ATI graphics optimization
- Thread starter NightnDay
- Start date
Mee
Registered
That's not exactly true, people can see the difference between 60 and 100 fps (on a 100+ Hz screen ofcourse). Especially in very high-paced games like Quake. However, some people don't even see the difference between 30 and 60 fps, let alone between 60 or 100 fps.
But as you also correctly say: on a 60 Hz monitor you can't see the difference between 60 and 100 fps. Well, you can because you'll have screen tearing
.
Mr.Ferret
Registered
Not to mention the human eye cant see any more than 60 fps as well... as long as its a consistent rate of 30 or 60 it should still be playable. if its dipping below 30 or moving anymore between 10 - 15 of the desired framerate regularly then your getting into the 'unplayable' territory
Cracheur
Registered
Mee, that's right... but a constant min 60FPS on a racing game should do for more or less everybody...
At least this is for me minimum I try to reach : if I get lower FPS I reduce quality settings. If I have more FPS I cranck up quality settings.
For me this is always a good refernce point to configre the gfx settings for a specific game.
At least this is for me minimum I try to reach : if I get lower FPS I reduce quality settings. If I have more FPS I cranck up quality settings.
For me this is always a good refernce point to configre the gfx settings for a specific game.
furiousgibbon
Registered
I don't think there are any performance issues with ATI/AMD cards. Running 5300x1050 on a single 5850 and the framerate is basically what I expected, but the graphics aren't quite as nice as I expected. I turned off the 'fancy' settings such as the sun occlusion, reflective track surface and objects etc, on a sunny race i can't even see the difference, and suddenly the framerate is perfect.
So I would say there are optimisations required in these effects. In regards to the graphics themselves, a sunny session looks too pastel and washed out, but oddly the darker image I see in the mirror looks awesome. There needs to be a gamma setting!
So I would say there are optimisations required in these effects. In regards to the graphics themselves, a sunny session looks too pastel and washed out, but oddly the darker image I see in the mirror looks awesome. There needs to be a gamma setting!
NightnDay
Registered
so when it runs smooth on your system, why not sharing your ingame and ccc settings?
Mee
Registered
Oh please, again with those fables...
I've read somewhere that tests on fighter pilots showed they could recognize fps-changes up to 200 fps. Yes, we are no fighter pilots and 200 fps is a bit too much, but 28-30 fps is just ridiculous.
Don't forget movies that play at 24 or 30 fps look smooth because 2 following images aren't "photos" but are a bit blurry to show a smoother moving image.
Some games do this as well, I believe Rainbow Six Vegas did the same and that way you could play the game a lower fps than normal...
Jose Casanovas
Registered
Guys i never used rfactor vsync and never under less than 200 fps.
I dont know how u can drive at 60 fps
I dont know how u can drive at 60 fps
Domi
Registered
I have around 10-12fps more using the control panel AA...
unless you have a 120hz monitor, you were playing at 60fps.
Domi
Registered
Less fps, more steering input lag. Specially with rF1. After 150fps the input lag was minimal.
Guys I have a problem with the shadows, I come and I disappear and is very annoying.
I have a radeon HD 6950 2GB, the latest ATI drivers, I tried different settings in-game levels but has not improved, the FPS are acceptable between 60 and 80....
Any sugestion ¿?
Greetings Tony.
I have a radeon HD 6950 2GB, the latest ATI drivers, I tried different settings in-game levels but has not improved, the FPS are acceptable between 60 and 80....
Any sugestion ¿?
Greetings Tony.
furiousgibbon
Registered
wrong. As a simple example: http://www.boallen.com/fps-compare.html
There are also plenty of videos encoded at 60fps that demonstrate the difference between 30 and 60fps in games. Do some searching if you care to see.
By the way, '20/20 vision' has nothing to do with how many 'frames' of anything we can perceive.
I don't suppose you were around when Geoff Crammond decided to force this idiotic logic on us all by writing his entire GP2/GP3 engine on a lethargic 24fps refresh rate. Curse that fool.
Anyway, as for my settings, when I say the framerate is 'perfect' I mean it's perfect for an antique system running at ridiculous resolutions. START BY TURNING HDR OFF. Instant 50% framerate boost. HDR can look nice but it doesn't look particularly nice in this game at the moment. With it off you lose the washed out pastel colours, but you also lose some of the nice highlights. Anyway, for a framerate impact like that, it's not worth it.
Turn off shadow blur, turn off anti aliasing completely. It's a fill rate hog and at resolutions like 5300x1050 on an ancient card like a 5850, this is fill rate bound. Also limit anisotropic filtering to 2x, I even ran with trilinear and noticed very little filter lines (only on the walls). AF is a fill rate hog as well.
Road reflections, environment reflections and wind/crowd movement is superfluous to a good racing experience and can be turned off. In a sunny race you won't notice any of these missing.
That's it. I get 30FPS on the start line with a grid of 19 opponents on spa, and that soon jumps to 70FPS+ once the race is underway. It also still looks pretty good.
Be patient and wait for the devs to optimise things, especially if you're running Eyefinity resolutions.
Stephane Rouault
Registered
which game? because Tim has already said the wheel updates are not connected to the frame rate in rf2.
Mee
Registered
With a decent multithreaded program/game I would think the controls run at a different rate...
... as Duvel just pointed out
.