Hi All, As a longtime devoted Nvidia user, after much research (literally hours of reading and reviewing benchmark results, articles, forums, etc.), and many internal debates ( ), I decided to try AMD/ATI. It didn't hurt that I got a great deal on a 7970 at 2/3 the price of the best priced GTX680 I could find. It happily overclocks from the stock 925 GPU/1375 Mem to comparable to higher spec cards 1100 GPU/1425 Mem effortlessly and without breaking a sweat (translate, temperatures never go above 73-74C under full, persistent load). In every benchmark I've run, every game I've tried since getting it 2 days ago it absolutely kills... EXCEPT for rF2 Not touching the settings from my previous GT250 settings which would slug along at 40fps and occasionally hit in the high 60s, I'm now down to 11fps using the Classic F1 on Mid-Ohio The computer is definitely not a slouch. 6 Core@3.8GHz, 16GB, top of the line chipset/mainboard, and top of the line GPU and the whole setup/Windows config is very lean with one startup item and absolute minimal background items other than what's absolutely needed. Something really wrong here! Not everyone wants to, nor can they blow $550.00 plus in a GTX680. Any other users with ATI/AMD getting solid, good frame rates please share some settings because this is disappointing. Thanks.
All I gotta say is welcome to the club. I, being a former AMD fanboy, have switched over to a GTX 680 from my (2) 6870s in crossfire just so I could run RF2 well. I get about 50 more frames with the 680. Although those two cards don't compare, you are not the only one who has had major issues with AMD products and RF2.
I had an extensive reply to this and maybe, just as well, I accidentally closed a browser tab and lost the whole thing. Don't feel like writing it all over again at this point. Not that any one person or what they think really matters but I've been this on rFactor voyage since 2005 and watched that evolve into what rFactor became along with all the commercial products that evolved from it. Rather amazing. It's certainly not there this time. I'm not trying to cause a stir here. Just speaking my mind. I knew that this was a Beta deal when signing up, was prepared for that and understood it. Even upon reading that rF2 was using gMotor2 and even though I, along with many, think it has been exhausted, and was hoping for a little more evolution, I was prepared for accepting that too. I purchased rF2 back in October 2012. Around the same time, I purchased 3 competitor products as well. I drove rF2 for about 3 weeks, saw some potential but realized it had a long way to go. I like other games and simulations as well. Other products, rival or otherwise, do not seem to have a problem with either of the predominant GPUs on the market and for the most part work. Even on my lower end equipment, I've been able to sample some of what is current. Some rivals boast better visuals but are not up to the physics. One or two however, are not far behind. One of those is only at the Alpha stage so in a comparable amount of development time, it will certainly be interesting to see where the physics side evolves to. While everyone realizes that rF2 will take time and development, one also has to consider that as that is happening, others too are continuing to evolve and develop further so, if some of those have surpassed in areas and have nearly caught up in others, even if you evolve and develop, so do they. It can kind of be a 'Catch 22' type thing because if you are kind of behind the game, you can potentially stay behind the game unless you make huge strides and I somehow am not seeing that happening. Rivals may not have the best physics, or the best this or the best that. What other products do seem to have is a more complete package. I think I, like many, would rather have lesser of everything but something complete that can be used and enjoyed. The best physics in the world are kind of useless when you are trying to run them at the whopping 12fps I'm experiencing at the moment. My lowly GTS250 even at its 39fps, ran better than now, as it stuttered away due to whatever issue in the program. Before my current upgrade, I had the opportunity to try a mid range GTX560. That only added about 15-20fps, stuttering still apparent but it at least kind of worked. I cannot understand how there can be so many problems with one GPU vs. another. I also don't see how any company can expect to survive when you've immediately eliminated half your customer base and half your fan base by a product that doesn't run on one of the market's two leading products. If I run BF3 with full detail, it's fine. I run rivals at full detail, they're fine. I benchmark with 3DMark Vantage and the benchmark scores for comparable systems are in the top 5. So, what then is the problem? With each build, I load up rF2, hoping for something more, and have been disappointed. I drive it, try to like it, and it gets shelved each time because it doesn't seem to change much and it doesn't seem to work well yet. All I can or will say is I'm disappointed so far.
Something strange must be happening with your system. I have a Gigabyte 7970 (core clock 1000MHz, memory clock 1375MHz) and the rest of my computer is fairly modest (Core i5 3570, 8GB ram etc). I tried the Eve F1 on Mid-Ohio with all settings maximum. 1920x1080. Vsync off. In game I set anti-aliasing to none but I used the Catalyst Control Center to override the game's antialiasing and set it to use 8x Supersampling antialiasing (which should have a major performance impact). The lowest framerate was 33fps at one part of the track, elsewhere it was around 40. What settings are you using? Do you have the latest drivers?
1959SLP, Build 134 was the first build that actually had me contemplating a new video card. With it (and for the first time since build 6X) I experienced stuttering, tearing and lower fps. And like others, I was wading thru all the stories about which card, which maker, what settings, what tweaks, which driver...it's been very time consuming. We may find out when the game is complete that many cards that we thought would be sorely under-powered may do the job just fine, who knows. When we have a final project THEN we may be able to find settings and tweaks that work for the majority of people and a variety of systems, right now however, the "unlucky" will have a lot of reading to do.
Hey, Thanks for the suggestions. Yes latest drivers. I know this system and I setup things very lean and stripped down. I'm quite sure there is not something going on because I've run all kinds of stress tests, system checks, and benchmarks over the last 2 days since getting the card and the system 'scores' very well with everything. Also, as mentioned several other games and simulators run killer with maxed out detail. Honestly, I cannot remember all the things/settings I tried but I went full circle from defaults to various combinations of Catalyst and in game settings to back to defaults. I will try your settings and see. I really hope it helps.
I've made some progress. I've been able to get some better to good frame rates. Sometimes, it's illogical. You'd think that adding detail or increasing something like shadows or turning on HDR, which should or at least you'd think should be a frame rate killer are increasing the framerate. Now, I just have to play with a balance of detail and anti-aliasing to find the happy place where frame rates are drivable and the sim looks good too. Sure hope these sorts of things get worked out sooner than later. Oh, and BarfFactor, some of what you suggested really helped. Odd thing though... I have a PowerColor card and I'm using the latest drivers from AMD's website. 13.1 is what they are I believe. There is not an option in the Catalyst Control Panel for AA of x8. I only have x12, x12EQ, x24, and x24EQ. Either way, I've set it to 'Use Applicaton Settings' so far in order to get some frame rate and I'm tweaking from there. I'll certainly be posting what I come up with so if anyone else is experiencing similar problems, they have settings to start from.
Low shadows, minimal AA, hdr on, all else maxed on an i5 and 7970 @ stock, 1920x1080, and i'm unlucky if i go under 60 fps... I need to double check settings, but i'm usually in the 80's and over. Are you using multiview? Something seems really off with that low framerate, i was down in the 30's at the startIng moment with max shadows and high AA.
Sorry to hear your troubles. I'm not sure I can help but I'll give you my settings: i5 3570k @ 4.4gHz 7970 @ 1100 (gpu) / 1390 (mem) 2560x1440p resolution (you didn't mention your resolution.) 8 Gb of Ram I run stock settings in Catalyst Control Centre (other than allowing Overdrive to overclock). In game, I run: 2560x1440 resolution FXAA off HDR on AntiAliasing: 2x (not much really needed at this resolution although I'd like to dial in a bit more) Sync: off Player detail: full Track detail: full Opponent detail: high Shadows: high Shadow blur: fast sun occlusion: on enviro reflections: off road reflections: off (I can't even really see these to be honest) wind: on special effects: full With these settings @ Sebring, with a full grid of 25 (20 visible) at night, I get around 50 fps on the starting grid, and anywhere from 60 - 100 around the track when things settle down a bit. During the day, running by myself I'll get anywhere from 75 - 120. One thing I noticed is that if I turn down my resolution just as a test (to say 1920x1080) it does not increase my FPS by very much (about 10% more). Given that 1440p is almost 4 times as many pixels as 1080p, I would have thought my fps would go up significantly. I'm not sure why this is happening, but I throw it out there for others to consider, should they wish to do so.
I'm 7970 as well with a 3820@4.3 everything on max with 1920x1080 i was always above 100 fps and now with 5780x1080 it always between 50-60 fps. Did you clean all traces for your old nvidia drivers before installing the new ATi ones? Also interesting thing to note I gained around 25fps going from 3.8Ghz to 4.3Ghz. That's with one core @35% usage and the rest at 10-15%
Howdy, I'm a happy 7970 owner. I have disabled CCC in msconfig.exe I now just let the game's settings take care of business, and it's seems to do well. Hope this helps, Bryan
You must have the AA filter set to Edge-detect, I just use Standard. For best performance use Multi-sampling antialiasing. I only use Supersampling because i can't stand jaggies in the distance.
I'm experimenting huge problems with rf2 online, and I have quite similar computer to yours. cpu: i7-3930K ram: 16gb os: win 7 64bit gpu: 2x AMD 7970 crossfire internet: 100m/10m cable This setup costed me almost 3500 EUR around one year ago so I'd except it to be on the top end in terms of performance. I can run games like Sniper Elite V2 and World of tanks full detailed with 1980x1200 resolution. rFactor 1 runs on max settings and 30 visible cars at 500-800fps depending on track. But I literally cannot race rf2 online. Screen freezes all the time, sounds lag and stutter, odd crashes etc... Also it is impossible to get decent FPS with high graphic settings, I get 30-40fps, High to med settings are needed to achieve 150. Disabling crossfire doesn't help any of these problems. Since many are getting decent results with the same GPU, I'm now thinking could the 6-core prosessor cause these problems? I'm going to re-install rf2 today and see if that helps. PS. Offline with rf2 seems to work okay, though same problems are experienced there, only in smaller scale.
