Watch_Dogs Performs Better with NVIDIA

Watch_Dogs goes live in a few hours and PC gamers looking to show off the full promise of the games graphical offering have most likely upgraded prior to launch. For those that don’t, NVIDIA has a bundle to sweeten up the deal and make which GPU to buy for Watch_Dogs easier.

Read NVIDIA Bundles Watch_Dogs Free with GeForce GPU

Watch_Dogs is an NVIDIA Gameworks title where Ubisoft Montreal worked closely with NVIDIA, giving the game devs a range of tools to offer some exclusive NVIDIA technologies to make Watch_Dogs a visual masterpiece. That said, the game utilizes NVIDIA tech when used in conjunction with GeForce GPUs offers faster performance with better visuals, showing Watch_Dogs performs better with NVIDIA.

These visual improvements are exclusive to NVIDIA GPUs with a few working on AMD cards but not everything so GeForce owners will have the better visual experience along with improved performance.

Jason Evangelho wrote an article benchmarking two GPUs other: the $500 Radeon R9 290X against the GeForce GTX 770 priced at $300:


The graph highlights the performance advantage of the mid-range GeForce model against the high-end Radeon. At medium settings with FXAA, the GTX 770 pulls away from the more expensive Radeon.

Watch_Dogs is a hot title and it will most likely hit many review sites’ game benchmark suites and will probably hurt NVIDIA in the early onset while it tries to roll out a performance driver but as Joel Hruska from ExtremeTech points out:

AMD is no longer in control of its own performance. While GameWorks doesn’t technically lock vendors into NVIDIA solutions, a developer that wanted to support both companies equally would have to work with AMD and NVIDIA from the beginning of the development cycle to create a vendor-specific code path. It’s impossible for AMD to provide a quick after-launch fix. This kind of maneuver ultimately hurts developers in the guise of helping them”.

Watch_Dog launches May 27… and that’s today. Standby for the B2G review.

Source: #1 #2