Minimum/Recommended System Specs for rFactor 2

You stated rf2 will be dx9 only, will dx10 or 11 be used on rf2 at a later date tim.

 

You are right I should have elaborated that, for a normal user running Only system processes the system would need (roughly speaking) 1Gb of ram (700 + 300 for working space, might need 2Gb depending on your system configuration) but i run about 20 IE tabs, 2-4 Visual studio, MS SQL server, Sybase server, Photoshop, Remote desktops, Outlook, and 6 screens using displaylinks, with that in mind I´m using a solid 4Gb on start and up to 12Gb when debugging etc.

And yes, a 32-bit compiled app. can only allocate 4Gb of ram.

 

Will dedicated servers run in the same manner as for rF1?
I run a basic server at the moment for rf1, and its an 8 year old laptop, and runs it fine
IS there any idea of minimun spec available for servers as yet ?

 

bluenoes, see this thread. (Tim's reply, mainly)

 

Well, the release of system specs means the release of the game, at least of the beta, is not so far. The announcement of sys specs is usually made 2-3 month before the release, because is game is finalized enough to make tests. Also, Tim said that will be already playing rf2 before Crhistmas somewhere at the forum (ok he said you`ll be playin by Crhistmas ), and in the facebook comments he said that ISI not considering the Crhistmas time as the the best moment for the release. Looks like ISI are afraid of taking some attention rf2 directly at Crhistmas by other games.

That means only one - rf2 will come (beta or 1.0 we cant know) out at the end of november or at the beginig of december, before the Crhistmas madness begins, or will never come out this year.

 

What about texture memory allocated by gfx card? Is is a part of this 4GB?

 

So under 64bit OS, even 32bit application may to make use of more memory. For example if rf2/mod will require to allocate 5GB for textures, there should be no problem. Am I right? If so, it really doesn't matter that rf2 won't be compiled as 64bit.

 

Just why I'm asking about (cause I don't know how it works)
If app pushes textures into gfx card, and doesn't care about it anymore (means textures are not located in app memory space but in drivers one etc), then memory allocated by textures will not be limited by 32bit app memory space limit.

 

Thanks Lazza, missed that one!

 

I'd be willing to say Enduracers and WSGT2 are probably high-poly mods.

 

Good question. C.A.R.S with dx11 looks amazing.

 

Even with dx9 looks amazing.

 

It looks amazing but it's more taxing that I wanted it to be. I recently built a computer for rFactor 2 but it's running at 100% load with C.A.R.S. on medium/high settings.

 

I don't notice any difference.

 

Yes, anything possible. Initial release isn't final release.

 

I haven't been able to see any real tangible difference in any game which was dx9 AND dx10 or 11 compatible. I have noticed that some DX11 titles look good, but I don't know how good they'd look in DX9 because they don't offer it... Like I said, those with dx9 options, I can't see a difference, a real difference, with 11.

 

Mainly because at the moment there are no differences. Dx11 in CARS should just offer better performance at the moment, but it doesn't have any new effect compared to Dx9. They will come in future builds.

We didn't see any big difference because all of those games just add Dx11 OVER the base Dx9 engine, which is not the way to go. In order to see proper differences you should create a full Dx11 from the beginning AFAIK.

 

Do I neither. CARS' DX9 looks identical than DX11 (except by the stuttering and messed textures in the second one).

There's a second effect called "Youtube". On those little screens, everything looks more beautiful than real life. I played CARS at 1920px@42" monitor and yes, it's nice, but is not awesome as I thought before.