[computerbase] Project CARS benchmarks

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

mikk

Diamond Member
May 15, 2012
4,288
2,372
136
Clearly not an API Limitation when Nvidia isn't limited to the same degree. Try better next time. That was a poor excuse.
 

Azix

Golden Member
Apr 18, 2014
1,438
67
91
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9217/the-amd-a8-7650k-apu-review-also-new-testing-methodology/9


Grid Autosport doesn't even use Nvidia Physx and still we see a huge 2.5x gap on slow CPUs in a CPU bound test compared with Nvidia. Keep talking about Nvidia Physx, it won't solve AMDs driver issues.

You're just seeing what you want to see. In grid there is a broader spread for nvidia in performance as CPU power decreases. That suggests a greater impact from CPU bottlenecks for nvidia. The game also clearly favors nvidia hardware.

Besides grid, none of the games show much of interest. The 980 is faster than the 290x as expected. They both drop similarly when CPU power drops.
 

Flapdrol1337

Golden Member
May 21, 2014
1,677
93
91
You're just seeing what you want to see. In grid there is a broader spread for nvidia in performance as CPU power decreases. That suggests a greater impact from CPU bottlenecks for nvidia. The game also clearly favors nvidia hardware.

Besides grid, none of the games show much of interest. The 980 is faster than the 290x as expected. They both drop similarly when CPU power drops.

You've got to be kidding, nvidia performs better with all those cpu's and you say nvidia has the bigger has a bigger cpu bottleneck.
 

Azix

Golden Member
Apr 18, 2014
1,438
67
91
You've got to be kidding, nvidia performs better with all those cpu's and you say nvidia has the bigger has a bigger cpu bottleneck.

I said nvidia drops more fps as the CPUs reduce in power. Therefore one could assume nvidia is more affected by the bottleneck. This is relatively speaking.

If they had started out at framerates representative of their real performance relative to each other, we could talk about drivers maybe. But the 290x started off showing that the game was favoring nvidia in the first place. Or are you going to say the 4790k bottlenecks the 290x?
 
Last edited:

raghu78

Diamond Member
Aug 23, 2012
4,093
1,475
136
http://www.techspot.com/review/1000-project-cars-benchmarks/page6.html

techspot review of Project CARS. Finally a website has the guts to calls out Nvidia on the performance of Kepler in recent titles and says Nvidia has forgotten Kepler owners. At 1080p with rain effects GTX 960 beats GTX 780. Ouch !!!

AMD is facing a different problem. They have slacked off on the game ready drivers for latest titles which were more regular last year and their last WHQL driver is more than 5 months old. This is bad. I hope AMD picks the slack up and has game ready drivers for titles like Witcher 3 and Batman Arkham Knight with good CF performance scaling and smoothness.
 

3DVagabond

Lifer
Aug 10, 2009
11,951
204
106
http://www.techspot.com/review/1000-project-cars-benchmarks/page6.html

techspot review of Project CARS. Finally a website has the guts to calls out Nvidia on the performance of Kepler in recent titles and says Nvidia has forgotten Kepler owners. At 1080p with rain effects GTX 960 beats GTX 780. Ouch !!!

AMD is facing a different problem. They have slacked off on the game ready drivers for latest titles which were more regular last year and their last WHQL driver is more than 5 months old. This is bad. I hope AMD picks the slack up and has game ready drivers for titles like Witcher 3 and Batman Arkham Knight with good CF performance scaling and smoothness.

AMD had gameday drivers for GTA5. I won't get started on this game because we don't need another locked thread.

Witcher 3 and Batman AK, we can only hope they are allowed to like GTA5.
 

Final8ty

Golden Member
Jun 13, 2007
1,172
13
81
AMD had gameday drivers for GTA5. I won't get started on this game because we don't need another locked thread.

Witcher 3 and Batman AK, we can only hope they are allowed to like GTA5.


GTA5 is not a NV sponsored game, that's why AMD had gameday ready drivers.
 
Last edited:

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
http://www.techspot.com/review/1000-project-cars-benchmarks/page6.html

techspot review of Project CARS. Finally a website has the guts to calls out Nvidia on the performance of Kepler in recent titles and says Nvidia has forgotten Kepler owners. At 1080p with rain effects GTX 960 beats GTX 780. Ouch !!!

TechSpot doesn't count. They use after-market R9 280X/290/290X AMD cards instead of reference throttling 290s and their results don't paint NV in the best light possible, which means they are made up. A biased review site, clearly. Pretty crazy to see a $1000 Titan just 2 fps ahead of a 960.

$650 780 = 31 fps
$180 960 = 32 fps
$1000 Titan = 34 fps



As I have already said, clearly some major issues with AMD cards as they exhibit practically no GPU scaling:

R9 280X = 24 fps
R9 290 = 27 fps
R9 290X = 28 fps

This is consistent with other sites like Computerbase who showed that R9 290X is only 15-16% faster than an R9 280X, suggesting the GPU isn't fully utilized at all. Everyone is so focused on AMD's poor performance in this game, but yet forgot that Kepler bombs too, which I can imagine is not making previous GTX780/780Ti/Titan owners happy.

"Categorically, NVIDIA have not paid us a penny. They have though been very forthcoming with support and co-marketing work at their instigation.

This game has awful performance for everyone but Maxwell users - how nice! The way you are meant to upgrade campaign is in full force.

 
Last edited:

iiiankiii

Senior member
Apr 4, 2008
759
47
91
http://www.techspot.com/review/1000-project-cars-benchmarks/page6.html

techspot review of Project CARS. Finally a website has the guts to calls out Nvidia on the performance of Kepler in recent titles and says Nvidia has forgotten Kepler owners. At 1080p with rain effects GTX 960 beats GTX 780. Ouch !!! .

Psst. Nobody cares about Kepler anymore. It's not like Nvidia is being "lazy" with their optimizations. It just doesn't care. It (Kepler) doesn't deserve the "premium" treatment. Nvidia has a new favorite child, Maxwell. Kepler is so 2000 and late.
 

SirPauly

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2009
5,187
1
0
Kepler sure did take a dive in this title -- that's an eye opener. Thanks for the link.
 

3DVagabond

Lifer
Aug 10, 2009
11,951
204
106
Psst. Nobody cares about Kepler anymore. It's not like Nvidia is being "lazy" with their optimizations. It just doesn't care. It (Kepler) doesn't deserve the "premium" treatment. Nvidia has a new favorite child, Maxwell. Kepler is so 2000 and late.

Makes you wonder if Maxwell will be such a good choice once Pascal comes along next year.
 

raghu78

Diamond Member
Aug 23, 2012
4,093
1,475
136
Kepler sure did take a dive in this title -- that's an eye opener. Thanks for the link.

Kepler's performance has been downhill from late last year after the Maxwell launch. Even in Gameworks titles like Farcry 4, Evolve Kepler is outclassed by comparable GCN cards. That is the reason for R9 290X to catchup with GTX 780 Ti on average in recent graphics card reviews. The fact is if you only consider games after Maxwell launch R9 290X is generally faster than GTX 780 Ti.
 

ocre

Golden Member
Dec 26, 2008
1,594
7
81
I believe there is a lot more to it than what is being repeated on the forums. Kepler performance has been hurting in a lot of recent titles, that is for sure.

Of course AMDs GCN isn't showing its age, it is still their current line up. It is AMDs current gen. On to of that, GCN is now in the current gen consoles. That was supposed to give them an edge and I think people just ignore that. Then, lets not forget that AMD had some pretty notable big driver improvements over the years.

Those are just a few things that any level headed person could easily see. Then there is the flip side. If people comparing recent performance of Hawaii and Tahiti to Kepler just put it off as nvidia abandoning Kepler, they the doing a disservice to AMD. AMD put a lot of effort in getting the most out of the gpus and it is finally paying off well.

I think Tahiti was a very beefy design. It had some killer specs. So much so that on paper there is no way the gk104 should have been able to touch it. It makes so much more sense to me that AMD just got better at harnessing that power.
 

xthetenth

Golden Member
Oct 14, 2014
1,800
529
106
There's AMD pulling ahead, but that doesn't answer why Maxwell is so much farther ahead than Kepler.
 

ocre

Golden Member
Dec 26, 2008
1,594
7
81
There's AMD pulling ahead, but that doesn't answer why Maxwell is so much farther ahead than Kepler.

Before we get too far down this road, I want to make clear that I am only offering other possibilities. I believe very strongly that these factors are at play here, each to some degree. That I am fairly certain that the singular stance that the entire situation is due to nvidia abandoning kepler is just way to shortsighted. It is lacking meaningful thought on the matter.

You ask why Maxwell is so much further. I do believe you are seriously asking this question but I dont think it is really so hard you cant imagine scenarios yourself. The most obvious comes to light simply by looking at any new architecture almost a year later. From Fermi to Tahiti, they all improved over their predecessors, widening the gap. Every other generation though, we called it driver improvements. It is not a new concept, it used to be the absolute expectation. What is so strange about Maxwell? We should all have expected that performance would improve the longer the driver teams have to work with it. It seems now, with this architecture people just believe that there is no improvement to be had for some strange reason. That instead of Maxwell improving, people see it as nvidia sabotaging kepler.

I think the outlier here is how the performance on GCN has gone up in this same time period. And this may be the factor at play that is causing the fuzzy vision. See, we often have Nvidia and AMD launching new architectures around the same time. This sort of brings us a brand new clean slate. But this time, things are different. Even more confusing is that AMD has steadily been gaining performance due to the factors i wrote about in my previous post (their on going driver jumps and consoles having GCN graphics, etc).

AMDs improvements are undeniable, just look at the 980 launch articles to the more recent ones. The 290x has gained ground on the 980. It is clear as day, they have closed the gap. But, i am also asking you to think about another element at play here. One that makes things a little more complex. I propose that Nvidia has been improving maxwell performance, at the same time. That their drivers are becoming mature, just like every other generation.

So, if nvidia has been improving their maxwell performance and AMD has still been able to close the gap at the same time...........
It is not so strange that kepler is being left behind.

When you were little and riding in a car on the interstate, do you remember watching vehicles appear to be going backwards as the car you were in passed them up?
It is a matter of perspective.

Q) So why is kepler not keeping up?

A) Nvidia had many years to extract the most they could out of kepler. There is no choice in the matter, Maxwell had/has more to gain simply being a younger architecture.

Q) But AMD still seems to be making progress with GCN

--ah yes, but also we have to realize that the next gen consoles are GCN. We also all know that AMDs architectures were way more powerful just looking at the specs. Even in gflops, AMD built some really beefy chips. I am suggesting that Nvidia was getting more out of kepler early on. They were able to extract and utilize them to their fullest. AMD has steadily been improving their performance and over the years we have seen multiple large jumps in big driver releases, as well as smaller gains with betas.

AMD is heavily vested in GCN as it will still serve them for yrs to come and they will continue to improve and extract performance.
 
Last edited:

exar333

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2004
8,518
8
91
Before we get too far down this road, I want to make clear that I am only offering other possibilities. I believe very strongly that these factors are at play here, each to some degree. That I am fairly certain that the singular stance that the entire situation is due to nvidia abandoning kepler is just way to shortsighted. It is lacking meaningful thought on the matter.

You ask why Maxwell is so much further. I do believe you are seriously asking this question but I dont think it is really so hard you cant imagine scenarios yourself. The most obvious comes to light simply by looking at any new architecture almost a year later. From Fermi to Tahiti, they all improved over their predecessors, widening the gap. Every other generation though, we called it driver improvements. It is not a new concept, it used to be the absolute expectation. What is so strange about Maxwell? We should all have expected that performance would improve the longer the driver teams have to work with it. It seems now, with this architecture people just believe that there is no improvement to be had for some strange reason. That instead of Maxwell improving, people see it as nvidia sabotaging kepler.

I think the outlier here is how the performance on GCN has gone up in this same time period. And this may be the factor at play that is causing the fuzzy vision. See, we often have Nvidia and AMD launching new architectures around the same time. This sort of brings us a brand new clean slate. But this time, things are different. Even more confusing is that AMD has steadily been gaining performance due to the factors i wrote about in my previous post (their on going driver jumps and consoles having GCN graphics, etc).

AMDs improvements are undeniable, just look at the 980 launch articles to the more recent ones. The 290x has gained ground on the 980. It is clear as day, they have closed the gap. But, i am also asking you to think about another element at play here. One that makes things a little more complex. I propose that Nvidia has been improving maxwell performance, at the same time. That their drivers are becoming mature, just like every other generation.

So, if nvidia has been improving their maxwell performance and AMD has still been able to close the gap at the same time...........
It is not so strange that kepler is being left behind.

When you were little and riding in a car on the interstate, do you remember watching vehicles appear to be going backwards as the car you were in passed them up?
It is a matter of perspective.

Q) So why is kepler not keeping up?

A) Nvidia had many years to extract the most they could out of kepler. There is no choice in the matter, Maxwell had/has more to gain simply being a younger architecture.

Q) But AMD still seems to be making progress with GCN

--ah yes, but also we have to realize that the next gen consoles are GCN. We also all know that AMDs architectures were way more powerful just looking at the specs. Even in gflops, AMD built some really beefy chips. I am suggesting that Nvidia was getting more out of kepler early on. They were able to extract and utilize them to their fullest. AMD has steadily been improving their performance and over the years we have seen multiple large jumps in big driver releases, as well as smaller gains with betas.

AMD is heavily vested in GCN as it will still serve them for yrs to come and they will continue to improve and extract performance.

In some ways, maybe NV has taken a calculated approach to just focusing on perf improvements on newer hardware because their key demographic is updating their cards on a regular basis and expects the newest gen to have the best and most optimized performance.

This does leave older users in the dust, but does help keep the folks who upgrade their flagship cards every gen, even if it's relatively moderate in real performance gains, doing so repeatedly.

I am not saying that is right, but maybe that is what the key NV fans want? This does bring-up the point that AMD is maybe a better longer-term purchase, for those who plan to use a GPU for 2+ years. Who knows.

Or all that is just that and Kepler (as someone else said) is just tapped-out?
 

xthetenth

Golden Member
Oct 14, 2014
1,800
529
106
That's all fair enough, ocre, and it'd be hard to tell some of that.

However there should probably be a thread comparing:


  1. GCN and Kepler once both had been launched
  2. GCN, Kepler and Maxwell at Maxwell launch
  3. GCN, Kepler and Maxwell now
All on consistent games released before that point. So 1 gets a few games, then 2 adds a few more and gives a second look at later performance in game set 1 and so on.



It would definitely be interesting to see how they fared next to each other, and whether for example, Kepler has gotten left behind without improvements or Maxwell has improved significantly more than Kepler.


It would also be interesting to see whether the continual update strategy for GCN has borne fruit in making the cards last longer, or whether improvements aren't large enough to say, stick out another generation.
 
Last edited:

Ranulf

Platinum Member
Jul 18, 2001
2,813
2,413
136
Makes you wonder if Maxwell will be such a good choice once Pascal comes along next year.

This is what has me holding off on buying a 970 at this point, even more than the 3.5gb stuff. The 2 game deal has been tempting but not if the driver support goes bye bye in a year, especially since it apparently needs special attention to 3.5gb issue.
 

Gikaseixas

Platinum Member
Jul 1, 2004
2,836
218
106
Nvidia is pushing hard with Maxwell optimizations and that's understandable, it is after all their newer tech. It sucks for Kepler owners thou.
 

AnandThenMan

Diamond Member
Nov 11, 2004
3,991
626
126
Nvidia is pushing hard with Maxwell optimizations and that's understandable, it is after all their newer tech. It sucks for Kepler owners thou.
I find it really hard to believe the Nvidia driver team does not have the resources to continue optimizing for Kepler.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |