Lack of performance optimisation on some new content

Have you observed a very clear drop in performance with certain recent content, really very clear ?

I drive practically only on the Nurburgring Combined, with 89 AI, in very diversified multiclass, qualification generally, 01:30 PM without timescale (sun at the zenith), with clouds, exclusively or almost S397 content from 2016 to 2022, texture details/circuit/car at maximum and anisotropic X16, EVERYTHING ELSE OFF, NO RAIN.

Various classic optimizations in the player Json.

HMD G2 21 Mp (right + left eye), CAS to enhance sharpness, optimization and reduction of FOV.

So to be very clear, in this very precise and very pleasant configuration for my eyes, all of the old 70 S397 cars allow me to have almost all the time 90 FPS (say 99% of the time approximately), which is perfectly fine for me.

The few jerks are rare and not very annoying, and this is rare. Almost all the time during the first 5 to 8 kilometers maximum, it rams because of either the lack of VRAM or the lack of RAM (after that it is 100% fine).

My computer :
RTX 2080 Ti OC, i7 9700K @5 Ghz, SSD, 16 GB DDR4 4000 Cl18.

So with for example the Porsche 992 cup, with exactly the same graphics settings and race conditions, and I start to calculate that after 5 minutes, the minimum FPS is 60.
That is to say 1/3 of FPS lost, it seems abysmal to me. Undrivable honestly.

So in my opinion all new content should be further inspected for performance. Have you noticed something similar?

 

Same with stock car 2018, updated content recently (min fps 54, max fps 69.....) weird
No problem with senna (90 fps)

 

Newer cars look so much better than they ones made 1-2 years ago so that could be a factor, but also perhaps the new sound engine, when used to its full potential, could also be causing trouble here?
It ceirtanly was an issue when it was first released; lots of users (including me) had to bring down the number of effects down to 128 or so to avoid a performance dip.

 

Thanks for the advice.

This leaves me with a small hope of a workaround, if S397 does nothing.

Because we are talking about a 1/3 drop in performance.

Also it is not a vram or ram problem, cause I did the test 3 times with the SC2018 in exactly the circumstances indicated : the 3rd time, I lowered by 1/3 (less 30) the number of AI: No difference at all.

 

The first 991 cup car was the same, with 30 AI, the CPU already bottlnecks the GPU and GPU load is at 70%......but with 30 GT3 or other car, the GPU load is at 100%....
https://forum.studio-397.com/index.php?threads/gt3-cup-car-optimisation.64169/

And s397 devs have never answered why some cars are more CPU/GPU demanding...
I prefer they reduce the polygons like for the Reiza cars, they are light for the GPU (30 reiza cars = 15 S397 cars for the GPU rendering) and it's good.

Even a 4090/13900K now is not good, the optimisation in rF2 is worst every year, cause they raise the CPU/GPU load with every update without valid reasons.

Let's be honnest, the DX11 conversion has always some fails, and this 3D engine shows its limit....outdated ? yes it's the begining.

The rain sprays at ultra add +100% fpr the GPU load (and sometimes +200% !!!) and it's not really a beauty game with the rain...reducing the graphics quality makes the game so ugly....even 4090/13900K can't render rain with ultra graphics at 4k or triple 1440p in good condition (+120 constant fps)....with ACC/AMS2 no trouble with rain or night...

One monitor at 1440p and 4090/13900K is ok if we play last of grid, with 30 AI, and rain and night, ultra graphics....
So for 3x1440p monitors, I need a GPU with +200% gain performance, a shame ??? Maybe in 10 years, but the rF2 updates will raise the GPU charge again...endless trouble...
Yeah, crappy 3D engine....can't use 3 monitors or 1 4K with rain/night...and I don't talk about the shadows....
That's why this game is for hotlaping, what I only do.

Yeah rF2 3D engine is showing its limit.

Little bit off thread, iRacing has announced the rain since many years, and I'm pretty sure they face with the same issue, the iRacing 3D engine is very old and with rain, they face to a massive CPU/GPU load increase that they struggle to reduce and control....

with Iracing with 4090/13900K many times the GPU load is stuck at 60% cause this game is too much old....can't imagine they will add the rain with such a 3D engine fail...so they stay silent about the rain, they are thinking about new engine, solutions, but it will break iRacing....

ISI 3D engine is now showing its age, it's maybe time like raceroom for something new, UE5 has some crazy demos.

The only games which use well my 4090/13900k are Dirt rally 2.0, ACC, AMS2 and F1 2022.

 

I come back to you after 2 precise tests which tell me that the major loss of performance (in the 30% of FPS) does indeed come from certain new content or certain content which has just received an update.

Always the exact same test conditions, in an almost "scientific" way (it's time to laugh), 2 precise tests with 1 data each time which differs, with the SC2018 which has been updated :

1) From 256 sound effects to 32 : no improvement or very weak and not significant.

2) Change from 89 AI with some multiclass (always the same) to 0 AI : slight improvement in perception, but extremely insufficient.

For both tests, the min FPS and the max FPS were approximately identical to the previous tests (59 and 69). I was just in a previous test down to 54 FPS for a while, but no satisfactory improvement.

I conclude 2 things :

1) It's not a CPU problem (0 AI vs 89 AI and number of effects).

2) Obviously it's a major optimization problem for the new S397 content (which we can also consider that graphic improvements can legitimately constrain performance, but by no means so much).

3) I think that RAM and VRAM are not in question (number of AI reduced by 89 !!).

 

I add that the new tracks are more GPU demanding.
I regret the Sebring optimisation, the framerate is the highest with sebring, and this track is very beautiful.
If the tracks and cars are more GPU demanding, ans we upgrade our GPU, it's endless nightmare, we can't improve really the framerate....
Honestly I will prefer that all the tracks have the Sebring optimisation and quality with same highest framerate.
Same for the cars, if they could have lower polygons to improve the framerate.

 

My performance has also really been tanking when doing bigger grids.
It will be fine at the start of practice and when I go back to pit and exit, fps will go all the way down from a solid 120+ fps to around 30 fps.
It sometimes improves when I get out on track but sometimes it will just stay at 30 fps no matter how long I drive.

Nordschleife seems to be the worst for this.

 

Sorry to insist, but have any of you noticed performance losses with some recent cars or with a recent update (992 cup and Stockcar 2018 in particular) ?

Moreover, these performance losses compared to the rest of the content are greater than 10% (30% in my case) ?

I need to know if the problem comes from this content or maybe something would have escaped me (it would be very surprising).

 

@Paul Jeffrey sorry to tag you, I think it is necessary to
escalate information.

I made some concessions that do not affect the graphic quality :

30 AI less (69), rearview in 50 meters against 75 (and the other two rearview optimizations but that I had already done before), 6 AI visible (against 9), 128 sound effect (against 256).

I redid the test with both cars, here are the results (don't forget that I'm almost always at 90 FPS with the other content) :

1) 992 cup :
min FPS 70, max FPS 90. 90 FPS most of the time and above 80 the vast majority of the time.
Conclusion for the Porsche : a significant drop in performance compared to the rest of the content, in the face of a real but not huge improvement in graphics compared to, for example, a 488 GTE. Thus, an optimization is clearly necessary. A slight loss of performance is understandable, but no more.

2) Stockcar 2018 :
min FPS 59, max FPS 69. Frankly, this is unacceptable. Unplayable.
And the graphics are really "no more", correct but "no more".
Really there is a problem that needs to be fixed (strong optimization needed).

 

The formula pro has less FPS than GT3 I think....

 

I see some slight stuttering on my end with the new content. No real test, I can just see It compared to before. It could have to do with the new cars, after all they do look a lot better, but so did the earlier BTCC cars and the performance was not as tanked as with the latest three new cars. Even the BMW was ok which Is recent too, so not sure what´s going on there.

 

I will make a comparaison with all the tracks and cars at 4K ultra, we will know the differences.

 

Just because I haven't tested fps in quite a while, I went through as many official mods as I could yesterday. 4k single screen, 30 AI from the back of a standing start grid, single model grids, Nurburgring 24H, all virtual mirrors, steering wheel off. The fps dives at the hairpin when all the AI bunch up, so a full lap is not necessary.

Vanwall showed the worst fps. Stockcar 2018 (Centennial) and Senna GTR were next worse, but 10% better than the Vanwall. The Centennial has something wrong with the cockpit windshield texture that makes other car windshields flicker. Doesn't happen outside of the cockpit. Porsche 991 RSR GTE has a bug that enabled the cockpit steering wheel. The BMW BTCC fared best and shows 37% better fps than the Vanwall.

 

So to finish my "alert", I performed exactly the same test with the only following differences : 1920x1080 simple screen (NOT VR).

RESULTS :

1) Ferrari 488 GTE (69 488 AI)
FPS MIN = 199, FPS MAX = 242

2) Stockcar 2018 (69 AI SC2018)
FPS MIN = 156, FPS MAX = 185

Either :
-21.61% for FPS MIN
-23.55% for FPS MAX

= Extremely bad optimisation. Not my settings, my hardware : the game !!

 

and some tracks are better optimised, Sebring for example, I like it very much, beauty and good framerate. Monza is too much GPU demanding and not really more beauty.

 

There can be an understandable difference in performance between cars and tracks. Some cars require more details to resemble the real car. They might even have some quirks that require more programming to reproduce their behavior.

With tracks this can be even more noticeable. Some tracks expand over a very large area, and some have very few objects while some others have a lot of them.

The detail settings are your friends here and maybe something can be optimized by removing certain details/objects at some detail levels but even then you couldn't make every track/car work at the same fps using the same detail level. That's impossible.

I guess they're trying to tune the detail levels so you get a reasonable quality/performance balance but even then, it's you that have to tune the settings. And at the same level of detail you might still get different fps depending on the hardware and session settings.

I think the settings profiles come handy here. You can have several settings and use the one more appropiate for each situation.

 

а также бывают моменты, когда FPS и частота кадров в норме (60fps/16ms), изображение не плавное, а прерывистое. как вы это объясните?
RTX3070

 

Between 20 and 25% loss of FPS exclusively related to the cockpit of a car, it is extremely excessive (and therefore not acceptable).

That a slight loss of FPS occurs between one AAA laser track and another, a slight loss between a graphically qualitative car that is 2 years old and an old car that has received an update (and which, moreover, graphically does not nothing extraordinary), no problem.

But no. Honestly no guys !

If they notice the problem, let them optimize the new content a little better as well as the content to come in the next few years : for me, no problem.

But they must see that there is a problem.

--> The huge problem of the very bad optimization of the day/night cycle and the rain has never been solved, which in the field of optimization is really very worrying.

In short.

 

I think they already know after thousands of comments saying it.

But there are some users that don't understand that there might be significant differences from one mod to another.

I'm not saying there's no room for optimization, a lot can be done for sure, I'm only stating that having different fps per car/track isn't a bug.