32 Replies Latest reply: Oct 26, 2013 12:20 PM by Momba1 RSS

AMD GPU users beware

damze

I feel sorry for those who will buy the PC version I as an nVidia user am appalled by what IW have done, the listed minimum GPU requirements are so laughable it’s not even funny. A GTS 450 for nVidia users and a whopping HD 5870 for ATi/AMD users. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the HD 5870 is three times as powerful as a GTS 450, the audicaty IW/nVidia have is unseen. Basically this game requires more ATi/AMD GPU horsepower to even run, than Crysis 3 (The benchmark for PC graphics) does. They must have deliberately coded CoD - Ghosts to run horribly on ATi/AMD hardware. There is no other explanation as the discrepancies between the nVidia/AMD minimum requirements are massive. 

 

I had this game in sights for my little sister who plays on a capable mainstream HD 7790, but it looks like I should look elsewhere since the HD 5870 is still a higher class of card. A huge portion of the PC community with very capable cards that are below spec wise to the HD 5870 will suffer.

 

It does not take a genius to see that this will be a failure on PC.

 

This is coming from an nVidia user who is rocking a GTX 680, but even though I buy nVidia cards this sort of partnership that handicaps the users who use ATi/AMD GPU is outright insane and makes me sick. 


Look at the below chart, it's not even funny:

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

 

  • Re: AMD GPU users beware
    maccabi

    damze wrote:

    They must have deliberately coded CoD - Ghosts to run horribly on ATi/AMD hardware.

     

     

    or... maybe Nvidia and IW have a technical partnership that will see Ghosts using EXCLUSIVE nvidia technologies in the pc version.

    Not really a conspiracy theory here buddy its a well known fact and something nvidia have been shouting about for ages .

     

    damze wrote:

    Basically this game requires more ATi/AMD GPU horsepower to even run, than Crysis 3 (The benchmark for PC graphics) does.

    Ya think maybe this could be that being optimized for nvidia that other makes of cards needs more power to match what the nvidia bods and iw have done

    • Re: AMD GPU users beware
      damze

      Obviously you don't know much about PC hardware. The minimum requirements for AMD graphic card users is utterly insane.

       

      Crysis 3 blows this game out of the water visually so don't give me the nvidia partnership excuse. Other games that feature nVidia PhysX do not handicap AMD users by upping their minimum GPU requirement three times higher. 

      • Re: AMD GPU users beware
        maccabi

        damze wrote:

         

        Obviously you don't know much about PC hardware. The minimum requirements for AMD graphic card users is utterly insane.

         

        Crysis 3 blows this game out of the water visually so don't give me the nvidia partnership excuse. Other games that feature nVidia PhysX do not handicap AMD users by upping their minimum GPU requirement three times higher.

        well its not really an excuse is it seeing as its totally true

        • Re: AMD GPU users beware
          damze

           

          I like how you completely indifferent to the fact that everyone in CoD PC community will suffer from this, less AMD GPU users will be able to play, meaning that the MP community will be small, and will be mostly comprised of nvidia users.

           

          • Re: AMD GPU users beware
            maccabi

            damze wrote:

             

             

            I like how you completely indifferent to the fact that everyone in CoD PC community will suffer from this, less AMD GPU users will be able to play, meaning that the MP community will be small, and will be mostly comprised of nvidia users.

             

            I'm not indifferent I only commented on your tinfoil hat theory and explained the most likely reason as to why.

            • Re: AMD GPU users beware
              Stormproot

              Save your keyboard maccabi, some people don't want explanations, they just want to cry and try to stir up a sh*tstorm.

               

              BTW, I agree with you, if IW have been working closely with NVIDIA then it seems to make perfect sense that the game is going to be more optimised for NVIDIA hardware than for AMD, though AMD will be supported well enough - it's all DirectX anyway.

              • Re: AMD GPU users beware
                Mechman

                My guess would be that IW is working just as closely with AMD as with Nvidia. Most of IW's sales for Ghost will come from console buyers.  The next gen consoles both will be using AMD and NOT Nvidia so IW has a  huge reason to optimize their software for AMD also.  (Also since the next gen consoles are using x86 hardware -( PC architecture), the changes made to optimize for AMD would be much more easily coded (ported) for the PC than the current gen consoles.

                 

                I would guess that since the engine in Ghost is not a new (its just updated)  engine that it would run on older/less powerful video cards except for maybe the following?  To run Ghost your video card must support Direct X 11. AMD cards prior to the 5000 series did not support version 11 of direct x.  And a card that does 'support' direct x11 may not have supported all of its functionality (especially if the card was produced when Direct X 11 first came out).

                 

                While the game lists 6GB of ram as a minimum (i can't believe it would really need that much!) it only requires a dual core processor so the game would not seem to be that intensive.  On a different note, I feel bad for those with older computers, but I'm happy that for once a COD game might be able to take advantage of the higher spec's my computer has.  I'd like to have good gameplay AND good graphics!

                • Re: AMD GPU users beware
                  damze

                  I don't believe they are working as closely with AMD on the PC side of things. As I mentioned before the HD 5870 is still a powerful card and eats the GTS 450 for breakfast. If they had gone with a HD 5750/5770 as minimum then that would make perfect sense as they match the GTS 450 in performance. The minimum AMD GPU requirement is thus utterly insane, Crysis 3 the benchmark in high end gaming and cutting edge visuals requires a HD 5770 as minimum. Something is terribly wrong here, and I fear we will see an uproar in these forums when the game releases.   

                  • Re: AMD GPU users beware
                    maccabi

                    damze wrote:

                     

                    I don't believe they are working as closely with AMD on the PC side of things.

                    are you going to keep ignoring the thing where its been explained to countless times nvidia and IW worked TOGETHER on ghosts .

                     

                    damze wrote:

                    Something is terribly wrong here, and I fear we will see an uproar in these forums when the game releases.   

                    As long as we have people like you blowing on the kindle they bought with them ...

                    • Re: AMD GPU users beware
                      Momba1

                      Consoles are using AMD GPU's and the PC version is a ported XboxOne/PS4, and that 'Graphics Card Hierarchy Chart' is a bunch of crap.

                       

                      Example: The HD 7870 sells now for ~$150 v/s GTX 660 sells for ~$180, and HD 7870 ~= GTX 660 in BO2 and I can assume the same for Ghosts.

                       

                      Example: The R9 290X sells now for ~$550 v/s GTX 780 sells for ~$650, R9 290X ~= GTX 780 in BO2 and I can assume the same for Ghosts.

                       

                      Price/Performance Charts change like the direction of the wind. Some games nVidia is better and some AMD is better.

                      • Re: AMD GPU users beware
                        maccabi

                        Momba1 wrote:

                         

                        Consoles are using AMD GPU's and the PC version is a ported XboxOne/PS4, and that 'Graphics Card Hierarchy Chart' is a bunch of crap.

                         

                         

                        ghosts is ported from pc to the consoles

                        • Re: AMD GPU users beware
                          Momba1

                          Nope, the game is written on a 'PC' for a console then ported back again to run on the PC. It is tested on a PC that emulates a console. I mean nowadays their all essentially the same thing, but the PC is an after thought at best. My friend the PC at best is a third-cousin relationship to Activision. The engine, optimizations or you name it are by far, not even close, geared towards the consoles especially in cross-platform games.

                           

                          PC sales are going to be about 1/20th to 1/30th of Activision sales for Ghosts, if that.

                          • Re: AMD GPU users beware
                            maccabi

                            Momba1 wrote:

                             

                            Nope, the game is written on a 'PC' for a console then ported back again to run on the PC. It is tested on a PC that emulates a console. I mean nowadays their all essentially the same thing, but the PC is an after thought at best. My friend the PC at best is a third-cousin relationship to Activision. The engine, optimizations or you name it are by far, not even close, geared towards the consoles especially in cross-platform games.

                             

                            PC sales are going to be about 1/20th to 1/30th of Activision sales for Ghosts, if that.

                            Actually in the case of ghosts you're incorrect.

                            Trust me on this Ghosts was coded and designed first for pc ..then its scaled back for each next gen  platform to fit that platforms specs. Granted with current gen you still have to work with the platforms as you always did but.. This is one of the good things about next gen consoles they are finally based off of pc architecture meaning itsd alot easier for devs to work with.

                            • Re: AMD GPU users beware
                              Momba1

                              Everything I've read, and I'm a programmer by trade though be it for SQL/PHP, the games are written as I described. All optimizations are console based, and like it or not that's not uncommon. Few games are written specifically for the PC and then later for a Console. Typically you're using tools like Microsoft Visual Studio and CodeWarrior.

                               

                              Minimum specs being similar to the Xbox One aren't a coincidence and neither is the 64-bit requirement.

                              • Re: AMD GPU users beware
                                maccabi

                                Momba1 wrote:

                                 

                                Everything I've read, and I'm a programmer by trade though be it for SQL/PHP, the games are written as I described. All optimizations are console based, and like it or not that's not uncommon. Few games are written specifically for the PC and then later for a Console. Typically you're using tools like Microsoft Visual Studio and CodeWarrior.

                                 

                                Minimum specs being similar to the Xbox One aren't a coincidence and neither is the 64-bit requirement.

                                ok but honestly that's how ghosts was done. feel free to believe me or not

                      • Re: AMD GPU users beware
                        damze

                        The link to the GPU chart I provided has absolutely nothing to do with price/performance, it is a hierachy of card/performance, it clearly shows the HD 5870 is far beyond the capabilites of a GTS 450. I have explained how PhysX works and why it cannot triple the minimum requirements of AMD cards vs nvidia cards.

                        • Re: AMD GPU users beware
                          Momba1

                          The link is Price/Performance and not completely up-to-date one at that; otherwise it's completely and terribly wrong.

                          • Re: AMD GPU users beware
                            damze

                            Lol not it is not, your ignorance is amazing. Please just stop posting in this thread you are making yourself look bad.

                            • Re: AMD GPU users beware
                              Momba1

                              Huh, says the 'tinfoil' man, more like uninformed. If there's something that doesn't make sense, you cannot jump to a conclusion on the surface but instead you need look for attributes and characteristics that solve the reasoning: Bus, DirectX, vRAM, drivers, etc which often explains the reasoning.

                               

                              Again, simply looking say at the 'top' of the charts and at the top two slots of single core GPU's:

                               

                              Discrete: GTX 590, 780

                              Discrete: HD 6990, 7970 GHz Ed, R9 280X

                               

                              Discrete: GTX 680, 770

                              Discrete: HD 7970

                               

                              Comparing a GTX 780 to an R9 280X/HD 7970 GHz is ludicrous and ditto with a GTX 770 to an HD 7970. More in keeping is a GTX 780 to an R9 290X and GTX 770 to an R9 280X/HD 7970 GHz; as the purpose from AMD was to compete directly with those GPUs. Keep in mind GTX 780 OC keeps up with a Titan in many tests. Next benchmarking can be easily skewed on what 'tests,' 'drivers,' 'settings,' or etc that are part of a series of benchmarks. Further, to complicate the crap out of a set of benchmarks are the clock speeds; try finding 'all' GTX 770's/780's at the same clock speeds in non-reference GPU's and the same holds true on the R9 280X today and very soon the 290X and many of the OC HD 7970's; stock v/s factory OC and GPU's overhead. Now if you're serious about gaming and resolutions SLI/CF can really paint a picture on GPU's shortcomings and/or drivers. Examples: the GTX 760, HD 7970's (all), R9 280X, and R9 290X all suffer from various degrees of Stutter/Frame Drop/Latency (FCAT) issues; hopefully it managed by newer drivers. Next 'games' and game optimization drivers, across all GPU's new often = bad in many cases for drivers, and an updated driver can easily change 'the game' with 5%-10%-20%+ optimizations. Lastly, who's doing the testing and what's their relationship with Nvidia or AMD. I recall a series of testing that Chris performed at Tom's HW where he was taking mid-to-low range GPU's and asserting 8xMSAA to bottleneck then deliberately the Nvidia's memory bus and hence skewed (cooked the books) testing/benchmarks. As I said, I know Chris, Don, Tom, etc at TH; I'm Jaquith at TH and I normally avoid silly GPU debates they're often like this crap.

                               

                              Therefore, take 'that chart' with a gain of salt. Going back to Ghosts, approximately 1/30th of the sales are PC while 29/30th are Consoles, and the new consoles, Xbox One/PS4 are indeed AMD GPU based and any 'optimizations' are first to AMD and in cases of 'partnering' those 'optimizations' favor the partner GPU's first, but cutting-off your nose and ignoring the other GPU vendor = lost sales so at best slight favoring initially followed by a series of driver optimizations quickly. This is why some benchmarks make no sense and flip in favor of one GPU over another.

                               

                              Lastly, bear in mind Nvidia as is Intel are toying with AMD, and they're both at least a generation and maybe two ahead of AMD. There's little difference between a GTX 780, a Titan and the forthcoming GTX 780 Ti other than unlocking CUDA cores and messing with overhead core frequencies.

                • Re: AMD GPU users beware
                  afflictedmed

                  You hit it on the head.  Its all about DirectX 11.  THe 400 series was the first for nVidia as was the the 5000 series for AMD.  Both are midlevel cards for those series.

                  • Re: AMD GPU users beware
                    damze

                    Completely wrong. The HD 5870 was top tier for the HD 5000 series only surpassed by the HD 5970 which was a dual gpu. The GTS 450 was an entry level card for the 400 series. Check your facts before posting in this thread.

          • Re: AMD GPU users beware
            Regulator_Prime

            Um... all of the people I know that are PC gamers use NVIDIA graphics cards... so... meh.

  • Re: AMD GPU users beware
    Momba1

    Pff...anyone citing 'minimums' is laughable. Being real, today unless you can sustain a minimum of 120 FPS in BO2 and without Stutter you going to have a very miserable experience in Ghosts.

     

    Further, either the forum's min specs are wrong or the Activision site is wrong; GTX 550 Ti & HD 5870. In either case there is a 26% difference in Activision's specs - PassMark Software - Video Card Benchmarks - Video Card Look Up The HD 5870 min spec probably has more to do with vRAM and bandwidth more so than anything else.

    • Re: AMD GPU users beware
      damze

      Pff... anyone citing Passmark Software benchmarks cannot be considered legit in any way shape or form, look at Tom's Hardware chart. Also the minimum specs list nvidia GTS 450.

       

      http://www.hwcompare.com/7763/geforce-gts-450-1gb-vs-radeon-hd-5870/

       

      Something tells me you are way off in your vRAM and bandwdith theory.

      • Re: AMD GPU users beware
        Momba1

        Pff...I know Chris & Don there and those 'charts' mean absolutely zip, most of them are opinion based v/s performance based and taking into account prices at time of publication.

         

        Chart v/s Benchmarks that do not line-up, the Chart is a function of 'price' to 'performance.'

         

        Example a ($400 today) GTX 770 is a slightly less performer (most not all tests) than an HD 7970 GHz/ ($310) R9 280X and the AMD's are cheaper but not a performance match to a GTX 780 but listed on the same level.

  • Re: AMD GPU users beware
    FatRules

    To me it is quite obvious, since AMD/ATI cards dont have the PhysX, they have more to work on the GPU.

    • Re: AMD GPU users beware
      damze

      That is because you don't understand how PhysX works. Let be break this down for everyone who is confused about the PhysX debacle. ¨

       

      PhysX is rendered by the nvidia GPU, but if the user does not have a nvidia GPU he/she can still enable some PhysX effect but the CPU will take over the rendering for PhysX, most of the time there are some exclusive effects only available on nvidia cards, but if you have a pretty beefy CPU you could let it do PhysX with tolerable performance hit. AMD cards cannot render PhysX at all, this is the important thing to remember. PhysX is not mandatory at all, and users can chose to disable it completely. This gives us the conclusion that the three time higher AMD GPU requirements for Ghosts has nothing to do with PhysX as an AMD card cannot render PhysX effects. And IF PhysX was indeed needed then the CPU requirements should have been higher to compensate for AMD GPU users, but they stay the same from BLOPS2.

       

      The high AMD GPU requirement is therefore obviously a coding decision by IW/nvidia, and makes no sense at all, unless some money was exchanged under the counter by IW and nvidia to deliberately underperform on AMD cards. The HD 5870 is to this day a higher tier card, and is three times as powerful as the GTS 450, there is no way that a GTS 450 (which also sucks at PhysX rendering as it is a very low end card) can match the HD 5870 in anything. That is why I have raised the red flag to inform AMD users to what is going on here, a large portion of the CoD PC players who run an AMD card that outperforms the subpar GTS 450 but is still not as powerful as the HD 5870 will most likely struggle.

       

      • Re: AMD GPU users beware
        DShKM

        In a way you're right, but will you please try and calm down before you give yourself an aneurysm. We get it, the specs don't make sense, but, you haven't played the game yet or seen benchmarks of any sorts. Take the tinfoil hat off and relax, we'll see how performance is at or after launch day. Nothing else has to be said here.

         

        /thread

  • Re: AMD GPU users beware
    T-boss

    consul versions run on AMD hardware, this makes no sense unless the rumors of IW skipping optimization alltogether is true. it also raises the chances that the specs they claimed are BS.