Its not a Gameworks game. It is just optimized for nVidia, too. We saw this with Anno2205: A PC developer who cares about the PC plattform.
It might as well be since games based on UE4 and iD tech are synonymous with NV. NV used Doom to unveil Pascal, what else is there to say?
That's the simple reason why those games run und look fantastic while others games (Hitman, Ashes etc.) are just a joke in contrast.
I call BS on this comment.
I find this entire thread LULz considering the trash talking AMD is receiving, Doom is being hailed as some greatly optimized game, while 960/380X are beating 780Ti.
You can try to argue that 780Ti is close to the limit with 3GB of VRAM but then 960 4GB is just 3 fps off the pace of the Titan 6GB, while 980 is faster than the Titan by 54%?
Moving from UQ to HQ sees 780Ti move from 33 fps to 49 fps
(+48% increase) and 290X moves from 32 fps to 48 fps (
+50% increase).
Isn't it odd that 780Ti and 290X gain almost a 50% increase in performance moving from UQ to HQ but 980 gains only 4 fps moving from 63 fps to 67 fps? Sure, sure well optimized NV game -- for Maxwell and Pascal perhaps.
On the CPU optimization side, turning on HT on the $1000 Intel CPU
halves the FPS. Nice bug/optimization there.
Let me guess, just another game that runs better on NVIDIA HW, therefore there must be some sort of conspiracy going on. On the other hand if it was running better on AMD HW it would be a proof of their superior architecture, etc.. Where did I see this before?? Mmhhh
I love posts that ignore how 380X is beating 290X, how 960 is beating 780Ti as claims that he game is well optimized and runs great on NV hardware. At the same time in the same post you managed to categorize all AMD cards into the same group, GCN 1.0, 1.1 and 1.2. It's pretty obvious that Tahiti and Hawaii are having some issues in this title that are not present on Fury X.
And how is PC Gamer getting completely different results?
Doom's 'Nightmare' graphics: image quality compared and benchmarked
http://www.pcgamer.com/dooms-nightmare-graphics-image-quality-compared-and-benchmarked/
I would bet it's 1-2 settings, possibly Ultra shadows that destroy performance by 50-60%.
Defacto strategy around here. Game is great, getting a lot of positive reception, but tanks on AMD/NV so clearly inferior product. :/
Yes, obviously because seeing 290X/780Ti vs. 960/970 Maxwell/380X or Fury X vs. 390/390X cannot possibly explain that something odd is happening with Ultra settings. The easier explanation of course is that as long as NV's latest architecture performs better than AMD, the game is a well optimized next gen title. :thumbsup: I bet if Pascal destroys everything in ARK Survival, it's going to become the defacto standard for a Next Gen well optimized title.
Based on this tweeter feed, it seems AMD never even got a chance to optimize for the Ultra settings or at the very least they are aware of the issues and are working on a fix.
https://twitter.com/idSoftwareTiago/status/731269988242202624
Considering NV used Doom to unveil Pascal, I wouldn't be surprised if behind the scenes they were working with iD for weeks optimizing Maxwell and Pascal for this title. This explains why AMD did so well in the Beta but the final game now magically bombs on everything prior to Fury.