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

Do you have a link for NVIDIA claiming that? Nowhere in the video is that said, and here is the entirety of the text posted with the video.

Published on Mar 2, 2017

Project Cars 2 is coming soon to PC! Take an early look at the gameplay in full 4K 60fps goodness. Captured on GeForce® GTX 1080 at Ultra Settings.

More on Project Cars 2 here: http://www.projectcarsgame.com/projec...

Subscribe to GeForce! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCL-g...

Follow GeForce on Twitter: //twitter.com/NVIDIAGeForce

Like GeForce on Facebook: http://facebook.com/NVIDIAGeForce

No mention of a GTX 1080 being required for 4K 60FPS. Additionally, the developer never stated PC Ultra settings for the X1X version.

No, NVIDIA is advertising 4K / 60 fps Ultra settings Project Cars 2 with GTX 1080.

"Project Cars 2 - PC Gameplay 4K 60fps Ultra on GeForce GTX 1080"

YouTube channel has "For business inquiries: ngn@exchange.nvidia.com"

You can't do FXAA and SMAA together. I can do high AA setting at ultra and only dip to 40's and 30's under serious loads. It never goes to the teens and that's with a 1070. They must have put DS9X which is a superscaling technique. That would certainly kill it, but is totally unnecessary at 4K.

Also ignores the two videos I have posted playing it myself at 4K/60 at Ultra on a 1070.

@ronvalencia said:

@asylumni said:

Do you have a link for NVIDIA claiming that? Nowhere in the video is that said, and here is the entirety of the text posted with the video.

Published on Mar 2, 2017

Project Cars 2 is coming soon to PC! Take an early look at the gameplay in full 4K 60fps goodness. Captured on GeForce® GTX 1080 at Ultra Settings.

More on Project Cars 2 here: http://www.projectcarsgame.com/projec...

Subscribe to GeForce! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCL-g...

Follow GeForce on Twitter: //twitter.com/NVIDIAGeForce

Like GeForce on Facebook: http://facebook.com/NVIDIAGeForce

No mention of a GTX 1080 being required for 4K 60FPS. Additionally, the developer never stated PC Ultra settings for the X1X version.

No, NVIDIA is advertising 4K / 60 fps Ultra settings Project Cars 2 with GTX 1080.

"Project Cars 2 - PC Gameplay 4K 60fps Ultra on GeForce GTX 1080"

YouTube channel has "For business inquiries: ngn@exchange.nvidia.com"

Exactly. They are showing off gameplay of a work in progress title set at 4K Ultra and 60FPS running on a GTX 1080. They make no claim as to the requirements this will entail with the finished product and can't, since they are not the developer. So your assertion of such a claim was false.

Yeah, he seems to be ignoring what he doesn't want to see and just making up what he wants.

Umm, this whole thread has absolutely nothing to do with the PS4. It's all about Ron trying to equate the Xbox One X to a GTX 1070. He first thought Project Cars 2 would be 4K 60 FPS on the system and pulled charts and videos of the GTX 1070 doing that. Then when the developer clarified that they were sub 60 and would be upscaling, he pulled charts and videos of the GTX 1070 running sub 60 as well.

Just stop, he is one of the biggest Sony fanboys on here. He just wants to damage the X1X which is pathetic. He should at least have the B----- to say the PS4 Pro will be better or if not then he should just crawl in his troll hole.

At this point it is getting insane and frankly not mentally stable

Do you deny the X1X will be better then the PS4? If you do not disagree then shut up. If you do think the PS4 will be better then PLEASE lets hear how the PS4 is going to be better then the X1X.

The salty cows are getting far beyond pathetic now

Wow. You may be projecting a bit. That is not a sane nor mentally stable response.

No one has made the claim that the PS4 Pro will be better than the X1X. I have, in fact, seen @tormentos explicitly state that the X1X will outperform the PS4 Pro on more than one occasion. And there is no way to damage the X1X by saying it's not more powerful than it is. Do you actually think the X1X will match the performance of a GTX 1070? And since this seems to be about BALLS to you, are you willing to go on record with such a claim? Or at the very least, stick to the topic of the thread, which has nothing to do with the PS4.

My answer is Yes and No.

@asylumni said:

@ronvalencia said:

@asylumni said:

Do you have a link for NVIDIA claiming that? Nowhere in the video is that said, and here is the entirety of the text posted with the video.

Published on Mar 2, 2017

Project Cars 2 is coming soon to PC! Take an early look at the gameplay in full 4K 60fps goodness. Captured on GeForce® GTX 1080 at Ultra Settings.

More on Project Cars 2 here: http://www.projectcarsgame.com/projec...

Subscribe to GeForce! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCL-g...

Follow GeForce on Twitter: //twitter.com/NVIDIAGeForce

Like GeForce on Facebook: http://facebook.com/NVIDIAGeForce

No mention of a GTX 1080 being required for 4K 60FPS. Additionally, the developer never stated PC Ultra settings for the X1X version.

No, NVIDIA is advertising 4K / 60 fps Ultra settings Project Cars 2 with GTX 1080.

"Project Cars 2 - PC Gameplay 4K 60fps Ultra on GeForce GTX 1080"

YouTube channel has "For business inquiries: ngn@exchange.nvidia.com"

Exactly. They are showing off gameplay of a work in progress title set at 4K Ultra and 60FPS running on a GTX 1080. They make no claim as to the requirements this will entail with the finished product and can't, since they are not the developer. So your assertion of such a claim was false.

NVIDIA didn't show GTX 1070 nor GTX 1080 Ti nor Titan XP. As legal business, NVIDIA has to be careful with their claim i.e. they can't show a lesser GPU card that can deliver Project Cars 2 4K 60 fps Ultra.

1. Two data points already pointed X1X being GTX 1070 class e.g. ARC Survival and Forza wet track. Gears of War 4 already indicates similar results.

2. Copy and paste article.

3. Find the closest GPU with point 1 limits and Project Cars.

4. Developer didn't state 4K 30 fps. Later stated mostly 60 fps for normal racing.

5. GTX 1070 is borderline 4K GPU.

LOL, there is no "and". You claimed NVIDIA said that the GTX 1080 was required and they did not. This is very simple. Your claim was false.

And there's no reason NVIDIA couldn't show Project CARS 2 running like that on a lesser card if it could run like that on a lesser card, but as a business, it is in their best interest to show it running on a more expensive card...

1. Irrelevant. This thread is about Project CARS 2 and the performance of the original game.

2. Irrelevant. What led you to this belief doesn't matter, this is the case you were making and

3. how you made it.

4. No one is saying they did. These are the quotes YOU posted, you really should know what they say by now. But I'll repeat it yet again.

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.

Notice, I'm not claiming it is 30 because we don't know what the average actually is. It could be 30, or 40, or 10. We don't know.

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.

5. So what? As proven by videos that were posted, including ones you posted yourself; the GTX 1070 can run Project CARS at 4K and mostly 60 FPS and above. This is a feat that the developer admits can not be done by the Xbox One X without either dropping native resolution or dropping weather and a great number of other things.

Ron is backtracking again on here. He stated Nvidia stated a 1080 is REQUIRED for 4K 60 Ultra settings. I keep seeing you in threads getting destroyed ron. It is time to give it up.

NVIDIA is showing GTX 1080 for Project Cars 2 Ultra 4K 60 fps NOT the lesser GTX 1070.

@asylumni said:

And there's no reason NVIDIA couldn't show Project CARS 2 running like that on a lesser card if it could run like that on a lesser card, but as a business, it is in their best interest to show it running on a more expensive card...

NVIDIA didn't show it on Titan X Pascal 1.0 which IS the more expensive card. During the same month, GTX 1080 Ti was released which IS the more expensive card.

NVIDIA is legally bound to not advertise falsely e.g. NVIDIA is claiming GTX 1080 for Project Cars 2 Ultra 4K 60 fps.

@asylumni said:

1. Irrelevant. This thread is about Project CARS 2 and the performance of the original game.

2. Irrelevant. What led you to this belief doesn't matter, this is the case you were making and

3. how you made it.

1. It's relevant since ARC Survival and Forza M6 runs into similar bottlenecks that impacts the current AMD GPU designs as with Project Cars.

2. It's relevant since I quoted this article in first post. Your "Irrelevant" assertion is irrelevant.

@asylumni said:

4. No one is saying they did. These are the quotes YOU posted, you really should know what they say by now. But I'll repeat it yet again.

Once again.

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.

Notice, I'm not claiming it is 30 because we don't know what the average actually is. It could be 30, or 40, or 10. We don't know.

59 FPS IS also sub-60 FPS. Sub-60 FPS implies near 60 fps not near 30 fps, which SMS should have claimed 4K 30 fps like any other developers.

@asylumni said:

Host: a great number

Also, once again,

"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,

"We will" has higher assurance than "we may".

NVIDIA is legally bound to not advertise falsely e.g. NVIDIA is claiming GTX 1080 for Project Cars 2 Ultra 4K 60 fps or buy GTX 1080 for Project Cars 2 Ultra 4K 60 fps.

Tested Project Cars on both RX 480 8GB and GTX 1060 6GB. Looks like 30-40fps at 4K/Ultra.

X1X could still offer superior results to the $250-300 PC GPU tier.

Your videos didn't select cars with larger transparency window, enable MSAA and external car view.

MSAA has higher impact on Pixel Engine and memory bandwidth.

Thanks.

Regardless, you claimed NVIDIA said a GTX 1080 was required - they did not. Simple as that.

We don't know the average they are at. We just know it's less than 60 and they can't make 60 on average by just dropping a couple settings. The game is also not finished and their goal is not 30 FPS like other developers, but 60. Here is where a little common sense comes into play.

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

They wouldn't need to do this if they were running at 59 FPS. Doubly so since they don't feel the need to have 60 FPS locked on consoles.

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.

And one more time, I'll point out that this was a reply to this question,

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

So it's not even talking about just the Xbox One X version, but their goal for all console releases.

But is there anywhere that is says required like you stated or are you the one who is falsely advertising?

NVIDIA is claiming GTX 1080 for Project Cars 2 Ultra 4K 60 fps or buy GTX 1080 for Project Cars 2 Ultra 4K 60 fps.

Are you going to answer my question or not?

That's not really fair when Forza 7 looks, and plays better...

NVIDIA is claiming GTX 1080 for Project Cars 2 Ultra 4K 60 fps, not the lesser GTX 1070.

So answer me this...Is NVIDIA claiming it takes a 1080 to run it at 4k or are they just showcasing it on a 1080?

NVIDIA is claiming GTX 1080 for Project Cars 2 Ultra 4K 60 fps, not the lesser GTX 1070.

Forza 7 looks like Apex. pCARS looks better than Apex. It's not even out yet so none of us can comment on how it plays. But if Apex is any indication, pCARS plays better as well. At least on PC.

LINK...

Is time you back up your shitty misinformation,Nvidia never claimed that you need it a 1080 for 4k 60FPS,they showed the game running on those settings which is totally different you should stop assuming bullshit just to win an argument LINK or GTFO.

I think you people should start asking Ronvalencia for Links to his shitty misinformation and complain to the mods for his disrupting posting,he clearly argues things with misinformation and try always to pass his misinformation as FACTS without actually linking to proof that he is right.

Examples of this are quite obvious,claiming Nvidia is saying that you need a 1080 for 4k Ultra in Project cars 2,based on nothing but an add on youtube that just show the game at those settings,but no where on the page Nvidia make such claims.

Claiming Scorpio GPU would be Vega and its CPU Ryzen,again based on nothing but a vague comment by Phil Spencer were he claimed they were doing something different to the pro,which in the end they did not.

Claiming that FP16 double pumped was on Scorpio because sony had the feature on Pro,and because sony had it that means MS most has it as well,not only that he started hyping FP16 and openly claim that with FP16 Scorpio would surpass a 1080ti because with FP16 Scorpio was some how 12TF,then after it was proven Scorpio lack the feature he started to downplay it, because now only the PS4 Pro had the feature that he so fiercely claim that would double power,oh by the way now it doesn't double power because it is for the Pro alone,now 4.2TF doesn't = 8.4TF with FP16 like he did with Scorpio..lol

Claiming falsely that scorpio would be $399 based on nothing but the size of the APU both have inside,many people including my self told him how extra memory,4k drive for movies,bigger GPU,better cooling would make the hardware more expensive and he would not admit it,and simple would quotes its many charts which in the end proven nothing,Scorpio was confirmed for $499 and he didn't even have the decency to claim he was wrong.

He even claim the xbox one has 30GB/s for CPU and 68GB/s for system was well,when the peak bandwidth of DDR3 on xbox one is 68GB/s,that means that if you connect to memory at 30GB/s from the cache,any other part of the system that try to access DDR3 would do so at lesser speed than 68GB/s.

When it comes to Rondementia and the xbox he would invent the most pathetic shit in order to defend the brand,the worse part is how he act as if he is a PC gamer,when he is nothing but a die hard lemming.

Who can't even admit been wrong.

Wait so he already played Forza 7 and Project cars 2 as well to know F7 plays better? See for lemmings anything on the mighty xbox is better even if the series is not what it use to be any more.

I already posted a video of Driveclub weather and look even better than F7,and is not even on Pro is on normal PS4,F7 look impressive to lemmings because they are use to F5,F6 and other that looked quite bland and unimpressive.

Project Cars 4K with Ultra settings, High FXAA, enabled MSAA, disabled SMAA, Render frames ahead = 4, disabled V-Sync.

I purchased my GTX 1080 Ti to increase my PC's 4K 60 fps head room.

@tormentos: Yeah, that's what I've been doing (except the complain to the mods part). He also brings up irrelevant facts like citing NVIDIA's business link on the YouTube account. Or separating my summary of the thread I made for CanYouDigIt (Umm, this whole thread has absolutely nothing to do with the PS4. It's all about Ron trying to equate the Xbox One X to a GTX 1070. He first thought Project Cars 2 would be 4K 60 FPS on the system and pulled charts and videos of the GTX 1070 doing that. Then when the developer clarified that they were sub 60 and would be upscaling, he pulled charts and videos of the GTX 1070 running sub 60 as well.) and replying line by line with nothing that actually denies what I said; as if the fact that he copied and pasted things changed what they were or what he was attempting to prove.

Well the best racing game at E3 was Forza, so if pCARS looks better (which it doesn't because Forza 7 looks better than Apex) than Forza definitely plays better.

To be fair it does both, just like a RX 480/GTX 1060 can pull 4k/60fps in Apex on dry track, but get 30-40fps on wet track.

GTX 1070 is not a 4k/60(+)fps performer in Project Cars from what I've seen. It is, under the right settings, but the GTX 1080 seems to be the minimum card for the job.

---

Regardless, this thread is a big nothing-burger for a couple reasons:

1) We don't have an analysis of the settings or anything more than generalized statements from the dev

2) Apex looks and plays better than PCars and we have analysis of that to work off

Livetrack includes dynamic weather and wet tracks still hammers GTX 1070 class GPUs.

So what?

LiveTrack includes wet weather and this workload hammers GTX 1070 class GPUs.

• Livetrack 3.0 (dynamic racing track with grip & temperature changes, full rain simulation with puddling, water flow and track saturation, marbles & debris)

http://www.slightlymadstudios.com/tech.html

Yeah that is what was say about Titan fall in fact it won 100 awards and we know how that ended 86% isn't the be all end all FPS that E3 was claiming it would be.

Again you haven't play both so you are assuming based on nothing but your fanboysm.

The first Project cars do run at 4k 60FPS in the 1070GTX at ultra,in fact it goes as high as 86FPS.

Unless they screw up something i don't see why the 1070GTX can't do it,and considering that PC2 may end sub 4k from god knows what resolution,sub 60 with god knows what average frame(the first one was a mess on PS4 even more on xbox one 900p and dropped to 30's or even below on stress parts with weather) and god knows what settings,i think the sacrifices will be many things on PC2 on scorpio which is ok the Pro will sacrifice even more.

Which is ok on xbox one X they have to drop livetrack to be able to get closer to 60FPS.

The problem here is that you are making claims that are false,like Nvidia claiming that you need a 1080ti for 4k 60FPS.

@tormentos said:

@ronvalencia said:

Livetrack includes dynamic weather and wet tracks still hammers GTX 1070 class GPUs.

1. Which is ok on xbox one X they have to drop livetrack to be able to get closer to 60FPS.

2. The problem here is that you are making claims that are false,like Nvidia claiming that you need a 1080ti for 4k 60FPS.

1. Livetrack deals with dynamic weather and wet tracks/weather.

2. NVIDIA claims their GTX 1080 non-Ti for Project Cars 2 Ultra 4k 60 fps. Your second point is false.

That's just the full "GP104" chip GTX 1080 NOT GP102 chip GTX 1080 Ti.

If Livetrack 3.0's wet tracks/weather is factored in, GTX 1080 Ti will be needed for Project Cars 4K ~60 fps.

GTX 1080 Ti and Titan XP 1.0/2.0 are deep 4K GPUs and anything lesser are borderline 4K GPUs.

Don't make me laugh with GTX 1070 class GPUs being a deep 4K GPU.

There's a reason for me to replace my MSI Gaming 980 Ti with MSI GTX 1080 Ti. GTX 1070 is NOT an upgrade for my MSI Gaming 980 Ti.

MSI Gaming 980 Ti seems to be faster than GTX 1070 with MSAA + high FXAA i.e. never reach down to 30 to 40 fps worst case.

I can overclock my MSI Gaming 980 Ti to 1.4 Ghz clock speed for 8 TFLOPS GPU.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_geforce_gtx_980_ti_gaming_oc_review,35.html

Guru3D's MSI Gaming 980 Ti can reach 1.5 Ghz for 8.4 TFLOPS and 378 GB/s physical memory bandwidth. <-------- Not enough.

I have matched Guru3D's overclock settings with my MSI Gaming 980 Ti.

Reference GTX 980 Ti with 6.0 TFLOPS will be slower than my MSI Gaming 980 Ti i.e. it will worst than my posted youtube videos. I tested my MSI Gaming 980 Ti at factory settings.

Yes and the developer claim they have to drop it on xbox one X to be able to hit 60FPS.

NO Nvidia didn't claim that Nvidia showed the game running on a 1080 and you assume they are claiming that in no part of that youtube page make such claim,you are the one making it which is why you can't provide a quote of it you are assuming and claiming false things.

Well you make me laugh even more as you believe that a 6TF polaris can match a 1070GTX and you argue Scorpio was a true 4k machine when it is even less a 4k machine than the 1070 without doubt.

1. The context was with dropping Livetrack includes dynamic weather and wet tracks/weather.

2. NVIDIA is advertising their GTX 1080 for Project Cars 2 Ultra 4k 60 fps which is sales offer claim. You failed legal school 101.

3. RX-580 (Polaris 20) has large classic "graphics pipeline" bottlenecks. On pure GpGPU workloads without classic GPU hardware being active, RX-580 rivals GTX 1070 on Ethereum crypto mining. GPU separates itself from DSP with classic GPU hardware. Ethereum heavily uses compute ALU, uncompressed memory bandwidth and memory storage.

The general problem with current AMD GPUs are with graphics pipeline hardware, but compute pipeline hardware is fine, hence the half-assed upgrade.

ARC Survival example didn't have 4K resolution. My argument is X1X's GPU group class NOT pure 4K resolution.

It's based on E3 awards, nothing to do with fanboyism... I don't even play Forza...

Have to disagree with you. Even Forza 7 looks less detailed that project cars in terms of graphical quality and car handling. I guess we're dueling opinions here so let's just agree to disagree.

So what?

GTX 1070 isn't hitting 4k/60fps+ on 'Ultra' even with MSAA disabled...

.

.

.

.

.

I have a GTX 1060 6GB clocked to 2000(core)/9100(mem) and I get ~35fps @ 4K/Ultra. A solid 60fps would represent a 70% increase in frames over the 1060. These charts scale more accurately to my experience.

---

Personally, I think people are splitting hairs. We're seeing superior performance to PC's $250-300 GPU tier. That's in the Fury/980ti/1070 class of GPUs.

@gamecubepad said:

@tormentos said:

The first Project cars do run at 4k 60FPS in the 1070GTX at ultra,in fact it goes as high as 86FPS.

GTX 1070 isn't hitting 4k/60fps+ on 'Ultra' even with MSAA disabled...

.

.

.

.

.

I have a GTX 1060 6GB clocked to 2000(core)/9100(mem) and I get ~35fps @ 4K/Ultra. A solid 60fps would represent a 70% increase in frames over the 1060. These charts scale more accurately to my experience.

---

Personally, I think people are splitting hairs. We're seeing superior performance to PC's $250-300 GPU tier. That's in the Fury/980ti/1070 class of GPUs.

Except there have been multiple videos posted in this thread showing the GTX 1070 regularly hitting at or above 60 FPS. And according to the developer of Project CARS 2, it's not just about Livetrack (weather). To hit 60 FPS on the X1X, they would also have to drop many other things in addition to Livetrack (weather), not just a couple settings like what has to be done with the GTX 1070. So where, exactly, are we seeing this better than GTX 1070 performance?

@gamecubepad said:

@tormentos said:

The first Project cars do run at 4k 60FPS in the 1070GTX at ultra,in fact it goes as high as 86FPS.

GTX 1070 isn't hitting 4k/60fps+ on 'Ultra' even with MSAA disabled...

.

.

.

.

.

I have a GTX 1060 6GB clocked to 2000(core)/9100(mem) and I get ~35fps @ 4K/Ultra. A solid 60fps would represent a 70% increase in frames over the 1060. These charts scale more accurately to my experience.

---

Personally, I think people are splitting hairs. We're seeing superior performance to PC's $250-300 GPU tier. That's in the Fury/980ti/1070 class of GPUs.

^^^MSAA Enabled

^^^MSAA disable FXAA Low 40 cars on the track

My own recordings on my desktop with an i7 770k and gtx 1070 FE no overclock.

On top of that, the chart you posted has high AA which is MSAA plus ultra SMAA

I don't deny it does hit 60fps or above. However, average framerate is 46fps with 33fps minimum at 4k/Ultra, MSAA, SMAA.

Even without MSAA the GTX 1080 hits 63fps AVG, meaning GTX 1070 would be in the mid 50's.

Who said that?

X1X is a tier above RX 580/GTX 1060 is my claim. This aligns with Digital Foundry's "Fury/GTX 1070-class performance" claim.

P.S.- A GTX 1070 is not getting a 70% increase in frames over a GTX 1060.

---

You're so committed you're not reading the charts correctly. I posted both MSAA-enabled and MSAA-disabled benchmarks with both showing sub-60fps avg.

By your own admission you get 30-40fps dips with MSAA-enabled.

What are you trying to prove?

@Zero_epyon:

Dipping sub-60 fps.

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

With real weather and 20:00 time of day start. <------ frame rate slightly takes a hit.

Increase transparencies workloads with vehicle type. <------ frame rate slightly takes a hit.

CPU: Intel Core i7-4790K.

Memory: 16 GB DDR3-2133

Recorded by NVIDIA ShadowPlay.

MSI Afterburner tool for frame rate counter and stats.

NVIDIA Driver version: 384.76

NVIDIA is correct to claim GTX 1080 for Project Cars 2 4K 60 fps with Ultra settings.

Your comment "GTX 1070 isn't hitting 4k/60fps+ on 'Ultra' even with MSAA disabled..." is not true as I can do MSAA Ultra at above 60fps. Right after your comment is a chart that shows performance using high AA and Ultra SMAA. Your second benchmark chart doesn't even show the 1070.

My comment about the dips to 40's and 30's was in regard to the GS benchmark where they were getting results in the teens which is odd since I drop to high 40's and 30's under serious loads. Serious loads meaning thunderstorm and 40 cars on the track with high AA on at the back of a long line of cars. This is certainly not a normal racing condition in pCARS and I generally stay above 60 fps at 4K ultra the majority of the time I play.

My point was that they probably weren't using high AA, but were instead using DS9X which is a down scaling technique that renders higher resolutions and scales it down to fit the resolution on the screen. That's resolutions higher than 4K, I think DS9x is 4 times the game's operating resolution, scaled down. That would certainly give you results in the teens.

I never address downsampling, my comments and charts were aimed at MSAA-enable+SMAA and MSAA-disable+SMAA at 4k/ultra on the GTX 1070.

The second chart is self-evident. If the GTX 1080 goes from 56fps to 63fps when MSAA is disabled, the GTX 1070 will sit around 52fps with MSAA disabled.

P.S.- "60+" is synonymous with 60fps min.

So ronbot has moved from charts to repeated project cars youtube videos?