Disappointing return after a year long pause [VR]

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Thrindil, Aug 31, 2020.

  1. MarcG

    MarcG Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    6,854
    Likes Received:
    2,234
    Either way your card is still weak.
     
  2. Thrindil

    Thrindil Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2014
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    5
    I know it's on the lower-end of cards to run VR, so I always adjust my settings accordingly, and you know what?
    It manages Assetto Corsa and R3E just fine with 15 AI cars. You can be all elitist and ask people to "jUst buY a 2500$ comPutEr bRo", or you can acknowledge that rFactor2 has performance issues, either related to some of the content or related to the whole engine.
     
  3. Woodee

    Woodee Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    4,004
    Likes Received:
    1,058
    Well adjust your settings accordingly then. Somehow being told you have a weak card for VR in rF2 has somehow hurt your ego.
     
    Remco Majoor likes this.
  4. hitm4k3r

    hitm4k3r Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1,320
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    As allready pointed out by many people in this thread, your GPU is on the lower spec range while you are trying run the game in one of the most demanding scenarios and your minimum and recommended specs are what they are - rough guidelines where results can vary alot with different HW and SW configurations. I am not trying to say that the game shouldn't be more optimized but I it's certainly not the worst when it comes to performance and I would like to see you running ACC with your setup. Next to the fact that GPUs and their quality can vary greatly in quality and performance as it is with every product. One RX 480 might perform better or worse than the next RX 480. I have a GTX 1070 and I know where my limits are - aka not trying to run the game in VR or maxed out settings and it doesn't take too much to find that out by taking a look at GPU benchmark.
     
  5. Thrindil

    Thrindil Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2014
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    5
    I did adjust my settings. I ran on lowest possible settings with 0 AI, did you even read my original post?
    Also, I know my GPU is on the low-end for VR. No need to try the hurt ego bait on me.
     
  6. vittorio

    vittorio Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,118
    Likes Received:
    540
    Yes you are right on this. iRacing and AC need less computer resources than rF2 does. One reason is that rF2 is less optimized for VR. Another reason is rF2 has a more advanced simulation model (IMO and by many others). You have to decide for yourself what is your priority. Spend money on hardware and using rF2 or use iRacing or AC. Maybe with low graphics settings rF2 works well for you too, but I don't recommend to optimize your graphics settings all the time (which i did with my old GTX 670 in VR and Oculus CV1) cause you waste your precious free time only by optimizing and not enjoying rF2 sim qualities anymore.
     
  7. MarcG

    MarcG Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    6,854
    Likes Received:
    2,234
    And that's where different specs come into play, I've always had better VR in RF2 than with RRE. So yeah all you can do is find the right settings and live with it, nothing more to add really, you asked for help, you got help that you didn't like the answer too...
     
  8. Thrindil

    Thrindil Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2014
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    5
    Thanks for your constructive post. I almost forgot about iRacing, that game has got to have the best and most performant VR implementation out of all titles in the industry. It ran flawless for me, even on high settings, which shows to me that it can be done.
    I understand your simulation argument, but I don't agree with it. Physics run on the cpu, which is fine in my case. It shouldn't affect VR performance for my set-up.
     
  9. Thrindil

    Thrindil Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2014
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    5
    I ran on lowest possible settings with 0 AI and I couldn't play. "find the right settings and live with it" is no solution here, sadly.
     
  10. mantasisg

    mantasisg Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2,926
    Likes Received:
    3,876
    Yes it is absolutely worthy to try different track or a few different tracks. Car might not be an issue in most times unless plenty of AI is used.

    I know what you mean about having not enough spare time for such activities, let alone difficulties to begin in the first place... IMO rF2 requires little bit of breaking through because of its high level as a sim. Complexity which comes with such high level might sometimes make rF2 like that, especially when there are some differences like that in content itself. Breaking through is well worth in rF2, because it just gets better all the time the more you use it, while most others are not so much.
     
  11. Emery

    Emery Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,035
    Likes Received:
    1,654
    You are an edge case because rF2 is nowhere close to having performance issues compared to ACC. When you talk about Raceroom and AC being better optimized, they're only better by 10% or so and that's because of tradeoffs (Raceroom still DX9 and AC having smaller physical space & simpler physics)... ACC fps is 100% slower than rF2.

    At some point, though, you really have to upgrade your hardware for modern sims if you want acceptable performance. That's always been the case and will continue to be the case. New content will always push the envelope.
     
  12. vittorio

    vittorio Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,118
    Likes Received:
    540
    Yes, physics needs CPU performance. VR needs GPU+CPU (GPU most important but CPU is important too, even if only to calculate and render in 90Hz instead of 60Hz). In case of rF2 and physics: CPU single core performance is most needed cause rF2 is not well optimized on 4+ multicore CPUs either. But this is rF2. In my case i love rF2 physics (and graphics getting better all the time). iRacing and AC just don't make it for me. So I do everything to get rF2 working well.

    EDIT: BTW, when doing performance tests, only use official S397 content. Like Sebring and GT3s by S397. Unofficial content often showed to have big performance issues.
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2020
  13. stonec

    stonec Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    Messages:
    3,399
    Likes Received:
    1,488
    It's always a trade-off between performance and visuals. Assetto Corsa was released in 2014 and hasn't been updated basically at all since 2015, so it's a five year old engine. R3E is running a greatly outdated DX9 engine. A better comparison would be something like Assetto Corsa Competizione, which is using an up-to-date Unreal engine and most certainly would struggle in VR on an RX 480.
     
    vittorio likes this.
  14. Thrindil

    Thrindil Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2014
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    5
    I haven't run ACC, but I could understand why my hardware wouldn't be able to run it.
    rFactor2 to me, is in a different ballpark though. I bought this game in the first week of its release in 2013. It didn't have the latest and most fancy eye-candy back then, and it doesn't now. That's fine, I like the natural way it looks.

    I've changed my GPU 2 times over the years since I bought it, and I always bought mid-range GPUs. It always ran fine with it, and it still runs fine today on a 2560x1080 monitor. But once VR is turned on, the performance is crippled. And I'd love to see that change. Ever since I bought it, this game made other simulators feel subpar.

    The oculus had the same effect as rFactor2 had when I first bought it. It made other ways of racing feel subpar.
    Unfortunately, in my case I'm forced to choose between racing in rFactor2 or racing in VR.
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2020
  15. vittorio

    vittorio Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,118
    Likes Received:
    540
    I understand that completely. rF2 and its physics was an eye opener for me (early 2012, first BETA), VR was an eye opener for me too (early 2013, Oculus DK1). I have chosen I want both, "whatever it costs".

    EDIT: So my GPUs i owned are GTX 570 (monitor), GTX 670 (monitor), GTX 780 Ti (VR, CV1) and now RTX 2080 Ti (VR, HP Reverb). Though RTX 2080 Ti i bought in advance so i can drive HP Reverb G2 VR headset with highest resolution at the moment (2x 2160 x 2160). Only using for rF2.
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2020
  16. J0E

    J0E Registered

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2019
    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    61
    I had an RX480 and RF2 is my primary entertainment. It just didn't run well in VR (Lenovo Explorer). I replaced the RX480 with a Vega 64. RF2 runs at 90FPS with some stuff at High and the rest (shadows, reflections, rain drops set at low or off and no post processing). I don't remember which VR you are running and don't feel like scrolling back to find out, but if it's WMR, there's a Windows control panel setting that lets you force it to 60fps instead of 90. I experimented to see if I could run at 60 fps and turn up or on some of the things I had turned off or down but it really didn't seem like it had that kind of impact. It did lock the game to 60fps, though.
     
  17. hitm4k3r

    hitm4k3r Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1,320
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    This is sadly a misconception. Many people think that just because rF2 was released in 2013 that it's stuck with old, ugly graphics because - well it's a nice tradition to bash this sim for it's graphics and many people think it without even having played the game maxed out. Don't don't get me wrong, I would never claim rF2 to be the most beautiful game out there, but running the 488 GTE at Le Mans on all 12 cylinders maxed out should give you an idea where this sim is going and that we are running a 2020 sim that will get even more eye candy with stuff like screen space reflections and potential new tech for shadows, let alone new shaders and advanced track tech with much higher resolutions than in 2013. So maybe it would help to adjust your expectations, because from my experience ACC isn't that much better in motion than rF2, atleast ony my screen.
     
    Emery and mesfigas like this.
  18. Binny

    Binny Guest

    Maybe with all the improvements and upgrades rf2 should release new min settings and a min VR settings. Its up to them to supply this info to ppl considering buying the product. Without that you make a conscious decision to buy the product & you take that risk.
    I agree all content by s397 should now be bought up to the standards of new released content.
    Cannot wait for the UI to go public hopefully they will put someone fulltime on it so it get's regular updates to suit the users needs as then they might get the rest of them on to the physics they mentioned.
    Up coming release is that new wording for a major update ?
     
  19. Lazza

    Lazza Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    12,345
    Likes Received:
    6,572
    Assuming you mean the roadmap, I read it more as the next update. Several things are mentioned as due to be released in the next update, the UI is said to be close but I wouldn't expect it yet.

    There's not really any sign of anything else that might constitute a "major update" being worked on.
     
    Binny likes this.
  20. Binny

    Binny Guest

    not a roadmap, a major update as it seems we now get small updates for individual things. I gave rf2 a big break for a while is this the new way S397 releases updates content/bug fixes/physics/graphics now individually ?
     

Share This Page