Need for Speed Racing Games

cem_ea_id.overclocking101 wrote:WELL HERES HOW I FIXED THIS PROBLEM: I HAD TO INSTALL NVIDIA 8800GT FOR PHYSX OTHERWISE IT WOULDNT PLAY AT ALL

This game uses CPU PhysX, so having a second Nvidia card with PhysX enabled will not affect your frame rate.

I've tested this myself. Having a PhysX card with my ATI 3870 tripples my Batman frame rate, but makes absolutely no difference in NFS Shift.

This game is full of bugs, so there must have been some other reason why it wasn't working before you added the Nvidia card.

I got the same problem with intro movies and game it slows down unnexpected .I have downloaded the newest catalyst 9.10 and it crashes again all the times my config is amd phenom x2 ,ati radeon 4730,2 gb ddr2 ram,CAN ENYONE HELP plz

For anyone still using XP here's the next RC of the Hemlock Beta drivers used in the HardOCP article.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=EOL1XBKJ

I'm going to give this a try later today on my old XP partition.

cem_ea_id.proudmatt wrote:For anyone still using XP here's the next RC of the Hemlock Beta drivers used in the HardOCP article.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=EOL1XBKJ

I'm going to give this a try later today on my old XP partition.

Good Luck!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 11/16/2009 16:32:51

cem_ea_id.DirtyLeeds wrote:

cem_ea_id.proudmatt wrote:For anyone still using XP here's the next RC of the Hemlock Beta drivers used in the HardOCP article.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=EOL1XBKJ

I'm going to give this a try later today on my old XP partition.

Good Luck!

I've given it a crack and the results aren't brilliant.

This is testing the first 30 seconds of a race at Spa, from the car first appearing on the screen. 2 runs with 9.10 and a further 2 with Catalyst 8.68 beta (9.12 beta)

1280x720 - 60hz - 0xAA - V-sync on - All settings medium - 10 opponents

9.10 WHQL
Min 25.5 - Max 51.5 - Av 31.5
9.12 Beta
Min 29 - Max 60 - Av 32.75

I played a couple of races with the beta driver and found that I could get FPS drops to 22 when a whole bunch of cars corner in front of me, which is about the same as what I was getting with 9.10 drivers.

The only thing that I can think of to explain why HardOCP saw a big rise in the average FPS (OS and driver differences aside), is that the new drivers give a higher max FPS and that pushes up the average. Especially if the guy at HardOCP benchmarking overtook the AI opponents within the first couple of minutes. The test I did was only testing in a situation where there are performance problems and also I think having vsync on possibly prevented the FPS from getting any higher than 60.

It's better, so well done ATI, but does it come close to fixing Shift? No...

cem_ea_id.proudmatt wrote:

cem_ea_id.DirtyLeeds wrote:

cem_ea_id.proudmatt wrote:For anyone still using XP here's the next RC of the Hemlock Beta drivers used in the HardOCP article.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=EOL1XBKJ

I'm going to give this a try later today on my old XP partition.

Good Luck!

I've given it a crack and the results aren't brilliant.

This is testing the first 30 seconds of a race at Spa, from the car first appearing on the screen. 2 runs with 9.10 and a further 2 with Catalyst 8.68 beta (9.12 beta)

1280x720 - 60hz - 0xAA - V-sync on - All settings medium - 10 opponents

9.10 WHQL
Min 25.5 - Max 51.5 - Av 31.5
9.12 Beta
Min 29 - Max 60 - Av 32.75

I played a couple of races with the beta driver and found that I could get FPS drops to 22 when a whole bunch of cars corner in front of me, which is about the same as what I was getting with 9.10 drivers.

The only thing that I can think of to explain why HardOCP saw a big rise in the average FPS (OS and driver differences aside), is that the new drivers give a higher max FPS and that pushes up the average. Especially if the guy at HardOCP benchmarking overtook the AI opponents within the first couple of minutes. The test I did was only testing in a situation where there are performance problems and also I think having vsync on possibly prevented the FPS from getting any higher than 60.

It's better, so well done ATI, but does it come close to fixing Shift? No...

You are using Catalyst 8.68 beta
They used Catalyst 8.663.1 Beta
These are 2 different beta drivers...

MAIN.SneakyGunman wrote:

cem_ea_id.proudmatt wrote:

cem_ea_id.DirtyLeeds wrote:

cem_ea_id.proudmatt wrote:For anyone still using XP here's the next RC of the Hemlock Beta drivers used in the HardOCP article.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=EOL1XBKJ

I'm going to give this a try later today on my old XP partition.

Good Luck!

I've given it a crack and the results aren't brilliant.

This is testing the first 30 seconds of a race at Spa, from the car first appearing on the screen. 2 runs with 9.10 and a further 2 with Catalyst 8.68 beta (9.12 beta)

1280x720 - 60hz - 0xAA - V-sync on - All settings medium - 10 opponents

9.10 WHQL
Min 25.5 - Max 51.5 - Av 31.5
9.12 Beta
Min 29 - Max 60 - Av 32.75

I played a couple of races with the beta driver and found that I could get FPS drops to 22 when a whole bunch of cars corner in front of me, which is about the same as what I was getting with 9.10 drivers.

The only thing that I can think of to explain why HardOCP saw a big rise in the average FPS (OS and driver differences aside), is that the new drivers give a higher max FPS and that pushes up the average. Especially if the guy at HardOCP benchmarking overtook the AI opponents within the first couple of minutes. The test I did was only testing in a situation where there are performance problems and also I think having vsync on possibly prevented the FPS from getting any higher than 60.

It's better, so well done ATI, but does it come close to fixing Shift? No...

You are using Catalyst 8.68 beta
They used Catalyst 8.663.1 Beta
These are 2 different beta drivers...

Well spotted, the HardOCP article used earlier beta drivers, the 6.68 drivers are technically the 2nd release candidate.

The release date of the 6.68 RC2 drivers is 10th of November, which is the date the HardOCP article was published.

Here's where I found the link - http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33955692

Here's a link to the Hemlock drivers for Vista/7 as used by HardOCP

http://www.nogripracing.com/forum/showpost.php?p=910178&postcount=10

Matt, nice, thanks.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 11/18/2009 05:45:04

I am still very skeptical about the ATI driver making a big performance difference and the patch hardly any, as concluded in the review, since it goes against all that we heard the past couple of weeks (ATI claiming and SMS confirming that the graphics coding in Shift was flawed and hence a performance increase could only come from patching the game and not from providing a new graphics driver).

Perhaps ATI found some driver optimizations for Shift, like they did with plenty of other games, but still the game needs fixing first. It's impossible to fix flawed coding in the game with a graphics driver.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 11/18/2009 06:15:59

official catalyst 9.11's are out now: http://support.amd.com/us/gpudownload/Pages/index.aspx

nfs.GCReDi wrote:I am still very skeptical about the ATI driver making a big performance difference and the patch hardly any, as concluded in the review, since it goes against all that we heard the past couple of weeks (ATI claiming and SMS confirming that the graphics coding in Shift was flawed and hence a performance increase could only come from patching the game and not from providing a new graphics driver).

Perhaps ATI found some driver optimizations for Shift, like they did with plenty of other games, but still the game needs fixing first. It's impossible to fix flawed coding in the game with a graphics driver.

Indeed. The drivers give 10-20% under certain conditions, which is the kind of thing we've come to expect from ATI/Nvidia. So ATI's initial statement still stands true.

Just to pull appart the HardOCP article a little more, there's a guy on nogripracing.com who with a Q9650 @ 4GHz and an ATI 5870 still sees the same crap frame rates on Tokyo Club as every other ATI user. Which kind of proves how bad Shift actually is!

So it's over the SMS to see if they can do the right thing. FIX THIS F***ING GAME ONCE AND FOR ALL

nfs.jsk68 wrote:official catalyst 9.11's are out now: http://support.amd.com/us/gpudownload/Pages/index.aspx

These apparently don't contain the optimizations from the HardOCP article.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 11/18/2009 07:43:07

cem_ea_id.proudmatt wrote:

nfs.jsk68 wrote:official catalyst 9.11's are out now: http://support.amd.com/us/gpudownload/Pages/index.aspx

These apparently don't contain the optimizations from the HardOCP article.

Probably not but they work great for all the other games im playing waiting on this BS patch.

btw, I'm on a c2q 9550 @3.7 with a HD5850 and I still see the slowdowns in corners just like my old 4870.....so yeah this was definitely rushed out the door still in beta..

Just tried out the new drivers. Definitely an increase, but the framerates are still unplayable crap in traffic, merely slightly improved crap. Any day now on the patch and hopefully we can enjoy the game. Let's hope it's fixable because with frames as low as ATI users are getting, a 5 FPS increase is not going to cut it.

I did notice a very nice increase in AA quality, though.

Need for Speed Racing Games

Find us on the web

Electronic Arts

Highlighted Game

Need for Speed SHIFT