🛈 Announcement
Greetings! Watch Dogs forums are now archived and accessible in read-only mode, please go to the new platform to discuss the game
  1. #1
    thewhitestig's Avatar Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Sofia, Bulgaria
    Posts
    218

    Yes, the GameWorks thing was true

    I just wanted to put this benchmark up for anyone still saying that there are no differences between the AMD and Nvidia cards and that AMD were just whiny crybabies.



    A GTX 780 should not beat the 290X by so many frames. A GTX 760 should not match the R9 280X. Anyways, don't eat me alive for this post. Just wanted to put some "proof" once and for all.

    Here is how those cards should actually perform in a vendor neutral game.
    290X > 780 = 290
    280X > 760

    Share this post

  2. #2

    Hmm

    It's true some games are Optimized for certain Gpus , and this seems no different . Depends on what you play. Most of the time a 760 beats a 280 and 7950 so it's not completely surprising it was bested in a nvidia game. I think your looking more into this then need be . Performance is worse yes but not by enouh to claim its game works . It's just crap optimisation on ubisoft a part. They haven't even Optimized for nvidia properly so it's really not this IMO
    Share this post

  3. #3
    thewhitestig's Avatar Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Sofia, Bulgaria
    Posts
    218
    Originally Posted by Master-OC Go to original post
    It's true some games are Optimized for certain Gpus , and this seems no different . Depends on what you play. Most of the time a 760 beats a 280 and 7950 so it's not completely surprising it was bested in a nvidia game. I think your looking more into this then need be . Performance is worse yes but not by enouh to claim its game works . It's just crap optimisation on ubisoft a part. They haven't even Optimized for nvidia properly so it's really not this IMO
    Isn't 67 vs 58 fps enough for you? That's a 17% difference in performance. I wouldn't call that insignificant at all.
    Share this post

  4. #4
    Of course Watch Dogs is screwing with AMD cards, that top list proves it a 290x should never be placed there.
    Share this post

  5. #5
    This sort of thing has been happening for years.
    "The Way It's Meant To Be Played" vs "Gaming Evolved"

    Why is it a big story all of a sudden?

    Nobody put a gun to the UBI CEO's head to do the deal with NVidia.

    The rumour is NVidia weren't given early access to Saints Row IV in order to optimise their drivers, but AMD was. Same story the other way around.

    Why haven't AMD put their own package out there to complete with Gameworks?
    If they had put a better offer on the table, (as they did with Battlefield 4 and Tombraider) UBI would have gone with them and those with NVidia cards would have suffered.

    No doubt another time AMD will outperform NVidia in benchmarks in A.N.Other game.

    So AMD have lost this battle, but they have their tech in both the current consoles.
    NVidia would have wanted to win that contract.

    These things happen, it's just business. Businesses compete.

    I don't really understand all the fuss.
    Share this post

  6. #6

    Read

    Originally Posted by sickbullet80 Go to original post
    Of course Watch Dogs is screwing with AMD cards, that top list proves it a 290x should never be placed there.
    Never said it wasn't , you all failed to obviously read properly , nvidia cards are Optimized pretty poorly ATM aswell, no doubt that amd should be further ahead then it is on the chart.. But why do you all immediately point to gameworks. It may be just the fact they just haven't Optimized for amd rather then it being something to do with gameworks . The benchmarks provides no proof of gameworks hindering amd just that it's performing worse. Be it optimisation , gameworks or w.e else . Pointing it out like you know for a fact it's such and such without proper proof to back up facts does nothing for the community. Benchmarks are an insight not a awnser
    Share this post

  7. #7
    I feel like you jump to conclusion way too fast. There could be a lot of reason for those results
    Share this post

  8. #8
    The reason is pretty simply why the r9 r90x isn't on-par with the 780 ti, its because amd gpu's aren't optimized for this game. Hell, I would say no pc hardware is really optimized to run watch dogs at the moment.

    If you run msi afterburner and watch your R9 290x gpu utilization it drops to 40-60% when playing watch dogs, especially when driving. I don't think the nvidia gpu's are currently doing that but I could be wrong.

    Also the gtx 780 should not be beating a r9 290x in anything, that shouldn't even be possible.
    Share this post

  9. #9
    The game is not optimized for PC. That causes cascading effects such as poor performance for different graphics cards. That, and each graphics card varies due to the power which they each can handle. I doubt it is just because of GAMEWORKS having a special deal with Ubisoft. Though, I could be wrong.
    Share this post

  10. #10
    and why you assumed its GameWorks fault?

    why not pointing the finger towards AMD unoptimized drivers for this game?! , its a usual thing for any game whether its Nvidia/AMD optimized, one of the parties will get screwed over it, let me remind you of TombRaider, while AMD owners had a great experience, Nvidia users kept suffering from performance issues and lack of TressFX. long story short, after a month or so, things got better and it runs fine.

    no one is happy about this whether Nvidia/AMD fan, but i guess this has been going for a very long time and sadly nothing can be done about it.


    Originally Posted by Extreme_One Go to original post
    So AMD have lost this battle, but they have their tech in both the current consoles.
    NVidia would have wanted to win that contract.
    just a correction, MS and Sony went to Nvidia first and the asking price was too high that it would make consoles cost much more than its now, Nvidia stated that profit margin is very low if they gave lower prices and its not worth it, hence to that, they switched to AMD. AMD looked at it in different aspects and approved the contract even if the profit margin is very low.
    Share this post