rFactor 2 Build 930 Now Available

OF COURSE sorry forgot that one, plus the classic tick box for "SilverstoneGP" incase you forgot and selected the National layout....






....ok that's enough it's pub time

 

A request like: "do you really want to quit?", when exit was clicked, would be really not the badest idea...

 

Isn't that option already in player.json, a line called 'exit confirmation' or something like that?

 

Yep.

 

Well the whole idea behind this change was to improve performance with large fields. So I wouldn't be surprised if it helps you when there are lots of AIs close by. I suspect they will sort this out, even if it means dynamically disabling this extra threading on older CPUs. What would suck is if they abandoned the effort.

 

Well, as I didn't update the devmode yet; I was able to try
I used the ctrl+f after two laps at silverstone at the same point at the setting that you get the average, min and max.

Now I forgot the average...........
But the min before and after the update: 185 > 194
Max before and after: 320 > 344

So; yes, 930 makes for a better performance. Hopefully ISI keeps it this way and don't turn it all back for older cpu's.......that would be a step back in time.

 

I'm not being scientific, but the combo Nvidia 347 + 930b definitively improved my game performance.

For the love of God, we're 2015. I3 and similar procs should be displayed in a museum, even more in Europe / USA where hardware's price is a cup of tea.

 

4th gen i3 is no older than a 4th gen i5 or i7 though.

 

That's assuming they would go back to what they had before. I doubt that will happen. Most likely changes to cater for older cpu's (which by the by can still be above recommended System Requirements and even within 'runs best with')

I've gone up and down with builds, my system is not the best but I've had supersmooth builds, 60 to 100 frames, had crappy builds (for my pc) going below 40.
I'm perfectly happy with reduced performance, I can just tone down my settings. but when it effects online racing so much that drivers have to quit their races because they are becoming a liability.....that's even a worse step back.

But i'm pretty sure they will sort it one way or another

 

+1

 

But it's weaker.

I have improved my FPS jumping from a i7-2700k to a i7-4790k, let alone i3 and stuff.

 

I have an i5-2500K and I am not even close to being CPU bound. Maybe you gained frames because your old CPU would only do PCIe 2.0 and now you can do PCIe 3.0. I have contemplated updating my CPU for that exact reason. My GPU and mobo both do 3.0 but my CPU will not.

How much did you gain out of curiosity?

 

It's a bug, not a permanent situation. Until the next build is released its going to be a pain though I agree.

 

Thank you. Good to know.

 

I'm not being scientific on this again and I'm also not sure about PCI_E capabilities.

I was using an air-cooled 2700k at 4.8 Ghz which was really excellent but reached 98ºC on summer if I pushed to the limit. I got a CoolerMaster V8 and there was nothing larger to install on it. Then I went for the current 4790K at 4.4 Ghz - unable to increase clock since the Devil's Canyon tech is a piece of crap regarding temps even using water cooling now. If I try 4.5 GHZ I crash.

Firstly I couldn't see any improvement running alone on the track (I used to use Silverstone as benchmark - horrid optimizing at those days - nowadays it's fine) with 860b. It was seeming to be smoother but I've considered it as placebo.

Then I turned for a full AI grid (I don't remember how many of them, but certainly more than 25 AIs - Nissan GTR) and it turned clear: it was not a night and day but it was a very well noticeable difference - no stuttering, no 100% occupancy . Before the CPU change I was having a lot of irritating frame skipping.

So, again, not scientific, but there was a clear improvement. Not at FPS average, but on smoothness.


Of course, afterwards I removed my old 770 GTX and attached the current 980 GTX then I went to a massive FPS gain (20% average). But what I got was that GPU and CPU definitely work together when there's dozens cars around you. If you're in the middle of a 8 cars grid, well, maybe an I3 be enough.

Now, I'm just guessing: if Devil's Canyon i7 was able to make smoother my full-grid gameplay, I suppose an 6-core would improve even more. Unfortunately not money enough for a 5960X or something. Some guys are able to run 4790K at 4.7 or 4.9 Ghz, but I don't either. They must gain substantial performance when running hardcore CPU simulators (Flight SImulator X, rFactor 2 and 1, GTR2 night + rain - an acid test even using 4GB patch + fullproc switch) and so on.

Sorry - illiterate English "speaker".

 

For all those getting performance improvements, have you put the AF back to wherever you had it (probably x16) before rF2 lost it? Once I imposed AFx16 in my graphics driver, performance is pretty much back to "normal." I have a very high end CPU, though.

 

Eh, no I never had that up to x16 in devmode. I had it trilliniar and made sure I put it (and all the settings) right back to where they were. They already were though.
I did that "test" because in the normal mode, I already though I had improvement but couldn't make sure. In that one; I have everything on full and AF at x16. I even dare to say I had some more improvement in that one but again; that's just a hunch.

 

I took the aggregate of the cores and I'm around mid 30s usage. Used another tool (MSI Intel Extreme) to get an overall on the CPU (while running rf2) and it mostly confirmed my cellphone math, high 20s. I guess that behavior is very normal, i.e. one core gets loaded up and calls in the next. My bad...

 

The option of a private practice doesn't truly mean it's private. The game will still load-up a bunch of other cars/opponents - even though you selected private - then once you enter the race weekend the game just simply makes all other cars invisible and un-collidable. So you see, it has nothing to do with me asking ISI to cater to my "forgetfulness", but rather, me asking ISI for an option that does what it's name implies.

What about one of the following two methods?:

Method 1 - Having 2 separate options

A. "Private practice" - meaning, well, what it literally means (and what it's always meant in every non-RF2 engine based ISI game): That the session will be truly private, not "you still have 30 opponents but they happen to be invisible and un-collidable"

B. "Invisible opponents" - select this option in order to have all your opponents be invisible to you and eachother, and un-collidable with you as well as eachother. This option is of benefit if players want to race seemingly alone but still want AI cars invisibly on track lapping for laptime comparison purposes, real-road rubbering purposes, etc.


I think this really may all come down to a game/engine coding thing. Allow me to explain. ISI mysteriously removed the "Test Day" (AKA "Practice" in some other games) option in RF2, therefore every-time you play, you are loading up an entire race weekend from the game's point of view (even if, for eg., you un-check the qualy and race sessions). That is where I believe the problem lies. Unlike a "test day", the game is programmed to always load the opponents when in an actual race-weekend. That may be why the "private" option doesn't truly mean private and why the game still loads all the other A.I., because the game is coded to always load the number of opponents selected unless in an actual "Test Day" which is currently not available in RF2.

That leads me to method 2.


Method 2 - Do not add the extra options proposed in Method 1, but instead, just add a "Test Day" session.

Instead of having the two options i mentioned above ("Private Practice" and "Invisible Opponents), how about just placing a 4th tab at the top called "Test Day". When "Test Day" is selected, the other 3 tabs (prac, qual, race) automatically get un-checked, and vice-versa. The test day "Private" option will then behave just like it did in previous games, and the "Private" option will also continue to work as it currently does (invisible opponents) when in a non-test day (prac, qual, race).


Both methods will allow "the best of both worlds". I do prefer method 2 though, as I like having different presets for my test/practice days (for eg. the "Start Time" and "Private" options). On top of that, you don't need to change the all sorts of session settings like you currently do. You can have a 7 Am start time, unlimited length, Private, "Test Day", or an 11 AM start time, 1 hr length, 25-opponent, practice/race-weekend day all within literally 1 click of the mouse (whether you click on "Test Day" or "Practice"/"Qualifying"/"Race"). Therefore, with "Method 2", you'll hardly even need to mess with all sorts of settings (start time, private on/off, session length, etc.) as it'll hold it's last used settings separately from other session settings, just like the game currently does with the prac, qual, and race settings.

 

i realy dont get you spinelli!if you want 0 AI at your session just put AI to zero,and is a one click process if you hold your mouse till you get 0 AI.

private practice is when you pay for track just for your self for paid period and you dont want anyone to come at track exept you or your team..
why would you need that in game?you can set your session without AI and it same like private practice.i think AI will not bribe track owner to go to track with you
if you get my point..