AMD R9 Fury X benchmarks leaked, Significantly Faster than the GTX 980Ti at 4K

filip said:
Well as far as I understood you could not turn off game-works feathers in that game. That affected AMD cards heavily and people got mad.
Click to expand...

There are no GameWorks feathers in Project Cars.

There are no GameWorks features in Project Cars either.

Seriously? Your response to my post about PC not having GW is "you can't turn of GW features in that game"? Seriously?

Now how am I supposed to take anything else you say about video cards seriously when you've demonstrated a willingness to comment without even educating yourself about which you are commenting?
 
Nenu said:
Undoubtedly they will have to reduce settings and quality because of it.
Yes, the solution at the moment is to get a 980ti or 2 of them. Thats the price of HQ 4K gaming.
AMD could have competed if they had HDMI 2.0 and more than 4GB on their upcoming power cards.



Fair enough, I did read similar.
I also heard that NVidia are addressing Kepler issues but I havent kept up with it.
Click to expand...

Yes they will have to reduce settings like anyone ,even 980ti owners, that wants to play on 4k at 60hz (what an HDMI 2.0 is required for on tv's) So either 4gb is not an issue (because you have to lower setting for any card that you play with at 4k) or hdmi 2.0 is not an issue (because reaching a smooth 60hz requires sli in most cases and also requires a 4k tv both of which a lot of people don't own).

As far as I followed it and sold my card soon after, they released a driver to help performance in one game, the witcher 3, after the major shit storm that brewed over how poor the performance was in that game. If there are better drivers in the future for kepler remains to be seen, but I did not stand by to gamble on that.
 
filip said:
Yes they will have to reduce settings like anyone ,even 980ti owners, that wants to play on 4k at 60hz (what an HDMI 2.0 is required for on tv's) So either 4gb is not an issue (because you have to lower setting for any card that you play with at 4k) or hdmi 2.0 is not an issue (because reaching a smooth 60hz requires sli in most cases and also requires a 4k tv both of which a lot of people don't own).
Click to expand...
The issue is HDMI 2.0 if you want to game in the living room.
The issue is 4GB when you run out vram and it affects performance.
 
jwcalla said:
There are no GameWorks feathers in Project Cars.

There are no GameWorks features in Project Cars either.

Seriously? Your response to my post about PC not having GW is "you can't turn of GW features in that game"? Seriously?

Now how am I supposed to take anything else you say about video cards seriously when you've demonstrated a willingness to comment without even educating yourself about which you are commenting?
Click to expand...

How can I take what you say seriously when you think that PC games don't have game works features?
How is anyone suppose to take what you say seriously when you have no proof of what you are saying while numerous sources have said that project cars features things related to game works.

Do you even know what game works is?
 
Last edited:
Nenu said:
The issue is HDMI 2.0 if you want to game in the living room.
The issue is 4GB when you run out vram and it affects performance.
Click to expand...

Ok so the issue effects a minority, those who need hdmi 2.0 but in respect to 4gb that will affect everyone in the future as games start to utilize more ram how much more over the next year is still to be seen.
 
filip said:
How can I take what you say seriously when you think that PC games don't have game works features?
Click to expand...
Context. The topic is Projectcars.

How is anyone suppose to take what you say seriously when you have no proof of what you are saying while numerous sources have said that project cars features thinks related to game works.
Click to expand...
Provide some proof it does use gameworks.

Do you even know what game works is?
Click to expand...
Its not him having the problem with it.
 
Nenu said:
Show us proof of which those features are used.
Click to expand...

Edit: after being corrected I found what game works features were confirmed by the developer....
The MADNESS engine uses PhysX for collision detection and dynamic objects

It was not even that hard to find this stuff. Why would anyone be claiming otherwise?
 
Last edited:
filip said:
Game works provides Particles & Fluids
here is a screen shot of the settings for project cars...
Notice particles is listed there.

Not to mention all the other features that can be used with game works that will not show up in settings menus...
"Core SDK

Exposing access to NVIDIA Hardware:

NVAPI Allows full access to NVIDIA GPUs and drivers in any UI and non-UI application
GeForce Experience Settings API Games that integrate GSA will work with GeForce
Experience out of the box
Cross Platform Gamepad API Windows and Android C code for game controllers,
OpenAutomate A new standard for simplifying testing of applications"

"Tools

Geforce tools for debugging, profiling and optimizing graphics and compute applications:

Nsight™ Visual Studio Edition Build, Debug, Profile and Trace graphics and compute applications
PerfKit Suite of performance tools to help debug and profile OpenGL and Direct3D applications
Texture Tools for Photoshop Plug in for DDS export, normal maps and mipmaps

Android development tools for debugging, profiling and optimizing graphics and compute applications:

Tegra Android Development Pack All the software tools required to develop on the NVIDIA Tegra platform and Android
Nsight™ Tegra, Visual Studio Edition The raw development power and efficiency of Visual Studio for Android
Tegra System Profiler Multi-core CPU sampling profiler that provides an interactive view of captured profiling data
NVIDIA PerfHUD ES In-depth analysis of OpenGL ES applications on Tegra based devices
Tegra Graphics Debugger allows developers to debug and profile OpenGL ES 2.0, OpenGL ES 3.0, and OpenGL 4.x on Windows, OSX and Linux
Texture Tools for Photoshop Plug in for DDS export, normal maps and mipmaps"

It was not even that hard to find this stuff. Why would anyone be claiming otherwise?
Click to expand...

You havent provided any proof that gameworks is used.
 
any case project cars performance issues stems from the amount of objects being drawn, with the DX11 version of the game, this is noted in other games too, its more driver related other then anything else.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-nvGOK6ud8

AMD has more CPU overhead in numerous games, its harder to tell when using top end cpu's in most games, project cars even happens with high end cpu's.
 
filip said:
These are the features included with game works... https://developer.nvidia.com/content/introducing-nvidia-gameworks

Does project cars have any of those features? Yes it does. That must mean that it has game works features.
Click to expand...

The devs said it doesn't use GameWorks:

"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."

"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."

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/pressreleases/243705/Project_CARS_On_AMD_GPUs__Clarification.php


...but the myth will just keep being perpetuated...

Hey, people need to be mad at somebody for the performance problems on AMD cards. I guess GameWorks provided a good scapegoat.
 
razor1 said:
They made their own particle engine
Click to expand...

Thank you for clarifying that, after looking it up to verify it I found features that are Game works related... The MADNESS engine uses PhysX for collision detection and dynamic objects so it does in fact use game works features. That by the way was said by the developers.
So if they are using game works features they are using the game works sdk, in at least some effect, which in turn can affect the performance of the AMD cards.
 
Conversation MUST be civil or the thread will be closed.
 
filip said:
Edit: after being corrected I found what game works features were confirmed by the developer....
The MADNESS engine uses PhysX for collision detection and dynamic objects

It was not even that hard to find this stuff. Why would anyone be claiming otherwise?
Click to expand...

Here's the devs' statement on PhysX:

"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."
 
jwcalla said:
Here's the devs' statement on PhysX:

"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."
Click to expand...

Ok the game works sdk could easily provide problems.
And while you said there were no game works features the devs seem to disagree with you.

jwcalla said:
There are no GameWorks feathers in Project Cars.

There are no GameWorks features in Project Cars either.
Click to expand...
 
filip said:
Ok the game works sdk could easily provide problems.
And while you said there were no game works features the devs seem to disagree with you.
Click to expand...

Generally PhysX is considered distinct from GameWorks, even if nvidia promotes them under the same banner.

Does Project Cars even use GPU-accelerated PhysX?
 
jwcalla said:
Generally PhysX is considered distinct from GameWorks, even if nvidia promotes them under the same banner.

Does Project Cars even use GPU-accelerated PhysX?
Click to expand...

I don't know man it is a game works feature according to Nvidia.
It must, because PhysX is offloaded to the gpu instead of the cpu with Nvidia cards. The cpu reference was related to the fact that AMD cards do not do the same thing.
 
the physX CPU version isn't part of game works. With Flex, which is the GPU one is, pretty much nV is trying to phase out as much CPU physics as possible.
 
filip said:
I don't know man it is a game works feature according to Nvidia.
It must, because PhysX is offloaded to the gpu instead of the cpu with Nvidia cards. The cpu reference was related to the fact that AMD cards do not do the same thing.
Click to expand...

PhysX is a large library and is mostly CPU only.
Many games use PhysX that make no use of the GPU.
Certain features can be enabled to run on the GPU if the developer chooses.
 
Nenu said:
Context.
I could not recommend a card for 4K in the living room that doesnt have HDMI 2.0 and doesnt have more than 4GB.
[H] have highlighted the 4GB issue, strange you havent read it.


Your problems are your own, act accordingly.
When you have a genuine gripe I wont deny you.
But yes, the driver problems are what made me move so quickly back to NVidia.
Click to expand...

[H] hasn't highlighted ANY 4GB issue with Fury yet because they haven't released the review, the highlighted that NVIDIAs cards will use more ram if given the opportunity, yet the 980 still didn't have a stuttering issue despite having 4GB.

You just said you own a 980 and love it yada yada, why aren't you pissing and moaning about the 4GB on it?
 
shad0w4life said:
[H] hasn't highlighted ANY 4GB issue with Fury yet because they haven't released the review, the highlighted that NVIDIAs cards will use more ram if given the opportunity, yet the 980 still didn't have a stuttering issue despite having 4GB.
Click to expand...
Why should Fury be any different with its ram use?
I get stutters with Shadows of Mordor at 1080p, higher res would be painful.
The 980 does suffer from lack of memory at 4K, read [H] reviews.
They have to turn down settings to remain playable

ie
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/04/20/grand_theft_auto_v_video_card_performance_preview/3
What we have learned from these tests are that 4GB video cards are going to suffer at the highest in-game settings in this game due to the limited framebuffers. We are going to have to adjust settings to alleviate that bottleneck for these to truly shine. In our full-evaluation we will find out what settings are actually playable once we figure out which setting reduces the VRAM bottleneck on them. As it is right now, GTX TITAN X takes the cake as the best experience.
Click to expand...


You just said you own a 980 and love it yada yada, why aren't you pissing and moaning about the 4GB on it?
Click to expand...
I am on 1080p.
If I do use it for 4K, I'll turn settings down to remain within 4GB and may get another card as well.
I'm reasonable about how I use my hardware and its limitations.
I dont need to be at the leading edge :)
 
shad0w4life said:
[H] hasn't highlighted ANY 4GB issue with Fury yet because they haven't released the review, the highlighted that NVIDIAs cards will use more ram if given the opportunity, yet the 980 still didn't have a stuttering issue despite having 4GB.

You just said you own a 980 and love it yada yada, why aren't you pissing and moaning about the 4GB on it?
Click to expand...

4gb is 4gb, HBM ain't going to change that one bit mark my word on this.
 
Nenu said:
PhysX is a large library and is mostly CPU only.
Many games use PhysX that make no use of the GPU.
Certain features can be enabled to run on the GPU if the developer chooses.
Click to expand...

razor1 said:
the physX CPU version isn't part of game works. With Flex, which is the GPU one is, pretty much nV is trying to phase out as much CPU physics as possible.
Click to expand...

PhysX is Nvidia. Physx is part of game works. Nvida cards offload physX to the GPU.
AMD cards do it on the CPU. This game has game works features in it, end of story.

Now the developers claims that this does not affect the performance of AMD cards is a different story, personally not being in a position to check this, I have to take the devs word at face value.
 
filip said:
PhysX is Nvidia. Physx is part of game works. Nvida cards offload physX to the GPU.
AMD cards do it on the CPU. This game has game works features in it, end of story.

Now the developers claims that this does not affect the performance of AMD cards is a different story, personally not being in a position to check this, I have to take the devs word at face value.
Click to expand...


Using PhysX in UE4 doesn't automatically make you use game work libraries. Only if you sign up for flex or other game work features.

In UE4 and Unity 5 PhysX is CPU only.
 
razor1 said:
4gb is 4gb, HBM ain't going to change that one bit mark my word on this.
Click to expand...

I've been wondering about that. The bandwidth between the GPU and VRAM is huge, and that's a good thing. However, recently, overclocking memory hasn't really equated to significant performance increases on GPUs. The memory hasn't really been a bottleneck. Cards seem to run out of shader power well before they run into memory issues. Maybe I'm wrong, I dunno.
 
The bandwidth between the GPU and VRAM is immense, but the problem when you run out of VRAM capacity is that the system has to swap textures and other information from system RAM to VRAM, which is several orders of magnitude slower. I don't see how a faster connection between the GPU and VRAM will alleviate that.
 
filip said:
PhysX is Nvidia. Physx is part of game works. Nvida cards offload physX to the GPU.
Click to expand...
I dont know the truth whether PhysX really is part of Gameworks, it looks like it is from the way NVidia presents it.
But you can be sure that the GPU is only used when the developer makes it.
It does not automatically use the GPU.

AMD cards do it on the CPU. This game has game works features in it, end of story.
Click to expand...
A lot of games also run PhysX on the CPU with NVidia.

Now the developers claims that this does not affect the performance of AMD cards is a different story, personally not being in a position to check this, I have to take the devs word at face value.
Click to expand...
AMD have said they can improve performance.
Its a shame they stopped doing this before the launch of the game, you could have had decent performance from the start.
Its AMD that dropped the ball.

I saw a report that Project cars ran great on Windows 10 beta.
It is speculated that this is because the AMD video driver is multi threaded when used from DX12, even though the game isnt DX12.

Users reported a while back for a game (I cant remember which, it could even be PCars) that when they copied the Windows 10 AMD driver dlls to Windows 7, they got the same performance benefits.
I didnt see anyone reject this or prove it wrong so I am assuming it to be correct.


Given the above, it looks like the problem with Project Cars is the AMD driver being single threaded.
That they didnt release a Win7 driver that allows multi threading is strange, NVidia does it.
Perhaps they are playing along with Microsoft to try and sell Windows 10 to the public by making it the first OS to get the more fluid experience.
 
razor1 said:
Using PhysX in UE4 doesn't automatically make you use game work libraries. Only if you sign up for flex or other game work features.

In UE4 and Unity 5 PhysX is CPU only.
Click to expand...

That is great, but in project cars has the same thing been said outright or are you assuming that it is the same thing as CPU only physX?
Project cars has game works just check this link to Nvidia's Game works games page...
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/tag/nvidia-gameworks

Maybe the developer lied to get out of hot water? Maybe they only use some game works features but they do in fact use them.
 
Rizen said:
The bandwidth between the GPU and VRAM is immense, but the problem when you run out of VRAM capacity is that the system has to swap textures and other information from system RAM to VRAM, which is several orders of magnitude slower. I don't see how a faster connection between the GPU and VRAM will alleviate that.
Click to expand...

That was the point I was trying to get to.
 
AMD drivers seem to be more CPU bound than NVIDIA drivers for whatever reason so anything that frees up CPU resources will improve their performance quite a bit. I think that's why W10/DX12 is helping.
 
filip said:
That is great, but in project cars has the same thing been said outright or are you assuming that it is the same thing as CPU only physX?
Project cars has game works just check this link to Nvidia's Game works games page...
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/tag/nvidia-gameworks

Maybe the developer lied to get out of hot water? Maybe they only use some game works features but they do in fact use them.
Click to expand...

Well i don't play project cars, but from what they have said, it seems like they don't use any gameworks code, so I'm presuming they aren't using any GPU assisted PhysX, which something they have stated.

Also I did post a video of how high amounts of objects with AMD cards hurts them when running Dx 11 games due to CPU overhead. This issue is not confined to just project cars, it happens in AMD sponsored games too which don't use PhysX.
 
xLokiX said:
That was the point I was trying to get to.
Click to expand...
I think there is some potential for doing things that weren't possible on slower cards now that developers have access to 500+GB/s VRAM (compare that to the Xbox 1 which has 63GB/s :p) but if you exceed 4GB you'll still run into the same problems regardless of HBM versus GDDR5.
 
razor1 said:
Well i don't play project cars, but from what they have said, it seems like they don't use any gameworks code, so I'm presuming they aren't using any GPU assisted PhysX, which something they have stated.

Also I did post a video of how high amounts of objects with AMD cards hurts them when running Dx 11 games due to CPU overhead. This issue is not confined to just project cars, it happens in AMD sponsored games too which don't use PhysX.
Click to expand...

"Upcoming Titles with GameWorks Technologies

Assassin’s Creed: Unity | HBAO+, TXAA, PCSS, Tessellation
Batman: Arkham Knight | Turbulence, Environmental PhysX, Volumetric Lights, FaceWorks, Rain Effects
Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel | PhysX Particles
Far Cry 4 | HBAO+, PCSS, TXAA, God Rays, Fur, Enhanced 4K Support
Project CARS | DX11, Turbulence, PhysX Particles, Enhanced 4K Support
Strife | PhysX Particles, HairWorks
The Crew | HBAO+, TXAA
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | HairWorks, HBAO+, PhysX, Destruction, Clothing
Warface | PhysX Particles, Turbulence, Enhanced 4K Support
War Thunder | WaveWorks, Destruction"

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/tag/nvidia-gameworks

No more hearsay here are the facts. The game uses game works.

And to who ever said that there were no Nvidia particles "PhysX Particles" I was right about that too.
 
Last edited:
filip said:
"Upcoming Titles with GameWorks Technologies

Assassin’s Creed: Unity | HBAO+, TXAA, PCSS, Tessellation
Batman: Arkham Knight | Turbulence, Environmental PhysX, Volumetric Lights, FaceWorks, Rain Effects
Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel | PhysX Particles
Far Cry 4 | HBAO+, PCSS, TXAA, God Rays, Fur, Enhanced 4K Support
Project CARS | DX11, Turbulence, PhysX Particles, Enhanced 4K Support
Strife | PhysX Particles, HairWorks
The Crew | HBAO+, TXAA
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | HairWorks, HBAO+, PhysX, Destruction, Clothing
Warface | PhysX Particles, Turbulence, Enhanced 4K Support
War Thunder | WaveWorks, Destruction"

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/tag/nvidia-gameworks

No more hearsay here are the facts. the game uses game works.
Click to expand...

Yeah that looks to be fair enough.
However, as I stated in my last post, PCars works fine with AMD on Windows 10.
It looks like the problem is the single threaded AMD video driver on Windows 7/8
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top