- Sim Racing News

Project CARS – AMD vs. Nvidia Comparison Video

MotoGamesTV has released a very interesting comparison video, showing how the Radeon HD 7850 & GeForce GTX 660 handle Project CARS.

MotoGamesTV has released a very interesting comparison video, showing how the Radeon HD 7850 & GeForce GTX 660 handle Project CARS.

Both cars are reasonably-priced mid range cards, selling for around 200 Euros. How do these affordable cards handle the benchmark-setting graphics of Project CARS?

You can check out in the split screen comparison with FPS counter below!

  • Jermaine Smit

    Funny there is a differents between the red colors between the cards.. Not to the person who placed this topic: ‘Both cars are reasonably-priced mid range cars, selling for around 200 Euros’ I think you mean cards? Else i wanne know where you can get a reasoanbly-priced mid range car for 200 hehe:P

    • Anonymous

      Ha! 🙂


      • Ben Melluish

        Nope, there’s one more: Both ***CARS*** are reasonably-priced mid range cards.

      • Anonymous

        So they are reasonably-priced mid range cards that turn into cars when you go outside.. racing & simracing in one package, cool 😀

      • StarFoXySxv550

        I’d like to see a star in this reasonably priced car.

      • Anonymous

        Well they couldn’t have been made much worse quality than chinese cars.. oh damn wait, chian’s GDP grows so fast the jokes about chinese things are not funny or true anymore 🙁

  • Dave

    Project boats.

    • Anonymous

      Funny I just started a thread for Boat Racing on WMD but where in this video do you see water? HeHe.

    • Anonymous

      What?!? This is a superrealistic sim with superduper graphics. How can u say that…? Just joking. I have spend hours and hours to get rid of the floaty not totally control feeling but never got it fixed. I must be doing something wrong because every time I adres this here or on a forum I get a bunch of fanboyz ranting on me.

      • Luciano Saraiva

        This is the same SHIFT 2 engine.
        One guy modded that game years ago and almost fixed the boat.

      • Alan Dallas

        WRONG!!! You are so wrong it’s not even funny. pCARS is using an entirely rewritten engine(had to, in order to do DX11 features), is uses NOTHING from Shift 2 Madness Engine. Which btw belongs to EA, SMS had to write a new one. Try again troll.

      • Alan Dallas

        Which car are you experiencing a floaty feeling in? I don’t get any floating feeling in any of the cars that are past the Alpha1 stage in pCARS. Have you tried forcing other STM tyre compounds in the command line? See which one feels best then for a given car then report it on the official forums.

      • Alan Dallas

        Which car are you experiencing a floaty feeling in? I don’t get any floating feeling in any of the cars that are past the Alpha1 stage in pCARS. Have you tried forcing other STM tyre compounds in the command line? See which one feels best then for a given car then report it on the official forums.

    • sargentjack86

      Don’t worry mate. No doubt we will see Project Barge as a DLC.

    • suttcliffe

      Glad we don’t have people like you racing in pCars — we are much nicer and friendly.

    • MrAndrew_P
  • Manddrakke

    I hope P. CARS not favor any of the brands like BF with Nvidia

    • Attila Kiss

      BF runs better on AMD on the newer drivers. Yes better then nVidia does, so it is not true anymore.

  • Manddrakke

    Sorry BF= Battlefield 3

  • Guilherme Cramer

    Interesting, the nVidia averaged about 15-20 FPS higher than the ATi

  • Anonymous

    As long as ATI doesn’t fix the antialiasing with gMotor based games (and some other games) I stick with nVidia. Only with supersampling you get descent visual quality but that’s a fps eater.

    • Kris Baxter

      what you talking about Willis? I have crisp (no AA) graphics on rF2, rF1 and GTR2, that was on my 6950 and my 7950 is even better, more alive.

  • Richard Hessels

    Wow that is quite a big difference, nVidia has almost 50% higher framerates.
    Just the difference between an occasional slideshow or fluid motion.
    Hopefully some driver tweaks can bring the performance of AMD to nvidia levels.

  • Richard Jackett

    I’m card neutral, but it should probably be noted that a reference 7850 is quite a bit cheaper than an GTX 660 OC. It looks like they come out about the same in FPS/£.

    EDIT: on closer inspection I take that back. The GTX is still ahead when price is taken into account.

    Out of interest, does anyone remember if there is an AMD or nVidia spash screen at the start of Project CARS?

    • Tomasz Zabłocki

      neither of the two

  • Andrew Tiltman

    What a pointless, time wasting troll video.

    • Anonymous

      I thought it made a rather poignant point.

      As far as I know, part of the difference is in the drivers and part of it in the game(s). In the general gaming scene AMD and Nvidia performance is practically the same on average.

  • Jos

    poor ati users, first rf2, now pcars…

    • Anonymous

      “now pcars”?? It’s been like that since day1, amd has been slower in both titles for 1.5 years. I still don’t regret having amd at slightest because: 1)at the moment I play neither title, and 2) I’m sure it will be sorted and final version of both titles will run on any card.

      • Anonymous

        Well I’ll agree that AMD needs to step up their game but I also feel posting a video like this was not the best thing to do for one of SMS’ pCARS hardware partners.

    • eifionevans

      Doesn’t Asseto Corsa have Nvidia slapped all over it also? When I upgrade looks like I’l have to over pay ridiculously and go green

    • Ken Izuchukwu

      Got a link, showing the disparity between 7850 & 660?

  • Juhan Voolaid

    I will never buy a ATI card again. NVidia ftw!

    • Niels Heusinkveld

      Yes that is very wise! Or, perhaps you look at what card works best for your games and the available budget. Some situations its AMD, some situations it is NVIDIA. I buy whatever brand that may be. Silly eh! 🙂

      • Wesley Modderkolk

        Compared to what nVidia delivers on drivers vs AMD I am fairly happy. The Catalyst drivers are absolutely horrible, a world went open to me when I had my first nVidia card.

      • Rui Silva


  • Philip Samuelson

    Imagine that, the nVidia card looks better and performs better too! I knew my company built with nVidia cards for a reason. Got a cheap gaming PC build with the 660Ti too, perfect for racing sims 🙂

  • Jorge Araujo

    Oh if that was the only game that run better on Nvidia than on ATI. Drivers for ATI cards were always worse, but since last year, not only they became worse for a little older ATI cars (in my case, the HD6870) but became very confusing, with a lot of variation on performance. Best thing to do is to ditch ATI brand. They were always the second close to Nvidia and never took the advantage further whey they were leaders for a year (2003 with the 9000 series). Since 2004 they have been losing ground. Almost 10 years trying to step up the game again.

    • Kris Baxter

      Couldn’t disagree more, I’ve had ATI since my 9800GTX, never had any problems, always brilliant performance, the only game that doesn’t perform well is pcars, presumably just an optimization thing, or atleast hopefully that is the case with pcars.

  • Attila Kiss

    None of these cards are quick enough to run project cars at a terrible 720p resolution. That is alarming. That is 35-55fps at 720p, we need 120+fps to get smooth and less laggy at 1080p resolution and offcourse tripple screens.
    There is no pc at the moment that will do this for pCars.

    • Steve Shears

      120 fps? I think not.

      • Attila Kiss

        Think again. Every racing title benefineted from more smoothness and less steering lag from 120+fps in the past, even on 60hz displays, The reason is simple, more frequent polls from the control devices results less steering lag. More physics calculation/minute results in more detailed physics. Also with 120+fps you basicly minimize screen tearing without V Sync and with todays 120hz display technology, it is a MUST for simracing.

      • Steve Shears

        Your theory is flawed. Firstly, visual frames and physics updates are not even related. Secondly many people play on 60hz TVs. The next gen of consoles arn’t even going to do 60’s with many games. And GT5 drivers are being told that can’t compete in real races. On a 60hz game. From a console. You don’t NEED 120fps. you most certainly need 60fps. I won’t argue that but 120fps is purely overkill. even aliens don’t use 120fps games.

      • Noel Hibbard

        It really depends on the sim. For example in rF1 people try to run more FPS (regardless of monitor) because the plugin API refresh is bottlenecked by the display. Most people run RealFeel for FFB which relies on the plugin refresh therefor higher frame rates = more refreshes to the FFB. These pCARS people desperately trying to defend 35fps are hysterical. 35 is absolutely unacceptable. Every other sim runs 120+ on my old ass 5770. Sure they don’t look as good as pCARS but framerate trumps eyecandy IMO. The goal is to race not go sightseeing.

      • Steve Shears

        Well the pCARS argument is pointless anyway. Its futile when the game isn’t optimised no matter whats posted. But i think 60fps is a good goal for cost/value vs graphics/framerate. And on nextgen consoles you won’t even get that. Anyway you can turn the detail down in pCARS as well so the same point applies to that as well. I wish game companies would reduce graphics to hit 60s on console racers but most won’t and only best devs will hit it. I’m running all the sims and 60s is fine for me. If theres any lag then its extremely slight. Be interesting to see what Huttu thinks.

      • StarFoXySxv550

        From further up – “Consoles are choppy and laggy for simracing”

        I respectfully disagree, Forza 4 is butter smooth @ 60fps, As was Forza 3 except in rare occurrences online when a car is on it’s roof or there’s a major pile-up on turn 1. Forza 4 suffers much less in both those circumstances. The Devs (Turn 10) do seem to take framerate quite seriously and always aim for 60fps, and whatever optimising they’re doing (or sacrifices they make) seems to be working rather well to my eyes, and according to the following article:

        “The performance profile is identical to Forza Motorsport 3. Remarkably, the engine does not drop a single frame during general gameplay and never loses v-sync, meaning that there is absolutely no tearing whatsoever. The only time 60FPS is ever compromised is when the player switches cameras: there’s the small chance that you’ll drop a frame – a singular frame, invisible to the human eye”

        Would these games be a better
        experience at 120fps+? I don’t know, but just wanted to point out that
        we shouldn’t tar all our feathers with the same brush.

      • Steve Shears

        I’m sure they’d be a better experience but your aiming massively high. Anyway you can turn the graphics options right down anyway and that video posted isn’t at its lowest settings. If you have to lower older games down in detail, then taking newer graphics cards into account you’ll just have to do the same. Else buy a titan rig i guess.

      • StarFoXySxv550

        Just to be clear, I’m fine with a locked 60fps, but I do hate stuttering and screen tearing. I can’t afford a titan rig haha, and to be perfectly honest I couldn’t see myself dumping that amount of cash on a sim racing rig just to go above 60fps unless I was completely happy with all my other equipment i.e triple screens, sim vibe, quality h-shifter etc.

        That said though I am looking to go all out with 3D surround eventually and IIRC that requires 120hz screens? So I guess I’d be half way there anyway once I reach my ‘ideal’ simracing hardware target.

      • Steve Shears

        The fact is both GT5 and Forza 3 or 4 were both done on the same hardware over a long period. It takes a long time to get that performance. A lot of manpower. Now SMS isn’t a huge team. I dunno how many they’ve got but very little is being outsourced. They did 2 shift games for EA as you know. Plus this is their first game on their new engine and already its looking good but they’re starting from scatch (regardless of what trolls my post about boats and previous Shift games). Not many games have this kind of fidelity along with 24/7 racing – and (currently) 15 sky and weather types. Despite many not classing F1 2013 as a sim, the pCARS F1 A series already knocks it for 6 (and thats in FFB alone bearing in mind it barely worked and when it did it was subtle. The codies did a whole game with that car). Secondly devs on PC don’t really get that chance to exploit the hardware. Its taken 3 interactions of Forza. Theres been 1 GT5 game (how long did we wait) and nether are perfect. Rfactor 2 has been a looong time in the making and iRacing is still getting upgrades on its solid model. It won’t be impossible to get 120 as long as its realised you WILL lose fidelity. How many games have 3 types of in-game downsampling on top of all the best AA modes out there? So basically – give em’ a break. Its clear to me as a long term gamer they’re putting their heart into this. I’m sure you’ll get 120s if you reduce the settings – although i should add i’ve not checked myself.

      • Attila Kiss

        Consoles are choppy and laggy for simracing. Including GT5. BTW how do you know what equipment the aliens having? Top FPS guys having 1000hz mouses and 120hz screens and no v-sync for a reason, and top simracers using low detail/no v-sync for the same reason.

        60hz screens are definetly not smooth at all, you just got to try a 120hz screen, the difference is night and day.
        On a 60hz screen you also NEED 120+fps unless you want to have a lot of tearing or display lag associated with V-Sync. That is a fact and unfortunately there is no way around it.

        Just try the AC demo/pCars/netkar/rf1-2 at 60 and 200fps, there is a huge difference in both lag and actual laptimes. It was actually confirmed by Kunos and pCars developers as well.

        iRacing is a little bit better in this regard, because it polls as uses input data more frequenty and it does feel more direct then other titles.

        If you do not belive me, just download LFS demo. It will most likely run at 500-1000fps, but you can limit your framerate. At 30fps i am 5+sec slower then i do at 1000fps, with vsync 60hz i am only 1 sec slower, at 120hz Vsync i am only about 0.5s off, but at 120hz no Vsync i am actually quicker then i was on a 60hz screen. The reason is simple every slowdown adds lag, vsync adds buffer and that trippes lag.

        Quote from well known ‘alien’ simracer:

        Before lowering graphics: 1:27 PB
        After lowering graphics: 1:22 PB

      • Big Ron

        120 FPS is a must in simracing? Man, I was epic with my 25 FPS in GT Legends on pole position and winning multiplayer.

  • Alex Ball

    Weird. I get better framerates than him with my AMD card, and I run 3 screens!

    • Franklin Silva

      Whats your adm card?
      Do you Know the oldest card to run at least 30fps at 3 screens?

  • Aleksander Turnsek

    This comparison is irrelevant! They should at least use HD7870 which could compare to GTX660. The price difference between the 2 tested cards is ~50€ (depending on shop) and HD7850 has only 1GB of video RAM compared to 2GB in GTX660

    • Anonymous

      Really only 1GB?

      Pretty sure my HD7950 has 3GB

      • Aleksander Turnsek

        HD7850 is used in this video, not HD7950 (note the 8 vs. 9)

  • Franklin Silva

    Pcars, a game made only for ultra high PCs… imagine ps3 version

    • Anonymous

      My PC is ca. 20 inches high. pCARS runs fine on it…

    • Anonymous

      I think it will be fine

  • Big Ron

    The cards are pretty non-equal. The HD7850 isn´t the direct competitor of the 660, the HD7870 would have been a better choice.

  • wajdi nujeidat
  • Ken Izuchukwu

    The game is indeed favorable to nVidia. Even the 660 (non-ti) out performs the 7950 until the FXAA is increased to 8x, especially due to its 192 memory bandwidth bottleneck, I think. It’s worth considering whether or not, the reviewer was using the latest drivers, including beta ones.

    • anonymous

      Now with Cat 13.8 even 7970Ghz has better framerates than the 770GTX (320.14) in Pcars and BF3.

      • anonymous

        My 7850 is running +60 frames per second. I imagine the GTX 660 has got na extra boost in Project Cars too.

      • Anonymous

        As it always should…The 7970 is significantly more powerful than a 770GTX, just as it was with the 680. Only when the software is optimized by idiot nvidia ‘we can’t afford AMD testbed’ children do you find the results mangled to favor a less powerful arc.

  • Anonymous

    To be honest….This game is terribly optimized right now, there’s no reason to even bother benchmarking.