Press Release | Project CARS On AMD GPUs - Clarification

[PopReference]

I never once said I wasn't vindictive. For every action there is a consequence. They can either stay away with their tails tucked between their legs and internalize the fact they screwed up, or they can take the pride-bruising ownership of such a mistake and move on. Both choices end up being painful. Also, I do very much enjoy being right after a long debate.

There's nothing bad about being wrong if you find out what is right afterward, although I doubt this will come to a closed just yet.

 

I was referring to how you don't apologize whenever I've seen you corrected, on this forum, before. I'm not really going to judge character on it, just thought it strange you were asking them.

[samcool55]

So, they worked with Nvidia and AMD, fine. And they haven't received money from them, fine.

But why is there nvidia everywhere to be seen in it? It would be ok if it was just on the cars, because that's just how sponsoring in real life also works. And that makes sense.

But nvidia everwhere else exept on the cars, is surely there for a reason. The only question is what made SMS put it everywhere else? If it isn't money or help, then what is it?

They won't do it for no reason, there is a reason for it, but they just don't want to say why. And as long as they don't explain that, i won't trust anything about it.

[Altecice]

So its just optimized shit.. ok thanks dev.

[zappian]

@Victorious Secret Vindication is sweet.

@Notional @zappian I believe public apologies for BSing the community are very much in order from the two of you.

 

Do you know what a biased source is?

 

Do you think I believe anything that comes out of the horses mouth.

 

There is still something deeply fishy going on . A 760 beats a 290x and that shouldn't happen in any game.

 

If your theory is that AMD is incopetent why arent they equally incompetent in all games , why is the game with all the nvidia banners running so poorly on AMD hardware.

 

Can you explain why a gtx 760 beats a 290x?

 

[Notional]

@Victorious Secret Vindication is sweet.

@Notional @zappian I believe public apologies for BSing the community are very much in order from the two of you.

 

Indeed a very interesting statement. So what happened to the "we gave them 20 keys, and they did nothing at all", bs they claimed in the beginning?

 

What can I say but he should take better stock of what's happening in his company. We're reaching out to AMD with all of our efforts. We've provided them 20 keys as I say. They were invited to work with us for years.

 

And now:

 

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.

 

Fact of the matter is that the game ran fine on AMD cards, with the help of AMD, in beta stages. Then when the game released, it was borked as fuck on AMD, for no apparent reason, and AMD got blamed for it? These two claims are conflicting.

 

Also how can PhysX run at 50hz, if the physics threads are pulled 600hz? Seems very redundant, so I guess there is no point in running this game at more than 50 fps then

[patrickjp93]

There's nothing bad about being wrong if you find out what is right afterward, although I doubt this will come to a closed just yet.

I was referring to how you don't apologize whenever I've seen you corrected, on this forum, before. I'm not really going to judge character on it, just thought it strange you were asking them.

The number of times I've been corrected with strong evidence and reasoning (free of fallacy) in this community is unary-countable on two hands. In those instances, I have admitted defeat. Though, I also was not a pretentious jerk putting others down for disagreeing.

[Nexxus]

i dont know maybe its the physics which they said would be sim based physics, maybe how they said they would fix the ai which has been broken since its inception maybe how they said they would support the game for a long time yet they announce the second game. This however can all be forgiveable if they added mod support which every current sim with the exception of iracing has as that would prolong everything and its not like it would be hard to do, very little work in the grand scheme is actually required for mod support for tracks and or cars, the foundation is already laid with the additional skin support. Afterthat there are lobby systems instead of dedicated servers which isnt nice for sim racers, the people that have been in the sim racing scene for a while dont like this system and neither do I. Of course this rant doesnt include the array of awesome stuff that the game does but while it was a good attempt I cant recommend it because i know it will not have a multiplayer scene 4-5 months from now apart from the minor boosts when a dlc hits. It is a nice game but they caters for the people that havent played a sim before and now those people think its a sim when its not, I can understand why they did it some people win and some lose. the pre bred sim racers lost out on this one but to be honest its not the end of the world, there is still enjoyment to be had in the game its just downgraded to be recommended only on a sale not at full price. Its £27 on GMG btw. 

"physics which they said would be sim based physics"

I dont see how they arent, FFB isnt great but its certainly a sim

" maybe how they said they would fix the ai which has been broken since its inception"

Frankly the AI in this offers some of the best racing ive seen in a game. The only issue I have is getting "stuck" to a car if you accidentally rear end them, but the racing has been fantastic for me and hardly worse then other things on the market (fms a joke. GT is slow, AC drivers dive out of the way if you dive on a corner and the career isnt balanced at all you can kill them on a difficult % and then the next race its practically impossible to podem unless you tune the shit out of the car

not to mention its ALOT better then when it was in dev. I hate time trial and I was pretty much confined to it because the AI was so god awful. So much so I made a thread expressing my concerns when the game was slated for nov 2014 because I was on the verge of asking for a refund.

"They would support the game for a long time yet they announce the second game"

im sorry, I didnt realize that support was canned as soon as they mentioned the second game, Do you have a crystal ball? Can you foresee when he next game is coming out?  Can you tell me what exactly "support" entails? Releasing DLC/keeping servers up/troubleshooting customers issues? CAuse thats a very vauge term. and even post release of PC2 the only one of those we will be missing is more DLC

This however can all be forgiveable if they added mod support which every current sim with the exception of iracing has as that would prolong everything and its not like it would be hard to do, very little work

Aside from their licensing agreement with manufacturers...but ya know..besides that I quote from the developers forum

"Yes but you might (or might not) have noticed that we don't have a template for any of the McLaren cars because the licence deal includes "no custom liveries allowed". 

So it's also possible that manufacturers say "no modding allowed or no vehicle licence"."

[Victorious Secret]

 

Also how can PhysX run at 50hz, if the physics threads are pulled 600hz? Seems very redundant, so I guess there is no point in running this game at more than 50 fps then

 

One part of the physics engine is handling 600 polls per second. The PhysX implementation is handling it at 50 per second. PhysX's rate MIGHT have you think that its pointless to run the gave above 50fps, but whatever PhysX is handling clearly didn't need to be updated that often (whatever accelerated effects are CPU bound clearly didn't require that high a poll rate). The underlying physics engine that handles everything else is 600 because that NEEDS to be updated and analyzing information that fast. 

 

Don't make false comparisons. 

[patrickjp93]

Indeed a very interesting statement. So what happened to the "we gave them 20 keys, and they did nothing at all", bs they claimed in the beginning?

And now:

Fact of the matter is that the game ran fine on AMD cards, with the help of AMD, in beta stages. Then when the game released, it was borked as fuck on AMD, for no apparent reason, and AMD got blamed for it? These two claims are conflicting.

Also how can PhysX run at 50hz, if the physics threads are pulled 600hz? Seems very redundant, so I guess there is no point in running this game at more than 50 fps then

Nope, you're adding words that aren't there and are making a number of assumptions. AMD got 20 keys. AMD did some testing and response, but the fact remains it was too little, and nowhere is it claimed performance was ever great/good on AMD GPUs in beta.

[patrickjp93]

Do you know what a biased source is?

Do you think I believe anything that comes out of the horses mouth.

There is still something deeply fishy going on . A 760 beats a 290x and that shouldn't happen in any game.

If your theory is that AMD is incopetent why arent they equally incompetent in all games , why is the game with all the nvidia banners running so poorly on AMD hardware.

Can you explain why a gtx 760 beats a 290x?

You're putting words in my mouth which I never said and do not agree with. AMD is not incompetent. It doesn't have the manpower needed to test and help so many games across so many studios. And yes a 760 can beat a 290X if the graphics stack is organized in such a way as to disagree with AMD's drivers or hardware. Nvidia has the vastly superior driver support to fix buggy code, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that this can and will inevitably happen once in your lifetime. Since it's not a Gameworks title, you've officially lost most of your credibility to speak on this matter.

[Demonking]

You're putting words in my mouth which I never said and do not agree with. AMD is not incompetent. It doesn't have the manpower needed to test and help so many games across so many studios. And yes a 760 can beat a 290X if the graphics stack is organized in such a way as to disagree with AMD's drivers or hardware. Nvidia has the vastly superior driver support to fix buggy code, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that this can and will inevitably happen once in your lifetime. Since it's not a Gameworks title, you've officially lost most of your credibility to speak on this matter.

Did he just get Rekted ?

[Shakaza]

Did he just get Rekted ?

Why yes! How perceptive of you!  :lol:

[mvitkun]

Nvidia has to fix the fact that Kepler suddenly started tanking (I think we can guess why)

Kepler starting performing worse than it was?

[Nexxus]

What I wanna hear about this whole 780 stuff is from someone who had a 780 and has been playing PC for years while its been in dev to see if there has been any abnormal drops in FPS or if its performing exactly as expected. cause I can say my 680s are performing exactly as expected.

[carolkarine]

I'm used to this. We went through the same song and dance on the 970 issue, and the same thing again now. A few reddit threads and people blow it out of proportion, then ignore any evidence brought forth to the contrary. It is like the Boston Bomber and Reddit doing a great job in catching the wrong person entirely. 

 

Internet rage can be valid, but it is so, so wrong to base anything off that kind of anger. What I advocated for before was just facts, nothing more and certainly nothing less. And yes, I will take the word of the company over a bunch of people on the internet who have axes to grind against said company and their partners. 

 

What more is there to be said? I certainly won't back down when I know what I'm saying is right, though I figure after the past few days whats the point in being so invested in such affairs? Its not like anyone truly learns. 

 

what about reddit when it comes to witcher 3? feel like that's been blown out of proportion? if I remember correctly you are one of the people that is quite agressively in support of the "CDPR are liars, downgrade is a sellout" thing.

[spartaman64]

amd didnt get an nvidia cuda license because they dont like supporting closed proprietary stuff a position that i respect and will always give nvidia flak for i mean seriously proprietary linux drivers wtf nvidia

[Casperian]

...Also how can PhysX run at 50hz, if the physics threads are pulled 600hz? Seems very redundant, so I guess there is no point in running this game at more than 50 fps then

This is not a valid argument.

For example, a HUD in most games only updates when information it is displaying changes or when a timer is passed(sometimes). Since the HUD only updates at say 20hz (20 changes to HUD elements a second, seems about right), then there is obviously no point running the game over 20FPS...

 

Optimization exists for a reason, I could call draw on the HUD at 1000hz, but kiss goodbye to your framerate. Drawing HUDs in games, much like doing physics calculations, is expensive.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

Do you know what a biased source is?

 

Do you think I believe anything that comes out of the horses mouth.

 

If you are going to make a claim like that, then you need to follow it, true to the absolute word.

 

You are making a claim to not believe those who you believe are directly affiliated with NVidia (newsflash: most of them are not), and yet, you, as well as certain other members, have been taking in aggressive marketing material from none other than AMD word for word and treating them like "open source saints". As you said it yourself, straight out of a horse's mouth.

 

As Patrick stated, you have no leg to stand on in this argument with the amount of debunked misinformation dealt with. To be blunt, you never had, as you still did not being any new information or citations from the get-go, and up to now you had only the original argument to rehash over and over and over again. It was defeated ages ago; bring something new to the table or swallow your pride and admit you are wrong!

[GrimNeo]

You're putting words in my mouth which I never said and do not agree with. AMD is not incompetent. It doesn't have the manpower needed to test and help so many games across so many studios. And yes a 760 can beat a 290X if the graphics stack is organized in such a way as to disagree with AMD's drivers or hardware. Nvidia has the vastly superior driver support to fix buggy code, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that this can and will inevitably happen once in your lifetime. Since it's not a Gameworks title, you've officially lost most of your credibility to speak on this matter.

#TyrannosaurusRekt

 

If you are going to make a claim like that, then you need to follow it, true to the absolute word.

 

You are making a claim to not believe those who you believe are directly affiliated with NVidia (newsflash: most of them are not), and yet, you, as well as certain other members, have been taking in aggressive marketing material from none other than AMD word for word and treating them like "open source saints". As you said it yourself, straight out of a horse's mouth.

 

As Patrick stated, you have no leg to stand on in this argument with the amount of debunked misinformation dealt with. To be blunt, you never had, as you still did not being any new information or citations from the get-go, and up to now you had only the original argument to rehash over and over and over again. It was defeated ages ago; bring something new to the table or swallow your pride and admit you are wrong!

Just a quick question. What did I miss?

[mr moose]

 

 

Just a quick question. What did I miss?

 

Nearly every post from zappian is the same graph/s same claims and same out of context/misguided rhetoric that was debunked on the first page.  Every time someone links to a new reddit post that simply rehashes the old arguments, zappian comes in and post the same nonsense,   no new information and no new argument. 

[GrimNeo]

Nearly every post from zappian is the same graph/s same claims and same out of context/misguided rhetoric that was debunked on the first page.  Every time someone links to a new reddit post that simply rehashes the old arguments, zappian comes in and post the same nonsense,   no new information and no new argument. 

Thank you good sir.

[mr moose]

amd didnt get an nvidia cuda license because they dont like supporting closed proprietary stuff a position that i respect and will always give nvidia flak for i mean seriously proprietary linux drivers wtf nvidia

 

That's the way technology advances.  For every xbox you buy MS pays a small royalty to Sony for the Blu-ray.  This is the incentive companies have to push the boundaries and develop the next big tech and patent it.  By AMD refusing to adopt technology like CUDA and refuse to support tech that is becoming mainstream they are doing more damage to the advancement of technology than not. They are in fact segregating consumer choice more when they spend more money developing a competing technology than simply accepting the current standard.

 

Open source feels good and is cheap for the end user, but at the end of the day the stuff that actually works (like USB and Opengl/Vulcan) cost the end user because it cost money to maintain and advance the standard.  There is almost no difference to the end user between and consortium controlled standard and a proprietary technology.

[spartaman64]

That's the way technology advances.  For every xbox you buy MS pays a small royalty to Sony for the Blu-ray.  This is the incentive companies have to push the boundaries and develop the next big tech and patent it.  By AMD refusing to adopt technology like CUDA and refuse to support tech that is becoming mainstream they are doing more damage to the advancement of technology than not. They are in fact segregating consumer choice more when they spend more money developing a competing technology than simply accepting the current standard.

 

Open source feels good and is cheap for the end user, but at the end of the day the stuff that actually works (like USB and Opengl/Vulcan) cost the end user because it cost money to maintain and advance the standard.  There is almost no difference to the end user between and consortium controlled standard and a proprietary technology.

but bluray isnt locked to one company and amd is more concerned about that than the money cost. i will feel no difference from using something proprietary but its bad in giving nvidia control while killing off open source standards like openCL 

[mr moose]

but bluray isnt locked to one company and amd is more concerned about that than the money cost. i will feel no difference from using something proprietary but its bad in giving nvidia control while killing off open source standards like openCL 

 

Of course it's not locked to one company, that's how Sony makes money from developing it. You can't put it in your hardware unless you pay for it.  I don't know if Nvidia charge a fee for CUDA, they have offered it free before but even if that has changed that makes it no different from Blu-ray in that it is a technology we must pay extra to have.  However the difference is that you are paying for advancement and you are providing companies with an incentive to keep advancing.   If Nvidia charge for CUDA or any of their proprietary tech then it is no different from Blu-ray. 

[Guest Kloaked]

Of course it's not locked to one company, that's how Sony makes money from developing it. You can't put it in your hardware unless you pay for it. I don't know if Nvidia charge a fee for CUDA, they have offered it free before but even if that has changed that makes it no different from Blu-ray in that it is a technology we must pay extra to have. However the difference is that you are paying for advancement and you are providing companies with an incentive to keep advancing. If Nvidia charge for CUDA or any of their proprietary tech then it is no different from Blu-ray.

I'm sure Intel pays them to license Cuda.