Just released so it won't be as "optimised" as a 1.4xx Just did a test and on the grid with 30 cars, everything max... aax8, fxaa off and vsync off i get 37 on the start grid and 60 -90 in race... basically turning it down would result in a nice FPS... really just a test Easily the most realistic track I have seen in awhile on Max-Max... I built this rig for Arma 3, Looks like it will see more Rfactor 2 Lol edit-I just did a test with ISI cars only and I added about 5-10fps...
Can't drive it at the moment but have been testing it on my main pc, it is very very nice, ISI are putting out top notch content now Fps performance is on par with other tracks for me. ( compared to LRP / historic spa / maylasia ) There has to be something in there that's causing trouble for certain pc configurations Roll on Charlotte oval/road infield track
Loving this. Been ripping around Silverstone all day. Max graphics, 20-30 cars. Looks great. I have a pretty high end PC so all has been outstanding. Thanks ISI
Nice work, really impressive made. But i don't like how most HDR profiles works. From first days i noticed that picture is too dark. Lets don't forget that its HIGH dynamic range lighting. What we see on screenshot here (i hope Twista don't mind that i'm using his screenie): View attachment 8457 Photoshop clearly shows that our image hardly using 3/4 of available range. And this is HIGH dynamic range? It is not really. Also, colors is a bit too warm in my opinion. I have monitor calibrated for photoworks and comparing screenshot with what i see from my window. Colors begin to match after applying 7% light blue cooling photofilter (don't know what this really means ). Thats what it ends up after fixing lighting range and color temps: View attachment 8458 For me it looks times and times better. Most of the work was done by lighting range fixing - what HDR actually should do. Hope something would be done with this problem.
Tim, will this version be still available somewhere after updates.. mainly because i fear also that the devs will butcher the track to optimize it for the complainers, so i still want to drive the first version and admire the visuals.
Kev, that screenshot from Twista is using the default 'failsafe' HDR values (so tracks from older sources don't look painfully bad). You should analyze a screenshot that was taken using the Realistic Clear profile (or Tosch's profile). Should be a bit more representative . There is a few more % of optimizations under the hood of the art, but not THAT much either. Seems like most of the issues are caused by reflections and/or VRAM usage on cards with less than 2GB of RAM. For example, I have zero issues on my HD6970 with 2GB VRAM and it runs perfectly fine, but of course my performance is being hampered by a 6 year old CPU ... That's why I recommend people with 1GB cards to turn texture detail down a click. Most of the terrain textures are higher res than the older tracks anyway, so the 1 click would just bring it back to LRP quality. Reducing Track Detail from Max to High will also bring it down to LRP quality, but it will reduce VRAM usage by quite a bit as well. FYI, loading 20 AI will fill almost 1GB of VRAM already, so that leaves little margin for the track on cards without excessive amounts of RAM. That's the price to pay when people request higher quality . Fortunately, the options allow rF2 to be scalable. Silverstone has been set up rather well to be scalable too. So yeah, Max detail is actually Ultra detail on this track, and that should be the standard IMHO. We're not planning to butcher the track to make it look like the previous tracks .
Is the problem the number of cars altogether or the number of cars being displayed? Maybe I could start shopping a bit.
I THINK invisible cars would still remain loaded in VRAM, but they simply don't get drawn to offload the GPU itself. I don't know though. Can't check either at the moment. What I DO know for sure is that at some point before we started optimizing, Silverstone used about 1.4GB of VRAM without any cars . It is a massively detailed track (both in real life and in rF2) inside a compact area. At highest track detail level, there are about 50.000 spectators in the grandstands. That's just scary ...
Superb work Luc. Look forward to those further little improvements. Best track I've been on in a sim.
Thanks. I'll start looking for a better card if the next tracks are this heavy. I'm liking the progress, it's not a complaint.
That's great! Stay with high quality please, and those with slower PCs can turn details down. Hopefully, the idea of a set of graphics settings per track will be implemented soon and then everyone will be happy As for HDR profiles and overall appearance. Silverstone at default HDR profile (setting to "none") looks very cartoonish indeed, with lots of red discoloration. With "realistic clear" it is better but still too much red. What's up with that red color, by the way? Something with the shader code and lighting?
Thanks for this post. I can confirm the VRAM usage. Silverstone at max with some cars fills my gfx card ram with 1800MB data. Most other tracks are around 1300MB. About the colors. I can see improvement in the latest builds. It is now possible to have a bright sky (high Sky S LUM) and dark shadowed areas (Have to redo all my old profiles). What I'm missing is the specular reflection on trackside objects like the pitwall and buildings. Here is an example from an old build. There is a nice specular reflection on the pitwall (see the Mills Logo) and also the top of the green wall. Next screen is from Build 228. I have tried to change the mat props in devmode but nothing works. Looks like the gfx engine don't use the spec maps for these objects.
Thanks for the answer, Luc. Yeah, realistic clear is better but there is gap too. There is a shot http://i.imgur.com/Nlukul0.jpg (gonna use imgur as my attachment space running out) Maybe there is different issue because graph has peak at level 255 than clear gap to about 230. http://i.imgur.com/xS9masK.jpg In the shot above you can see some objects that are overbrighten a bit. Also notice sky is almost half way (154) to the brightness of kerbs: http://i.imgur.com/5rUDWPg.jpg Just for reference there is a shot i just made out of my window: http://i.imgur.com/lkSmSyI.jpg Sky is way brighter here (level 238): http://i.imgur.com/0b1RkTI.jpg So yeah, not a big problem but room for improvement is still pretty big. I hope i don't bother you too much, you made great work to push it out before F1 GP. (edit) Took screenshot with realistic clear in the same place as Twista's. There is big gap too, graph is empty from 205 to 255 (almost 20% of range is free ).
This basically, it's good to see ISI now producing the best content. ISI have now set the benchmark in rF2 IMO for how good a track can look and that's exactly how it should be. Well done to the track artists Runs flawless here aswell btw, can run a full F1 field maxed, runs better than older ISI tracks and looks miles better.
Silverstone curbs easily saturated my eyes. And the white paint actually hurt my eyes. The only way I could see any detail on the freshly painted curbs was by editing the settings on my camera . And the paint smellt pretty bad (they were in the process of painting the curbs while we surveyed the track, as they do for each event)! When I arrived at the track, I thought "what are those people complaining about, the tracks need MORE saturation!". I've been doing track textures for over a decade, and I was very VERY impressed. Seeing those vibrant colours really was a (painful) eye-opening moment . Seeing the track on TV right now feels ... dull. Too much post-production . But yeah, red shouldn't turn into pink. Perhaps we need a better set of default values.
I thought the red on curbs were to pink then I saw some pics on Facebook (couple of friends re at the f1) & yep they are a tad pinkish
This is running pretty flawlessly for me too, and I have a pretty standard PC (GTX 670, 2500k). Look at upgrading your PC's perhaps.
