Xbox One X's Project Cars 2 running 4K (update)

Will be, after they drop the native resolution and optimize graphical settings. That's their target, not where they are at.

Additionally, that's the response to this question,

So is a locked 60fps on consoles a high priority in pCARS 2?

So he's not even speaking of the X1X versions specifically any more, but all consoles.

Most of the time in normal racing? Meaning they'll drop frames at less than 4K on a dry track. On a wet track they'll dip even more. 1070 doesn't dip on dry tracks, it reaches past 70-90 fps at full 4K with MSAA. Drops to low 50's when on a wet track with 30+ cars. And that's at ultra, which consoles won't be running at. The 1070 eats the scorpio dude.

Dry track.... Not dropping below 60 fps... rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrright.... Nope, you are wrong.

Published on Mar 16, 2017

@ronvalencia: hey ronbot, I got here reality check patch v.1.01 for you. Do you want to install it now or do you want to wait until the X1X releases? I suggest you do it now, it will save you a lot of pain.

So not even proper arguments anymore... ron really has you shook

Scorpio = sub 4k sub 60FPS and who knows what quality Deal it it...hahahhaa

Inferior to a 1070GTX you have been owned again...

The only thing shocking about Ronvalencia is how blind and on denial he is when he gets proven wrong.

The 1070GTX can sustain 60FPS in 4k in ultra,the video posted here killed its argument,it dropped a few seconds below 60 and was more over 70FPS than it was under 60.

It hit 82FPS which the XBO X will not do which is sub 4k,and sub 60FPS.

The arguments about the XBO X been like a 1070GTX turned into aches..lol

And just like he was wrong about Vega,Ryzen and FP16 been in Scorpio he was also wrong about the Price and the bandwidth comparison he blindly does.

Lol at these special mental Olympics to proof a weak box being faster then a faster box.

Oh give me a break. Ronbot and arguments don't mix. For a proper argument you need to actually argue like a human being, you know? like make a statement, elaborate it, analyze data or information, make logical connections between different parts of arguments, debate points clearly, etc. Ronbot does nothing like that, he just regurgitates information exactly like one of those dumb bots from the 1990s does. What is the point of arguing with that? He will just copy paste the same info spam over and over as if posting the same shit for the 100th time would make it more true or less dumb. That's not how normal human beings argue or debate, he should learn that if he wants others to take him seriously. The worst part is when he posts something completely unrelated to the actual point of discussion. It's as if he gets one or two keywords from the whole text, searches his database of charts and posts that without even a logical connection between what was previously said, it's impossible to develop a logical transition from point A to B with that kind of randomness.

Arguing with ronbot is a waste of time. The same waste as if you were to engage in a philosophical conversation with www.cleverbot.com. Sure he will answer, he will get keywords from what you say and respond, but he doesn't process anything, he doesn't elaborate or analyze or even understands content, he is just a database of prefabricated responses with prefixed information that is triggered by inputs from a human. If you refresh the page you'll get the same sequence of answer and info over and over. That's exactly how ronbot behaves here, there's no point. Several people have already refuted his charts and allegations 100s of times with factual knowledge and information yet he re-pastes his graphs and answers over and over as if he never even read but reacted to the first keyword he found. At least celeverbot can stay on topic I give him that.

My own race.

This is what most would consider a normal race. X1X couldn't handle this at 4K with dropping major frames. It would be worse for X1X if you threw in weather. And we don't even know what settings they were running at. It could have been console settings, medium-high. If I reduced settings to high, I'd probably get past 150 fps in this race.

crickets...

lol

pfff 10 second drive-through penalty for exceeding track limit @Zero_epyon. Learn how to drive lol.

lol I'm getting used to the controller.

Does it run at native 4k? - NO

Does it run at a locked 60fps? - NO

Does it run at ultra settings? - NO

Is it equal to a 1070 then? - NO

this lol

https://www.gamersnet.nl/nieuws/201706/project_cars_2_belooft_native_4k_op_xbox_one_x_playstation_4_pro_nog_onzeker/

Yes, Project CARS 2 wil run 4K/60 natively on Xbox One X. [...] We are not ready to define the exact resolution on PlayStation 4 Pro yet.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/project-cars-2-general-discussion-thread-coming-september-22nd-2017.342814/page-155#post-11859876

Yup, this was a misquote. We're running sub 60 FPS at 4K and we'll probably always be unless we drop livetrack and a host of other things... We'll probably upscale from something very reasonable

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/project-cars-2-general-discussion-thread-coming-september-22nd-2017.342814/page-155#post-11859906

We don't like the term 'locked'. It would put us in first party territory where chest beating is more important than a great experience. We'll be 60 most of the time in normal racing and we'll push the consoles to and beyond their limits for more interesting racing. Even if that means dropping a few frames.

You have selected a different track with less object density. My old GTX 980 Ti at factory settings can play the same track, the same 12 cars count (11 NPC), the same gfx settings with +60 fps.

"Several people have already refuted his charts and allegations 100s of times with factual knowledge and information"

Bro....

Ok check out next video. Same track. Same settings (had to learn a little Portuguese). Same car count. I only drop to 55 once for a second or two on the initial turn. Any other drops were stutter from the video recording. Now why is it that I can reach 70 fps for the majority of the race and the video you posted stays under 60 for the majority of the time? I'll tell you. MSI Afterburner capture software EATS frames. I'm using Shadow play which only takes 1-3 frames off of the counter. Without the recording that 55 Fps drops might have only been a drop to 58-59. Once again this is 4K ULTRA settings running above 60 fps with 40 cars on the track, which is technically a stress test. X1X has to drop resolution and probably run medium-high settings just to approach 60 fps which by dev admission is not guaranteed to hit or stay at.

Face it. The X1X is not as powerful as a GTX 1070. Give it a rest.

Also that player needs to bring down the render frames ahead to 1. 4 makes the input lag worse.

Sure, 4k/60.....checkerboard 4k that is. LMAO

@pimphand_gamer: not even checkerboard. They're going to do a straight upscale.

To conclude, did lems all peak at the same time?

More crickets I guess...

@Zero_epyon:

1. You disabled MSAA. This reduce memory bandwidth usage.

2. You played in cockpit mode. This gains additional frame rate.

Using the same gfx settings with low FXAA**, my old MSI Gaming GTX 980 Ti factory settings very rarely (only once) dipped below 60 fps during the actual race with NVIDIA ShadowPlay.

**Disabled MSAA, disabled SMAA, Render frames ahead = 4, V-Sync = OFF.

My argument for X1X is the GPU range not actual "GTX 1070".

Holy crap dude. The Portuguese video had FXAA turned to low and MSAA disabled. Did you not watch your own video? Cockpit mode doesn't add 40 frames per second. I'm not making another video. I proved my point. And now you're changing your argument that iut's not a 1070? Yeah right dude. It's not even close.

@ronvalencia: here's the problem with your "argument"

You're assuming that X1X was tested with Ultra settings and MSAA

You're also assuming that the track used was wet and had 40 cars on it

What you don't get is that a GTX 1070 and as you demonstrated, a 980 Ti can run this game comfortably at 4K under those conditions (except wet track, even the 1080 Ti struggles with wet track).

The X1X could not. They have to drop the resolution just to get the game to run at a stable framerate (not locked at 60) under normal conditions. They're also likely to run this game at console settings. You don't have to make such drastic compromises on a 1070 or even a 980 ti. How is X1X in the same range dude?

The problem is that X1X's gpu is not a true 4k 60fps ready gpu nor is vast majority of gpus on the market. It does not matter if the 6 TFLOP gpu has sufficient memory bandwidth to handle the texture/data rates needed for the higher resolutions but it does not have the processing power to push 4k at 60 fps without taking compromises to reach it.

Fact that the devs have to lower the 4k resolution to reach 60 fps on a racing game...... means that its below a GTX 1070 when 1070 can provide 70-80 fps on their previous game at 4k even when cpu usage and gpu usage isn't even consistent.

AMD's Fury X which has no memory bandwidth limitations from its HBM and the fact it also has 1st gen DCC which provides upto 20% bandwidth savings. Its a 8+ TFLOP gpu it can match or beat a GTX 1070 when its 4gb buffer isnt saturated at 4k. However an overclocked RX 580 at 1440p cant even beat 980ti where memory bandwidth isnt an issue... which means at 4k it wont even come close.

Agreed.

Project Cars' Nurburgring dry track with mostly 60 fps and it dips below 60 fps.

MSI Gaming GTX 980 Ti with factory settings, Project Cars 4K Ultra settings with MSAA enabled, FXAA disabled, SMAA disabled, Render frames ahead = 4, V-Sync = OFF.

The Italy track is sustained +60 fps for the most part with a single 60 fps drop event during the actual race event.

And X1X can't do any of that. SMS are not worried about a few drops. But what's happening on the X1X at 4K is making them drop the resolution. That's what you're not getting. If X1X was "in range" of a 1070 or even a 980 ti, then they wouldn't need to drop the resolution and could run at ultra. They're not doing either.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/project-cars-2-general-discussion-thread-coming-september-22nd-2017.342814/page-155#post-11859876

Yup, this was a misquote. We're running sub 60 FPS at 4K and we'll probably always be unless we drop livetrack and a host of other things... We'll probably upscale from something very reasonable

Notice SMS didn't state 4k 30 fps, instead sub 60 fps at 4K.

After the above post

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/project-cars-2-general-discussion-thread-coming-september-22nd-2017.342814/page-155#post-11859906

We don't like the term 'locked'. It would put us in first party territory where chest beating is more important than a great experience. We'll be 60 most of the time in normal racing and we'll push the consoles to and beyond their limits for more interesting racing. Even if that means dropping a few frames.

Once again.

Yup, this was a misquote. We're running sub 60 FPS at 4Kand we'll probably always be unless we drop livetrack and a host of other things... We'll probably upscale from something very reasonable

30 FPS IS sub 60 FPS. There is no rule that says if it was 30 he would have to say 30. But he does state they will ALWAYS be under 60 unless they drop livetrack and a HOST of other things.

Host: a great number

Also, once again,

We don't like the term 'locked'. It would put us in first party territory where chest beating is more important than a great experience. We'll be 60 most of the time in normal racing and we'll push the consoles to and beyond their limits for more interesting racing. Even if that means dropping a few frames.

"We'll" is a contraction of "We will". This is future tense, as in something that will happen. This is their goal, not their current status. Which, according to the previous statement, has not been met with the X1X version yet. Additionally, this is a response to the question,

So is a locked 60fps on consoles a high priority in pCARS 2?

So they aren't even talking about the X1X version, specifically, any more; but for all console versions.

@ronvalencia: they'll be at 60 fps in normal races AFTER they drop the resolution from 4K to something smaller. Learn to read.

We'll be 60 most of the time in normal racing

Implies it will be 60 or above at some point.

Probably implies its an estimated guess.

if it was near 30fps they would say 30fps not that its under.

Lets not be silly here.

These are 2 different quotes. The one about being under 60 is about the X1X version specifically. It is where they are currently with the build and they are short enough of the 60 fps goal that dropping weather would not be nearly enough and they would have to drop a great number of other things to reach 60 fps. The second quote is a direct answer to "So is a locked 60fps on consoles a high priority in pCARS 2?" and is not just about the X1X version, but their goal with all of the console versions. It is not a clarification of the previous statement. Sorry for the confusion, I should've broke out the quotes and separated them to make more clear which I was referring to.

Gamespot just did a test with Project Cars and couldnt get over 20 FPS @4K? There test machine was a i7 7700 at 4.2 and a 1080 clocked at 1683. They ran the highest AA which is a little stupid at 4k resolutions. haha!

https://www.gamespot.com/gallery/the-most-graphically-demanding-pc-games-2017/2900-1331/17/

I don't believe that. Unless by highest AA they meant DS9X. That would have been stupid.

The fact that you still arguing that the xbox one X is close to a 1070GTX really show how dense you are,several videos were posted the one i re linked,dropped below 60 for a few seconds and the game was more over 70 and even over 80FPS than under 60 and at tue ultra 4k,not water down and sub 4k like the xbox one X version is,and since we know for fast that the xbox one X will not even hit 80FPS on Ultra settings even less at 4k you have nothing.

Again.

1070GTX = 4k ultra 60 to 80 FPS

The XBO X = sub 4k sub 60 and who knows what mixed settings in other word not even close to a 1070...hahahahaa

Yes because they say near 30 for the xbox one and PS4 right.?

They sold the game as a 60FPS game despite the low performance..

Don't be surprise to see the xbox one X dropping below 40's when stressed.

It is funny at this point the cows do not deny they will have the worse version but instead just try to downplay how much better it will be. You know cows are in bad shape when their best argument is -ya it is not going to be so much better then the PS4 as you think it will be.

So the argument is not who will have the best version but how much better the X1X will be then the PS4.

You have posted alpha/transparency effects heavy Project Cars's wet track which is memory bandwidth heavy consumer.

X1X's wouldn't exceed 60 hz since most HDTVs are limited to 60 hz.

My MSI GTX 980 Ti less instances with dropping below 60 fps when compared to Zero_epyon's GTX 1070. MSI GTX 980 Ti is factory shipped with 7.7 TFLOPS capability out-of-the-box.

If you max MSAA, FXAA and SMAA, frame rate will significantly drop. 4K rendering resolution is already SSAA resolution for lesser rendering resolution.

SMS didn't state 4K 30 fps, learn to read.

According to NVIDIA, GTX 1080 is required for 4K 60 Ultra settings.

The game was under 60 FPS for about 8 seconds intermittent,and about half the damn video the game is over 70FPS,in fact the game spent more time over 80FPS than under 60FPS,apparently you don't freaking know what an average is do you?

Yes you know but you play the blind fanboy because it serve you best,the 1070GTX does more than 60FPS on average on this game without problems on Ultra 4k true ultra and true 4k.

If you had some freaking dignity and weren't such a sour loser you would have the guts to admit that you were wrong,and move alone but again you are to dense,and to much of a MS fanboy.

You posted Project Cars version 1, while I posted Project Cars version 2.

Project Cars version 2's ultra 4k 60 fps is being budgeted for GTX 1080. PC gaming is shifting the workload goal post to the next level GPU.

Project Cars 2 has competitive pressures to deliver 4K on X1X since F1 2017 and Forza Motorsport 7 has committed to 4K 60 fps.

Try again.

I don't care what you posted ridiculous fanboy.

I posted the video right there and it shows period,PC2 is not yet out and there is no frame rate in the video you posted just a 60FPS claim in 4k,which could mean higher.

But is the game does requires a 1080ti for 4k ultra (which Nvidia doesn't claim there) that mean the xbox one X version will be totally downgraded.

Do you at least agree that X1X will be better then PS4? If so then just seriously stop since all you are trying to argue is how bad the PS4 version will be compared to X1X. If your entire argument is to say the X1X will not be that much better then the PS4 as hoped then you failed.

If you actually think PS4 and the X1X are the same then we can have fun. You will lose and you know it, I know it, and everyone knows it.

If you agree the X1X is better then crawl in your hole. Pick your battles and just admit when the X1X is better.

For the posted Project Cars 2 video, NVIDIA has shown the lesser GTX 1080 non-TI variant NOT higher GTX 1080 Ti variant.

You have mixed up GTX 1080 (with GP104 silicon) with GTX 1080 Ti (with GP102 silicon).

GP104 silicon has 317 mm^2 size chip.

GP102 silicon has 471 mm^2 size chip.

For Project Cars 2, NVIDIA is claiming Ultra 4K 60 fps for GTX 1080 and it was done from their official business youtube channel.

Try again.