Project CARS devs address AMD performance issues, AMD drivers to blame entirely, PhysX runs on CPU only, no GPU involvement whatsoever.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

so, your idea being game companies implement new features that other companies don't and so the people who invented that feature is a dick.

Not when the only other competition allows their features to work on their rival's cards. AMD makes Nvidia seems like greedy pricks and they're very good at doing it.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

Not when the only other competition allows their features to work on their rival's cards. AMD makes Nvidia seems like greedy pricks and they're very good at doing it.

i'm sure if tables were reversed AMD would have done the same thing. i'm sorry, did you not understand when i said "that's competition" ? ( have i ever told you the definition of insanity ? )

[mr moose]

Company A makes a product that improves the end user experience, company B can't so all those with products from company B call company A dicks for improving the experience for their customers.   Sounds like butthurt to me.  You can't buy a cheaper DVD player then blame Sony because everything looks superior on blu-ray.

[xAcid9]

that's amd's department to deal with you can't say you hate nvidia for game companies implementing the features such as physx, you're blaming nvidia for inventing physx because amd cards don't have them? that does not make any sense, iirc AMD has their hair Tessellation technology they used on Lara croft, no one from nvidia complained its not on nvidia did they ? 

 

At least create an option to disable them. You can disable TressFX in Tomb Raider, you can disable Global Illumination in Dirt:Showdown but you cannot disable Physx in ProjectCars. 

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

At least create an option to disable them. You can disable TressFX in Tomb Raider, you can disable Global Illumination in Dirt:Showdown but you cannot disable Physx in ProjectCars. 

That's upto the devs to disable them, and if it's integrated into the gameplay you can't expect them to disable the feature

[xAcid9]

That's upto the devs to disable them, and if it's integrated into the gameplay you can't expect them to disable the feature

So, what Phsyx bring into the gameplay? Better FFB? Lel

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

So, what Phsyx bring into the gameplay? Better FFB? Lel

doesn't matter what it brings, if a developer wants to implement it because it makes their game better they will use it and there's nothing you and i can do from them stopping it, you either evolve with it or perish, physx is disabled by default for the cards which dont support it and not enabled on amd cards, i don't get what's your problem here, if its not at all compatible on your card, why would they add disable option ? its not even enabled 

[xAcid9]

doesn't matter what it brings, if a developer wants to implement it because it makes their game better they will use it and there's nothing you and i can do from them stopping it, you either evolve with it or perish, physx is disabled by default for the cards which dont support it and not enabled on amd cards, i don't get what's your problem here, if its not at all compatible on your card, why would they add disable option ? its not even enabled 

 

Nah, Phsyx is enabled. 

 

http://steamcommunity.com/app/234630/discussions/0/613940109908920730/?insideModal=1#c613940477683909381

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

Nah, Phsyx is enabled. 

 

http://steamcommunity.com/app/234630/discussions/0/613940109908920730/?insideModal=1#c613940477683909381

that clears your doubt, nothing to do with nvidia cards and their drivers, blame your CPU 

[Dabombinable]

that clears your doubt, nothing to do with nvidia cards and their drivers, blame your CPU 

I've noticed that if I set PhysX to use a CPU (i5 4440 or Xeon X5450) it gets disabled outright. And people should stop whining about it not running on their CPU's when its designed to run on graphics cards. Specifically those made by Nvidia.

[xAcid9]

that clears your doubt, nothing to do with nvidia cards and their drivers, blame your CPU 

 

Plot twist, crappy performance on 980 when u set Physx to use CPU.

 

http://steamcommunity.com/app/234630/discussions/0/613957600537550716/#c613957600537622481

[Dabombinable]

Plot twist, crappy performance on 980 when u set Physx to use CPU.

 

http://steamcommunity.com/app/234630/discussions/0/613957600537550716/#p1

Because its meant to be run on the graphics card not the CPU. Do you even know anything about PhysX?

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

Plot twist, crappy performance on 980 when u set Physx to use CPU.

 

http://steamcommunity.com/app/234630/discussions/0/613957600537550716/#c613957600537622481

you have anything more credible than a google search results of steam discussion ? 

EDIT : do you even know what physx is ? 

[zappian]

that clears your doubt, nothing to do with nvidia cards and their drivers, blame your CPU 

 

Physx always runs terrible on AMD gpus .

If thats the issue its nothing new.

I had to disable physx on mafia 2 or it ran under 30 fps and thats a very old game.

[Notional]

If I remember correctly, it's very difficult for AMD to optimize for gameworks.  It's why Nvidia started pushing it in the first place. 

 

Also lol is the original Titan really a 30 FPS card 2 years after release?  Man, I feel bad for people who bought one.  

 

It's pretty clear Nvidia only cared about Maxwell optimization.  Must suck to still have a Kepler card.

 

I can only recommend you, and everyone else to read up on this article, as you get feedback from AMD, NVidia and a dev (valve programmer):http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/183411-gameworks-faq-amd-nvidia-and-game-developers-weigh-in-on-the-gameworks-controversy

 

The original titan was literally a 780 with more vram, nothing else.

 

Not just for the lack of driver optimization, but also the fact that 780 series only had 3GB of vram, which everyone should have known would be a bottleneck within 1 year (I have argued that point many times back in the day).

 

that's amd's department to deal with you can't say you hate nvidia for game companies implementing the features such as physx, you're blaming nvidia for inventing physx because amd cards don't have them? that does not make any sense, iirc AMD has their hair Tessellation technology they used on Lara croft, no one from nvidia complained its not on nvidia did they ? 

that's called competition, AMD better come up with something other than a let down free sync, and arguing over gameworks is just pointless 

 

NVidia did not invent PhysX, they bought it, then made the shittiest non NVidia exclusive software for CPU, the world has ever seen, using x87 instruction set. Read more here: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2010/07/did-nvidia-cripple-its-cpu-gaming-physics-library-to-spite-intel/

 

NVidia users have always been able to use TressFX, though it was not proper optimized, when Tomb Raider launched. However AMD supplied NVidia with full source code access for optimization after launch. The result is that TressFX in Tomb Raider runs equally well on both platforms. Oddly enough, NVidia suddenly had their own version, called HairWorks/FurWorks a year or so later. Odd that.

 

The problem is not NVidia inventing middleware. The issue is having a black boxed, proprietary piece of tech, that is fundamentally anti consumer, due to vendor lock in. Vendor lock in, will diminish competition, choice/options of products, and cause price increase (which we already see in all NVidia products), because vendor lock in, results in high switching costs.

 

i'm sure if tables were reversed AMD would have done the same thing. i'm sorry, did you not understand when i said "that's competition" ? ( have i ever told you the definition of insanity ? )

 

The tables were turns with TressFX, and AMD did not behave in this manner.

 

Company A makes a product that improves the end user experience, company B can't so all those with products from company B call company A dicks for improving the experience for their customers.   Sounds like butthurt to me.  You can't buy a cheaper DVD player then blame Sony because everything looks superior on blu-ray.

 

What an absolutely horrible comparison. I simply cannot fathom, how you don't understand the problem with GameWorks, and the consequences for the entire industry, including NVidia's own users in the long run. It's disturbing and sad really.

How about company A, bribes company C (the game dev) to use proprietary black boxed tech, that punishes company C's customers, that are also Company B's customers, by delivering a sub par experience, either by bad performance or downgraded graphics. Customers of company C's products, pays for this.

 

---

For all those, who support the business strategies of GameWorks: How would you feel, if AMD, made the same middleware package, that game devs, would heavily base their graphics on, which would run sub par on your PC's?

[Opcode]

that's called competition, AMD better come up with something other than a let down free sync, and arguing over gameworks is just pointless 

What does FreeSync have to do with physics frameworks? It seems like you're wanting to change the subject by trying to bash AMD in any way possible. Let's stick to the subject of our discussion and not side track on irrelevant subjects. While GameWorks is Nvidia getting better at being more consumer friendly the company can still take a few notes from AMD. Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is using GameWorks which is doing all the calculations through direct compute and not PhysX. So both AMD and Nvidia consumers will get similar gameplay experience (other than it being optimized for Nvidia hardware). Although a year ago if you looked at Nvidia with AMD hardware they pretty much gave you the middle finger and sent you packing. As much as Nvidia tries to convince people that they are there for the gamers more than any other company, they really aren't.

[Guest Kloaked]

If I remember correctly, it's very difficult for AMD to optimize for gameworks.  It's why Nvidia started pushing it in the first place. 

 

No.

 

See my signature.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Because its meant to be run on the graphics card not the CPU. Do you even know anything about PhysX?

 

you have anything more credible than a google search results of steam discussion ? 

EDIT : do you even know what physx is ? 

 

Wouldn't that reinforce Acid's statement on physX causing performance drops? Since it was stated in the quoted post that physX is supposed to run on the graphics card and AMD's graphics card clearly cannot run physX. It will now have to run on the CPU thus causing systems with AMD gpus to have performance drops since physX is being handled by the CPU.    

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

NVidia did not invent PhysX, they bought it, then made the shittiest non NVidia exclusive software for CPU, the world has ever seen, using x87 instruction set. Read more here: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2010/07/did-nvidia-cripple-its-cpu-gaming-physics-library-to-spite-intel/

 

i worded it wrong, didnt mean invent but you get the idea 

 

 

 

NVidia users have always been able to use TressFX, though it was not proper optimized, when Tomb Raider launched. However AMD supplied NVidia with full source code access for optimization after launch. The result is that TressFX in Tomb Raider runs equally well on both platforms. Oddly enough, NVidia suddenly had their own version, called HairWorks/FurWorks a year or so later. Odd that.

 

good for them, i'm not talking against AMD for that. and nvidia didnt sit around on thier butts and did work on their own hair works, see where this is going ? (amd should have worked on their equivalent to physx)

 

 

 

The problem is not NVidia inventing middleware. The issue is having a black boxed, proprietary piece of tech, that is fundamentally anti consumer, due to vendor lock in. Vendor lock in, will diminish competition, choice/options of products, and cause price increase (which we already see in all NVidia products), because vendor lock in, results in high switching costs.

 

Competition...deal with it

 

 

 

The tables were turns with TressFX, and AMD did not behave in this manner.

and i should believe that because you said so.... /s

 

[zappian]

Competition...deal with it

 

You just say that because it doesn't affect you .

If it did you would be singing a different tune.

[Guest Kloaked]

Nah, Phsyx is enabled. 

 

http://steamcommunity.com/app/234630/discussions/0/613940109908920730/?insideModal=1#c613940477683909381

 

It's not a PhysX issue though, to be clear. It's a development issue.

 

Mirror's Edge had a PhysX issue even with Nvidia cards because it would put PhysX onto your CPU in some cases and not the GPU - I experienced this myself. I think a driver update fixed this, but it was an issue and still is today for some people - I even helped another member out recently who was just pointing out an issue he had with the game and I told him to try disabling PhysX and see what happened. Sure enough their game ran fine after that.

 

I wanna say Metro: Last Light had the same issue because Nvidia left out a PhysX update in a driver package during the release time frame of that game; if you had PhysX enabled without the proper PhysX driver your FPS, even on higher end machines, would tank dramatically, around 15-20 fps no matter what you did. After manually downloading the PhysX update, the issue was fixed for me and the other people who were having the issue.

 

I think I got into an argument with another member here about that once. He swore up and down that there was nothing wrong with the PhysX drivers and Nvidia included them in every driver package. I told him I found out that Nvidia left that update out in one of their driver packages which would give the results that I mentioned. After the manual PhysX update, everything was fixed and that dude shut up, ha.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

You just say that because it doesn't affect you .

If it did you would be singing a different tune.

you actually say it like anything of my opinion will change anything from other companies tactics, it doesn't. 

[Misanthrope]

Competition...deal with it

How is that competition when you're basically preventing others from even competing by artificial means? That's actually the opposite of competition.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

companies lock down stuff they bought and implemented on product so other companies can't use them. that's business 101. stop whining about it , you know who you are.

[Dabombinable]

Wouldn't that reinforce Acid's statement on physX causing performance drops? Since it was stated in the quoted post that physX is supposed to run on the graphics card and AMD's graphics card clearly cannot run physX. It will now have to run on the CPU thus causing systems with AMD gpus to have performance drops since physX is being handled by the CPU.    

You do not understand PhysX at all. On systems with AMD cards PhysX is flat out disabled if the Nvidia driver is installed, or not even there as its part of the Nvidia driver.