Can't speak to much for AMD as I swaped my pair of 7970's for a pair of 780's early on in the development of this title, I was an early backer, but it runs great for me. I run triple screens at 5900*1080 and with everything set to high bar detailed grass + motion blur but with 4xMSAA enabled, I can get well over 60 fps. Actually it is normally around 100FPS once the start/first lap are out of the way but I prefer adaptive v-sync and a silky smooth 60 FPS locked at my monitors refresh rate. This is with large fields of 30+ cars and includes wet conditions.
Worst case scenario in my standard test, 36 car mixed GT3 field, wet conditions with me starting in the middle and letting the field drive by. It will drop to 50FPS briefly before recovering. Ultra settings in this title really do mean ultra. There are some very computationally heavy effects going on, especially in the wet where it will have the nearest thirty-two cars to you generating spray! That is a lot of particle effects to handle for any system. On the high setting that drops down to a more manageable eight.
There are also some crazy AA options if you want them. The top option, DSX9 does a custom 3x3 down sample. Better have those Titan-X's at the ready.
Back to AMD v Nvidia this game does run better on the equivalent Nvidia card due to I believe, their drivers being a little more efficient in terms of CPU resources consumed. Remember that this title has a very complex physics simulator running at its heart. There are some command line options you can run to enable mutli threading in the renderer and change the number of threads used for the physics engine. I don't know if the multi threaded renderer is now the default but most people have found this gives better results with AMD cards. Up until recently single threaded gave the best performance on my system (CPU is an i7 4930K @ 4.3Ghz) but in the last couple of months multi threaded has taken the lead.
Edit: BTW the suggestion that this title has been deliberately gimped to run badly on AMD hardware could not be further from the truth as anyone who has backed the title and followed its development from the start can attest. Slightly Mad Studios are a relatively small independent developer, do you really think they want to cut off a large proportion of their target market who are using AMD CPUs/GPUs?
There are a lot of different ways of creating the same Physics effects, not all of them are performance hogs, with CPU's that are capable of calculating physics instances on very efficient instruction sets across multiple threads There is no reason why physics should be such a performance hog.
I have 190,000 instances here, no Nvidia PhysX GPU, no £800 Intel CPU and the performance is pretty good.
What you are looking at there is something created using Cryengines Bullet Physics backend, its similar to Hair Works / TressFX, actually much closer to TressFX than Hair Works, it reacts to player actions as well as environmental.
Last edited: