Tried 107 today, and noticed you have finally unlocked some bottleneck in the engine. Solid performance, and I saw near 100% usage on all four cores. This resulted in my GPU running near idle, though. Really shows you how the GPU can perform when the CPU is doing it's job properly. GPU running clocked down to about 50% and still only running 50-70% utilization. Solid 60fps with all maxed, full AA and HDR. Only running single screen, though, 1920x1080. i7 2600K @ 4,4GHz nVidia 680GTX stock clock
No what he means is the graphics card is utilizing the cpu 4 cores not the game. The gtx680 has a feature in the CP where you can spread the load out over 4 cores or something like that.
He said 100% usage on all 4 cores which would imply that rf2 is truly using quadcore or 100% total usage. If he just set the feature to spread load on all 4 cores, it would have to be 50% usage on each core, so 50% total usage.
Well, what I'm seeing is near 100% usage on all four cores, I have no idea what part of the software is using them, and for what. All I know is that performance is flawless and the proper CPU use means my GPU is able to run full tilt if needed. So , since I run with v-sync my GPU can do lunch and laundry while the game runs.
You shouldn't be seeing 100% CPU usage playing RF2.. You need to check your settings cause I am running RF2 on full @ 40% on 2 cores.....
No, you can have a single threaded application and if it will heavily use CPU for OpenGL or DirectX, then you can expect graphics drivers to utilize all available cores trying to keep up with the amount of work sent to them from application.
I'm not complaining, I have awesome performance, and if that means nVidia, Intel or ISI finally figured something out I couldn't care less. GPU usage goes up in more pure gfx situations like back of a grid or pits. And it's not a constant 100% load, I'd be suspicious then. It's 80-95% split on all four cores and varying which core works hardest. To me that indicate that stuff is working right.
To me it's and indication that game is using way too much CPU for graphics, but lucky for us, graphics drivers utilize all available resources to remedy it. When you would have only two cores working and both between 50-80% then you could say software is doing a good job - using only as much CPU as needed to run physics in realtime and handling graphics well enough not to be CPU-bound. As long as game puts so much work on graphics drivers that they consume multiple cores, you will always face a risk of simulation falling out of realtime because graphics drivers will be fighting for CPU time with simulation. People who have 4-core machines have reserves, but 2-core processor owners can have 100% CPU usage on both cores and that's not good if you want something to run in realtime.
Its called threaded optimization in the nvidia control panel global settings where you manage your 3d settings. Allows application to take advantage of multiple cpus.
Here is the numbers of my new upgrade: View attachment 3880 X6 CPU after to run 5 laps with 20 AI cars .in game all Max only shadows in MED only core 4 at 98%
Weird part is that in heavy traffic when the performance goes down I see LESS CPU use than when running good. So there's some bottleneck that still needs unwinding.
That sounds like if GPU or memory bandwidth comes to a limit so CPU does not get data to process and thus is showing less cpu usage as CPU waits for data from memory or waits GPU to process it's stuff. One reason why I like to limit fps to 60 with external app is that then I can see GPU usage, but using software setting in game, GPU usage is 100% according to monitoring software even in reality usage is 20-90% range depending from part of the track. I have not seen even nearly 100% usage of CPU in rF2, if such would happen I would start to suspect it being false like that GPU usage when using software vsync.
Sounds great jtbo.... could you share the name of your "external app" with the rest of us.... please. Thanks
That looks bad actually - if you sum up usage on all cores you get just over 500% - that's enough to fully load 5 cores! It means that 4 cores are not enough for driving with 20 AI cars not to mention you weren't using maximum detail settings.
Yeah, what I meant is that with this kind of usage 2-core CPU's can get choked-up pretty easily. One core is usually not enough for graphics drivers and sometimes even 2 are not enough. I'm really hoping for some major changes in game engine and content design that will decrease CPU usage. Recommended system specs only mention dual core CPU. I think ISI has slightly underestimated the impact old-fashioned rendering engine design will have on CPU.
new pics with more information for compare. my other pc X2 6000@3.2 View attachment 3887 View attachment 3888 X2 10 meganes 5 laps Mills 10 visibles 28fps X6 21 meganes 5 laps Mills 10 visibles 75 fps View attachment 3889 trackmap plugin enable during the race in pics no.
Yup, 2 cores are not enough - 100& on both and almost 3 times less framerate. And it's just 10 cars. Maximum total CPU usage on 6 cores is 65,9 - that's almost exactly 2/3 of 6 cores, so seems like you need 4 cores at minimum. Anything less and your GPU will be underperforming badly. With 4 cores you use (loosely speaking) 1 for physics and 3 for graphics, while on two you use 1 for physics and 1 for graphics, so you end up totally CPU-bound with performance. You can try that 2-core test again comparing different resulitions. I have dual core processor myself and I have no difference between 1280x960 + HDR + max AA and 800x600 + HDR + no AA. Not even one frame per second of difference.
