AMD GFX card performance issues, report directly to AMD here (link in thread)! Let's

If it's true that ISI only use nvidia cards for development then that really is bad form and i can understand why the performance is worse with ati then.

I appreciate it can be difficult without assistance from ati, but come on, if it is true you're not even developing with their cards as well as nvidia, then really what can you expect in terms of performance issues.

Tiny (5 or less) teams of independent developers don't get support from any hardware manufacturers and they manage to get things running reasonably well with parity between graphics vendors.
Please at least try because saying "oh no they won't help" doesn't really cut it. I know it can be hard and frustrating but you are effectively alienating a large part of your potential user base.




To be honest though, it could be worse - at least ISI aren't deliberately doing this, unlike some developers: http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/1...surps-power-from-developers-end-users-and-amd
Mind you that has been the case for years.

I think it's disgusting how nvidia disable hardware accelerated physx for systems that have an ati card in.
They even do it for people using an original Ageia physx card which strikes me as going so far to the point of illegal - the people with those cards bought them well before nvidia had even purchased the company and now nvidia have basically arbitrarily stopped them functioning.

The developers of the batman games clearly don't care about their users though - nor does anyone that adds hardware physx when there are just as good physics libraries that can be accelerated on any hardware - bullet physics for a start.

Personally, i don't want to support a company as anti-competitive as nvidia.


Sorry to rant but i really hate shady, anti-consumer business practices.
For a start, they only hold back the industry.

 

The problem is in code, yes, not sure anybody has said different, and perhaps this is a lack of understanding on your part to what has been said. Because nobody has blamed anything on AMD as far as hardware or drivers.

Development of graphics requires a lot of learning, even of your own engine. You have to learn what works on what hardware. nVidia take your software and assist you, the time is cut, the development is improved, and ultimately your software can perform as it should without you having to commit to trial and error testing. AMD don't (or haven't with us, I assume because we're a small studio), forcing longer development windows in the software, more trial and error testing, etc. His initiative to inform them of this is something a smaller studio really is thankful for if anything actually happens from it. Maybe we'll be able to get some communication going.

 

That's quite a foolish post you're quoting, one that is wrong. Lack of understanding is massive there, both in the post you quote and your assumptions on hardware based upon it. You're wrong. Stating opinion as fact is something that person probably shouldn't be doing, and it certainly shouldn't carry over to here where people might believe it.

What you are right about is where you state that nV advised. See my reply directly above.

 

You're welcome. Keep it up guys, send those reports in!

 

im too tired after work to read all this thread, but i have amd cpu and amd gpu, and i gave up on rf2 especially after civic relese, its unplayble for me even in mix of low/mid settings. Strange cause i just checked in the same resolution BF4 (1400x900) and i can paly in mix of ultra /high settings without problems...sorry but its been too long since release of beta and i cant see optimisation at all. Best physics/FFB/immersion but graphics/performance is just terrible for me

 

Ok, I filled it out, just the one report, no eyefinity stuff as I don't have anything like that XD

 

But BF4 is not an ongoing development product

Now seriously, even though I agree with the AMD huge problem, it's not fair to compare EA (well, DICE) with ISI. Totally different products/targets.

 

So done.

I made an extra Partition for Rfactor2 with the 12.11 beta 11 Driver incl the Cap2 profiles, so i can use the actual Driver for BF4 and the older for RF2.
An example. 13.xx Loch Drummond on 5040x1050, Radeon 7970 with 29 Ai on last grid 22fps
same Setting 12.11 Beta 11 +Cap2 45fps.

100% difference in high load Scenes.

all Drivers after 12.11 beta 11 are bringing large Performance issues to RF2.

 

I never quoted it as fact, just as an opinion as stated a couple posts down or in the following link. You proved me wrong, and I thank you for the explanation above. My opinion has been swayed. I did my part by filling out the survey, and I will do my part by reporting things here, too.
http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.p...thread)!-Let-s?p=239445&viewfull=1#post239445

I just hope it gets resolved. I don't care who is at fault, as long as it gets fixed.

AMD announced at CES that Catalyst 14.1 will be here by end of the month with new features and frame pacing across multiple cards.

I may have to roll back to 12.11's also, as I don't play many new games anyway.

 

Well after reading this post I just did the same, reinstalled the 12.11 beta 11 drivers and the Cap2. Whilst I think that the max frame rates are not better than on the current drivers there is a significant difference in smoothness and min framerates. The game is smoother and the FPS are much more steady.
I have a 4016 x 1024 resolution, tried several tracks yesterday (ISI and mod content, all maxed out only track detail low) and the frame rates on all tracks are very similar even at Silverstone which means I can finally use the same setting for all tracks. What I have also noticed is also the FPS drop with lots of AI on the start is not as big as with current drivers and as said there aren't those big FPS drops which makes the driving nearly impossible and very annoying.
To sum it up the game is just smoother, even in replays. It's really worth a try.

And as mentioned above on the other hand I think the max FPS are better on the current drivers.
I think it's also worth a look for the ISI devs to see what exactly the difference is there.

 

As i said, in high load scenes the performance is much better. WIth the 13.xx versions i have drops down to 30 fps on tracks like Spa or Silverstone, with the 12.11 it run constantly with 60fps. Only in the grid there are soms drops down to 45-55fps, but this is much more than the 20-25 fps with the 13.11.
The max fps aren´t so interessting for me, the drops with 13.11 make it undriveable.
But ist is not only the min fps rate, also the average rate is more stable and much higher. You can find it in the 770GTX vs 290 thread

 

Anyone got a working link to the 12.11's?

 

Where'd you get it?

I've looked around and I always get directed to AMD's download centre, which won't let me download an obsolete driver...

Can you provide a link?

 

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-C...a-11-und-CAP-2-im-Download-1038577/#dl_anchor

 

I am curious how many of you saying you suffer from massive frame rate drops are using vsync? Make sure vsync is off or you will have lower fps if your system can't run a min of the refresh rate of your monitor. vsync will pull your fps down to 30 if enabled and your normal rate drops below 60.

 

My framerate is a bit worse with the 12.11, however the it's image is much more smooth. 70fps feel like 70fps, unlike with the new drivers.

 

No vsync here, it's the evil.

 

I'm a bit of a noob in this department but doesn't updating drivers also involve having to go through rf2 graphic settings once more?
I would assume so since things could have changed one way or another and certain rf2 tweaks might no longer work as good or get better results?

 

No sync. I would cap the frame rate if I could but even if you have over 100 or more FPS it's not sure that they not drop down under 60 for example with AMD. And then you have to change the settings for every track and everything. Switch of mirrors when possible in practice and what not.
But have to say with the 12.11 drivers it is indeed really more stable all together. At least you know where you are.

BTW the mirrors are still a FPS killer literally. Up to 40% performance they eat. If that could be improved also it would help a lot.

 

Bleh, framerate isn't "a bit worse". It's much worse on my machine.

Symmons Plains @ Renault Megane (alone) and lowish settings

12.11 drivers
Min 55, Max 94, Avg 80.5

Last drivers
Min 118, Max 183, Avg 154.5

Forgot to make the benchmark with 20 cars and the old drivers, but they were clearly lower as well. However smoothness is worse with last drivers.