"Spider-Man Remastered is an old console game that was remastered for PlayStation 5 and now it's arrived to PC and we're taking a look at GPU performance, because why not."
- I can think of a very good reason why not. What this article fails to mention (for whatever reason) is that this is a title that had nVidia involved in its development. Therefore, Markham hasn't had an opportunity to
properly optimise the Adrenalin driver package for this game. Now, sure, AMD says that optimisations were done but there is one massive clue that they weren't given enough time to optimise the game properly.
What tipped me off was the fact that the RX 6800 and RX 6800 XT were churning out the exact same frame rates. I also see the RTX 3060 Ti handily out-performing the RX 6950 XT (in what universe does that make sense?). When I see two tiers of cards with the same frame rates or performance numbers that should be impossible, I know that there is an issue with driver optimisation. Of course, since GeForces aren't having these issues, it made me think that nVidia must have been involved. This is because in 100% of cases that I've seen things like this, nVidia
really was involved. I figured I'd do a little investigation into this discrepancy.
So, a little "sleuthing" on my part (by "sleuthing", I mean typing "Spider-Man Remastered for PC nVidia" in Google) showed me the result that I was looking for immediately (first result actually). As it turns out, this game is a
collaboration with nVidia, which is why Radeons are hamstrung at the moment:
"Marvel’s Spider-Man Remastered is out now on PC, and we’re proud to have collaborated with PlayStation, Insomniac Games and Nixxes Software to bring GeForce RTX gamers the definitive PC experience, enhanced with NVIDIA DLSS, NVIDIA DLAA, NVIDIA HBAO+, NVIDIA G-SYNC, NVIDIA Surround, and upgraded ray tracing."
- From nVidia's own website, click the text to read the whole thing.
This probably would have been appropriate to include in the article but it wasn't. Steve also didn't ask his usual questions like "With the RTX 3060 Ti handily beating the RX 6950 XT here, it's obvious that there are driver issues at play." but instead used wording that could easily mislead someone who doesn't know better to believe that RDNA2 just plain sucks in this title.
I think that benchmarking this title at this time gives nVidia an unfair advantage. These numbers make it crystal clear to anyone who understands GPUs that the Adrenalin drivers are
not properly-optimised for this game.
I think that this game should be revisited in about a month because all that this article has really told us is that nVidia cards are much faster when they're involved in the development of the game, especially when Markham hasn't had a chance to do a proper driver implementation. There is literally
NO WAY IN HELL that the RTX 3060 Ti is faster than even the RX 6800, let alone the RX 6950 XT in
any title so this article has really told us nothing except that the game is out, it looks really good and that nVidia cards are much faster
at the moment.
I've always been fair in my treatment of Steve Walton and I've never tried to hide the fact that I greatly admire his work. While this article is not up to his usual impeccable standards, I do not believe that he is anything other than 100% impartial and my post is not meant to imply otherwise.