Well i think if all you do every day is sit on certain forums spamming them then yes i agree don't buy a highend card. Gaming is obviously not a top priority and instead writing boring essays and making odd tiresome attention seeking threads is. If however you are a gamer outside of rFactor2 ( I know right, well weird ) then you should buy the highest peforming GPU that funds allow you to. I'm a gamer first and foremost, right now going through Metro Last Light with all the bells and whitsles on because i didn't scrape on hardware. Had i purchased hardware just for rF2 then maybe that would not be possible. Still rF2 is demanding and yes you should if funds allow buy the best you can get. I do agree however that buying a card just for one title or just for internet spamming then yes it's a bit crazy.
I do think about getting a Nvidia 660 (non-ti) though. It's gotten pretty resonably priced and should just be enough for my old CPU to handle, but I could run some more eye candy.[/QUOTE] I did just that, I run a 2gb 660 non ti with a stock i3 and 7gb ram I only run at 1360 Rez as i have a pants monitor but it does Silverstone 60 fps solid with everything high, shadows maxed and 8x AA and even 2x sparse grid ss. Looks fantastic to me, not even missing hd The sacrifices are low res and most tracks I have to disable mirrors, but can an capped at 60fps with 15-20 ai with all different cars Of course more card = better but for my one screen low ish res setup a £120 gpu is doing just fine
I think you've also got to consider most people with higher end cards are using more for triple screens and higher resolutions, 1 monitor and 1920x1200 size resolution doesn't really need such a powerfull card. I think if someone with higher end card is discussing poor performance it will be in regard to triples screens as even 2560x1440 on 1 monitor runs really well compared with 5760x1080 on 3 for me.
@ rob1178 Exactly at the res you are gaming at, your CPU is possibly doing more work. That resolution is not going to really bother any mid spec card from the last 3-4 years really, possibly further back. I bet my old 8800GTX would still offer decent fps at that res. Once you get higher and you begin adding AA, The better cards show their worth then. Also outside of sims, i like to downsample from 1440p when gaming as i like the SuperSampling effect it gives, better cards allow you to this and not suffer because of it. Always go with the best you can afford. And yes a better GPU will reward you in rF2. I went from a single GTX570 to my current card and basically doubled, nearly tripled my fps in rF2.
It's somewhat related to the graphics performance of this game, people shouldn't need to run vsync in order to not have big tearing, stuttering and other things, as it adds input lag (doesn't matter what people says, it adds input lag, more or less). @pleclair Checked briefly with 3 different cars and tracks and your times are quite slower than mines Anyway of course I do my own testing, but this is something even documented with almost every simracing game, it's not like I'm inventing something new...
I wasn't like one of those fools who buys an expensive GPU for rFactor 2. I got mine because I also use it for Microsoft Word and Quickbooks.
Hmm, well, I forgot to mention that not every of my lap times submitted to rf2rank are my best, some are just some laps ran on some tracks... But if you look at belgium, lime rock park (I have a few tracks records on lime rock park, in most config, btw), brianza, silverstone (mostly f2, fr3.5, megane, clio, skip), mid-ohio, croft, I got a few records... go after my best lap times, not the random ones! It's easy to say that you beat someone's time when you can't prove it Submit your times to rf2rank, and let me see them Btw, I'm playing rf2 for a few months, since build 198 to be exact. (Curious, which 3 cars/tracks have you checked? I can tell you if I really tried or not... I havent played much the non-isi tracks btw.. mostly only tried them, so my lap time on those, except mid-ohio, croft, poznan and putnam park are mostly the result of a few laps of trying the track) And even if you beat my best lap times on the track I practiced, it might only means that you have practiced more than I do, which could be highly possible, since I'm playing the game for about 3-4 months or so. (Also, only began to play with setups, most of my submitted times are made with default, except silverstone mostly) Regarding input lag and vsync... at least on my system, I can assure you it adds none (at least that the eye can see). I can record a video using my iPhone with it on/off and you'll see that I speak truth. I can't speak for people with hardware other than mine, such as those achieving 300 fps on a 120 hz monitor, as I don't have that... but in every games I tried on my system, I couldn't see the difference, other than the tearing you can see with it off. And to be honest, the tearing is more unpleasing to me than something that I cannot even see, feel and detect... (input lag). To make it easier for you, here are a few of my best lap time that you should check and refer to: Silverstone, F2: 1:45:604 Silverstone, FR3.5: 1:47:011 Silverstone, GTR: 2:01:426 Silverstone, Clio: 2:23:603 Silverstone, Skip, Regional: 2:33:608 Well, we're getting out of topic now, but just wanted you to compare apples to apples ie: compare my best laps to your best laps, not some of my random ones against your best!
I barely play rF2, just 1-2h when they release something new, as I find it quite pointless with all the issues/bugs on multiplayer and the bad gfx performance. Anway tomorrow I will do some comparison between vsync on / off, and how it affects laptimes.
I have always gone for the bang for buck cards. If I could afford it though I would have twin GTX700's a 1200W PSU and hang the cost and power bill.! lol
I have one nVidia GTS450, with Intel 3Ghz dual core and 8GB DDR3RAM. I have Details on High, x4 Anisotropic, Effects and Shadows on Medium and the rest Off except rain drops... and HDR On of course. Since the previous build I no longer get any stuttering at all online while in the pack, and no issues offline in testing. I have never done a full clean install with any update and only have Record Replays turned off, although it records hotlaps. So far my little system has been able to run RF2 well enough most of the time, although through the past year the few updates didn't do a lot for my experience improvement until the second to last one arrived. The only problems I experience now is in an online race and trying to pit (no pitbox to stop in) and leaving drivers being replaced by AI who cannot drive with any manners. Apart from those two glitches that will get fixed soon-ish, I have no real issue with how the game plays on my system. Weird huh ?
I have a GeForce GTX 560 and an Intel i7-3820 @ 3.6GHz and run everything maxed out. Get around 40 FPS on average.
What a crap thread no 1 knows what we will need or not need till the game gets optimized fully and support comes from nvidia and ati. all i can say is running triples you need memory buffer and the more the better.
What a terrible thread title. Doesn't represent the subject in any way. "What are your benchmarks/results with budget gpus?" fits a billion times more... Your thread title is an instruction that makes little sense. Sent from a mobile device using Tapatalk
Me too, GTX560 w/ AMD Phenom II 955 X4. Everything maxed apart from the more resource demanding tracks, then I turn environment and road reflection down or off. Happy. Game looks great when set up high, too!
I am certainly no pc guru ,infact I havnt got a clue really but my 5 year old middle of the road pc does ok with RF2 , Its able to let me run online, high effects,12 visible cars ,Silverstone, and have a blast at around 35/55fps, I know thats ordinary but Jeez its fun..Cant wait to get a kickarse pc as soon as all you guys with the knowledge can work out which pc formula will be best for RF2.. Till then Im still having a ball with the old clunker
^^ stay with what you have till optimization is complete. sounds like your having fun and enjoying it so no need just yet.
Guess what, I had a q6600@3ghz a gtx680 and 4gb ddr2 ram @ 850mhz an I thought it was great on fps till I decided to splash out and buy latest and greatest. Im so glad i did because i really appreciate the very best in graphics and fps performance. on a single screen on Silverstone in c6r same settings minimum fps was 50 I now get 130, maximum was 90 I now get over 200. So guess what I can do now, turn on x16 CSAA with x2 SGSS and still stay above 110fps an rfactor looks incredible. So if you ask me I would tell people yes upgrade if u can afford it and you love rfactor2, yes my upgrade was just 4 rfactor I don't play anything else. R u telling me I made a mistake? What another stupid pointless thread, people know what they want and will ask for advice if they need to. As Tim says go do some laps if your bored and don't bore us with crap threads.
