range of events. The companies include :
- NVIDIA
- Panasonic
- Oculus Rift

Further information on Slightly Mad Studios’ MADNESS engine is available in the „Tech“ section of our official website:

http://www.slightlymadstudios.com/tech.html
 
AMD really need to look at getting a new VP. Roy is a complete joke. Not satisfied on taking a dump on SMS once, he is back for another go.

https://twitter.com/amd_roy/status/600286803480838144

pCARS isn't even a gameworks game.

What are AMD going to do regarding the driver now? Do they release one and all of a sudden FPS shoots up 30% and destroys all of their credibility at the same time?

Stuff AMD.
 
To be fair, I'm pleased with my 290 in this game, my CPU takes a hammering though, especially when it rains. But I haven't noticed anything wrong with it tbh.
 
To be fair, I'm pleased with my 290 in this game, my CPU takes a hammering though, especially when it rains. But I haven't noticed anything wrong with it tbh.

It should be performing better than it is assuming you are using Windows 7 / 8. In Windows 10 TP frame rates are about 30% faster. All down to AMD's shoddy drivers.
 
If it's all down to AMD's software-side being **** then how come non-900 Nvidia cards also suffer more in performance than they should (when we compare it to how they perform in 99.9% of other games)? Oh right.
 
If it's all down to AMD's software-side being **** then how come non-900 Nvidia cards also suffer more in performance than they should (when we compare it to how they perform in 99.9% of other games)? Oh right.

You will have to ask Nvidia that but I am pretty sure it is due to Nvidia optimising their drivers for newer cards.
 
"its not a Games Works title and Nvidia do not sponsor the Game"

It has Nvidia adverts on billboards throughout the game :rolleyes:

I guess it only looks good on Panasonic TV's as well.

No matter what the devs and nVidia say, people still want to don the tin foil hat and come up with rubbish. It is getting tiresome reading really. PCars devs have put a lot of work in this game and for me, have done a fantastic job. People with no clue are quick to claim foul play with no means of proof or anything of backup and this is quite sad.

Nvidia have put their own devs on the game and AMD were also able to do this but according to the devs, the last time they heard from AMD was before Christmas. This is a long time in development and no wonder the game isn't running so well for AMD at present.

Maybe the AMD guys who bought PCars should be moaning at AMD instead of worrying if there is GameWorks (which there isn't) in the game.
 
Back
Top Bottom