To all the people than benched their AMDs in this thread, (especially 79x0 users) , can you please redo the tests with the brand new drivers? Lol
Just tested with new drivers and its around 3 fps worse off for me. CPU: I7 920 @ 3.8 ghz GPU: Sapphire 7970 oc edition RAM: 12gb 1600mhz Drivers: AMD 13.11 betas(9.4) old average of 27.8 with 13.10s(9.2) 2013-11-24 20:01:09 - rFactor2 Frames: 5034 - Time: 200492ms - Avg: 25.108 - Min: 11 - Max: 58 I don't think cpus hard drives etc are going to make a huge difference in rf2.
CPU: Intel Core i5 3450 @ 3.7Ghz GPU: Gigabyte GTX660 OC @ Default RAM: 8gb 1600mhz Drivers: R331.82 rFactor2 2013-11-26 23:09 Frames: 8750 - Time: 200227 - Avg: 43.700 - Min: 33 - Max: 59
Got a new gpu today so I'll did your bench as a gtx760 was still missing from your list CPU: Intel Core i5 3570k @ 4,2 Ghz GPU: MSI GTX 760 Hawk RAM: 16gb 1600mhz Drivers: 331.82 Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg 9994, 200033, 38, 69, 49.962
Hi all, Loch Drummond replay benchmark:- CPU: Intel Core i5 2500k@4.5Ghz GPU: 780GTX Classified@1306Mhz Boost RAM: 8Gb 1600Mhz DDR3 Drivers: 331.82 Frames: 19644 - Time: 205656 - Min: 76 - Max: 130 - Avg: 95.519 I highly recommend this GPU for Rf2, currently costs £100 less than the Ti in the UK and is stupidly overclockable! 1400Mhz is possible with a voltage tool without voiding the warranty, and mine is happy at 1306Mhz all day long.
We really need a triple screen benchmark to see the effect of having more video memory, as that is where you should probably see the difference and maybe influence the choices people make. I decided to get the Evga classified gtx770 4gb for this very reason, I could of course be assuming wrong but there is a reason the titan had 6gb. Higher resolutions require more memory I believe. It would be nice to see SLI vs single card in a triple screen benchmark too. Plus I would be really interested if someone with a SLI setup could run that FCAT test that shows micro stutter levels, as im so pleased with my card I'm immediately wondering about getting another for an 8gb video ram setup. Had my fingers burnt with a crossfire setup and micro stutter before so really wary of SLI. Changing from the 7970 to this nvidia card is like getting the greatest build of rfactor 2 to date! Incidentally in the player folder the config file contains a line "run benchmarks" I tried enabling it but couldn't see where to go from there. Maybe it isn't implemented or maybe it needs something typed in the CLI. Maybe somebody who knows stuff could look at that? An integral benchmark not requiring fraps that reported all your in game as well as clock settings would be a great tool.
don't get confused with sli or crossfire regarding ram, they don't get added together as you may think, ie 4gb +4gb wont =8gb, anyway your 4gb card wont ever get saturated imo.
I didn't know that but I checked and that is true. But I must be maxing out my 4 gb card now, it certainly won't run everything maxed out at playable levels on 3 screens, I doubt it would on 1 screen. I doubt a titan does either. That's why I'm calling for a 3 screen benchmark. Really to be properly playable you want min fps levels of 85, for your input and the graphics to feel fluid and related. I'd like to know what you need to get those levels of performance on 3 screens maxed out, or if it is even possible with todays hardware.
You need at least 2x780 Ti's to get close to a min fps of 85, in triple screens & using multiview, and hope that the sli scaling is working very well.
Maxed out graphics are overrated. Put every single thing 1 step from max. Should barely be able to tell the difference, especially while driving.
And multiview in rF2, at the moment atleast, is useless since it is fixed at a certain angle. If your screens aren't at that angle it looks just as weird as it off.
Well ok overrated maxed out settings or not it would still be nice to know what you needed should you want the full possible experience with 3 screens, and also about the micro stutter level with this game and sli. Yes Tim I know what you mean about multiview, but if you made a triple monitor stand that you could alter the angles on, multiview would be quite good, you would really have to turn you head for the apex, and glancing to the far mirror would feel quite real. Apart from the EMI worries of sort of boxing your brain in from 3 sides I'm quite tempted to give it a go. There was a guy on here from Spain selling the very thing some time ago. Although I assume in the end ISI will allow angle change in mutiview, and hopefully some way of rendering the 2 side screens in lower quality to make up for the fps hit.
Rendering the side monitors with separate, and much lower graphics settings, in multiview is a great idea. I'm assuming it's not difficult at all since the screens are all rendered independently.
This thread caught my eye because I was thinking of upgrading my old pc, and I had come to the same choice of videocards as the OP. So I started reading every single post and it didnt take me long to make my choice tbh... it has to be the gtx770. But... This did get me wondering where my old system would end up doing your benchmarks at 2 different resoltions (single monitor) and on a whole bunch of settings so thats what I did. My "Old" (current) system: Asus P5Q SE Plus Intel Q9550 @ Stock (2,83) 6 gb DDR2 @ 667 (I know lol) MSI HD6850 1gb Cyclone 1 tb seagate @ 7200 Using driver version: 13.25.18-131107a-164684E-ATI I wanted to make it an equal test so I made a Low, Med, High and Ultra setting for "Out off game" Low being all AA, HDR and FXAA off, Medium is AA level 1 and the rest off, High AA level 2 HDR on rest off, Ultra is AA level 3 HDR on rest off. Second I did the same for the "in game" settings. I've added a pic of those. View attachment 10990 Then I took all the combinations and did a 3 lap race for the 1680 x 1050 resolution and a 2 lap race for the 1920 x 1080 resolution (because that saved me some time ). View attachment 10989 The results, as you can see are imo pretty good for an old system powered by and ATI chip btw Low/Med means out of game I set Low and in game I set Medium and so on... It holds up pretty well on my Ultra settings as long as you keep the ingame settings on high. What is going to be interesting is to see what happens when my new system arrives later this week New system (ordered and on its way ): MSI Z87-G45 Gaming Intel i5 4670k @ Stock (3,4/3,8) 8 gb Corsair PC3-17064 2133Mhz Vengeance MSI GEFORCE GTX770 Twin Frozr Gaming OC 2GB GDDR5 PCI-E Kingston SSDNow V300 Series 120G 2.5" SATA III So after its arrival, me putting it all together without any smoke coming out and me fiddling around with it for a while I'll be updating this post with the "scores". Sorry for this rather long lap of text but you could have only looked at the pictures
I had some time today so finally redid mine at the correct resolution (used 1920*1200 last time since that is my native res) At 1920*1080 on the 780Ti OC'ed I get these. Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg 21055, 200227, 83, 142, 105.156
realised that I didnt do the "standard"bench mark so here it is : 1920x1080, Lvl 3, 16x, Max all and No Reflections: 2013-12-01 18:41:19 - rFactor2 Frames: 4202 - Time: 229134ms - Avg: 18.339 - Min: 11 - Max: 31 ps sys specs are 2 posts up ^^