Yes, the track is heavy and filled with many 3D objects, it needs to be optimized as the FPS sags even on strong GPUs, especially in replay.
Sebring was the firrst DLC, and this track has very good performance and it's very beauty. After, each new DLC is more and more GPU demanding, and not really more beauty.... That's the main problem now, the rF2 optimisation. this is a summary : with GT3 and Sebring and old rtx 2080 ti, we have same perfomance than rtx 4090 + the last tracks and last cars (992 cup car, formula pro...) Sad, I have exagerated just a little bit to show the problem. I can post the real results if someone is interested, at 4K ultra.
Users are also reporting the new Porsche 992 GT3 Cup car is putting more demands on their systems as well.
The newer tracks have many objects. Lower the circuit detail level in graphics settings. They've also improved the look of reflections. You can try lowering the reflection detail level too.
This did seem to do the trick on my end. Just had to lower a notch. I have only raced In Spa (23 cars) and difference with the before and after Is noticeable. Thanks Bernat.
I ask for Optmisation. The visual gain vs performance cost is not good any more. I prefer the Sebring quality and framerate. There is maybe a serious lack of optimisation, all the details are maybe constantly render by CPU/GPU even if there are not on the screen, in this way it's what we call Optmisation, to gain performance without any detail reduced, just a better code. A game like Ultimate Epic Battle Simulator 2, now render 100x more units, with a good quality and framerate, you can render 2 millions units fighting at +60fps (it features revolutionary new crowd rendering and AI technology which uses pure GPU POWER). I use only the Sebring 12h version, and the framerate is very high.
a bit curious is, that Donigton Park , Thruxton and Croft from same time period and pack are not concerned about that.
next week I will report all the framerate tests about the tracks, i'm pretty sure Sebring is the highest framerate track.
I had issues with Brands when it was released. I uninstalled 3rd party versions and the S397 version worked flawlessly
These tracks aren't as big and don't have as many objects as the others. More objects that are rendered means less performance. Some tracks have very complex pits, buildings, trees, etc, while others are just flat terrain with some simple objects.
it's useless to render all the objects when you are in a cockpit and can see 10% of all the objects, it's called OPTIMISATION. The old bad games had awfull optimisation and constantly render all even if you see only 1% on your screen, and rF2 looks like that. AMS 2 et ACC have both same framerate with ALL the cars and tracks.....with many many objects too, better optimisation. https://store.steampowered.com/app/1468720/Ultimate_Epic_Battle_Simulator_2/ look at this game, you can render a fight vs 10 millions units at +60fps, they use new GPU boost features and can render everything.
rFactor2 isn't the most optimized game. Most modern games do less than they could to optimize because good optimization is hard and hardware is getting more powerful every year. Don't compare games with millions of sales to a niche game. Even if you want to compare them, a racing sim is very different to other types of games. Just see how bad ACC performs compared to other games using the same engine. Racing sims have to render several views for the mirrors, and lots of reflections, while the view moves at high speed vs a static or slow moving view. And you think 60 fps is enough for those other games while users here demand at least 150fps.
nobody asks 150fps for Epic battle simulator 2 with 10 millions units.... ACC performs very well with 4090/1900k, AMS2. But rF2 rain is awfully low fps at ultra, and no way I reduce the graphics with 4090/13900k, and lucky me I have these hardware, can you imagine for the others, I can't imagine them playing at low....
Optimization Is not the same for everybody because every PC Is different due to many factors although they may have the same hardware. So In other words, what might be running good for you, might not be so for someone else with the same PC "specs". This has always been that way, It´s not a rF2 specific Issue If you want to call It that way. You might have you´re PC bogged down because you have a lot of bloatware Installed that you´re not aware of, and that´s just to name one of many other factors that can slow down you´re or any ones PC. There´s a lot of variables that have to do with the performance of a PC aside from the coding of a specific game/software. Not because one has the latest In hardware will mean he/she will have a guarantee that It will run any program without any Issues. More of, certain GPU drivers will be better for some games and others not, even some gen cards are better with some game engines then others. For example gen 20 and 30 Nvidia cards have had Issues with some UE4 games, so It´s not that simple as some might see It. GPU series are like cars, or wines, some are just better then others and not due to the branding but due to design or year/weather In the case of wine. Also, how you take care of you´re PC, what you have Installed, and were you surf will effect you´re PC´s performance without you even knowing about It. I am not saying optimization Is not needed here, I am just saying It´s not as easy as one might think, and that there are a lot of variables Involved that sometimes are not dependent on the game engine only. Each PC Is a world of It´s own...
my 4090/13900K has no issue, and you can't have better framerate if you don't use the same config. I even use Nvme PCIGen 4. My hardware can destroy ACC, Raceroom, AMS2, Dirt rally 2.0, F1 2022 or anygame (COD MW2, BF2042...) at 4K ultra, with rF2, the rain is awfull unoptimised....some cars give -30% performance, some tracks too...And I use the top of the best PC. Like I've said, it's unacceptable to race with the rain, 30 AI, with highframerate at 1440p only with my hardware, sad for the lower configs... ISI 3D engine is showing its limit, or the game needs optmisation and better code. But the positive is it's not like iRacing, which rarely uses more than 65% for GPU with 30 AI.... edit : I will soon make a new Track/car framerate thread, so we will all see what framerate we have and what comb
You cant compare UBS, or any game with a diferent engine for that matter, to rf2. There are some common ways of optimizing things but even these vary in efectiveness across different game engines. I have my own ideas of what is dragging down the game but without being able to see the pipeline at work it's all speculation. FWIW rain weather also costs about 30 fps in AC, ACC and AMS2 in my pc.
Well, It´s not going to be of much use for those who don´t have a 4090, and that´s the thing, we all don´t have the same PC. I run a 1070ti @1080p with 22 cars and rain, and I am a happy camper. You see what I mean... Now personally, I would rather It stay that way then having to buy a 4090 to play rF2.
It would be really great if S397 stopped trying to improve the visuals of rFactor 2 for a few months, but instead looked to optimize rFactor 2 instead. As well as the optimization of the day/night cycle in particular with the sun low in the sky, rain/wet conditions, but also really excessive performance differences between certain content whose visual difference is not huge at all, constitute priority areas for improvement in the area of performance optimization. At some point, you have to know how to favor the development time devoted to optimizing what you already have, rather than improving the visual, which only a small part of the users will be able to benefit from. The fact remains that I am very satisfied with the breathtaking work that S397 has carried out over the past 2 years. But hey, we'll see, we have no control over it as end users. And that's quite normal. (((We are tired of having to spend thousands of euros to run rFactor 2 in acceptable conditions (including using the sunset/sunrise/night/rain), it would be understandable if we had the graphics of Gran Turismo 7, but this is obviously not the case. Not everyone can afford a 13900K and an RTX 4090.)))