GTX 980 Review - Sim Racers Perspective

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Seahawks1Fan, Dec 9, 2014.

  1. Seahawks1Fan

    Seahawks1Fan Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2011
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    I recently upgraded from the 680 to the 980 and decided to do another video going through the different sim racing titles, mainly focusing on frame rates. It's a little long and the video gets a little blurry at times (cheap camera), but thought it might be informative to some.

     
  2. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    Awesome, thanks a lot man. Nice info and commentary :)

    Here's some tips for you. They helped me massively with triple screens and multiview when trying to keep everything maxed out, or at least continuing to look like it's maxed out, while achieving some big framerate improvements --> http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/22793-Large-Framerate-Boost-w-Practically-No-Image-Quality-Loss

    P.S. If you're framerate isn't going over 60 then you have input-lag inducing V-Sync on, maybe it's set in your GPU control panel rather than rF2. Also check in the in-game graphics settings section just in case. Other than that, the only other thing that could be limiting your framerate is if you put a framerate limit in the player.json file.

    Also, you can't correct the lack of multi-view with Raceroom Racing Experience because their game is based on a modified version of the pre-rF1 engine, and that version of the ISI engine didn't have multi-view yet (it was introduced in an rF1 update), and it looks like Simbin themselves still haven't add that functionality to their dated "base" engine.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 9, 2014
  3. Saabjock

    Saabjock Registered

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    906
    Likes Received:
    19
    +1 on commentary.
    As Spinelli already mentioned, go into Nvidia's control and see if V-sync is turned on there.
    You can also manage individual game profiles there as well.
    On AC, you can turn the smoke to very low under the effects tab and also turn off apps you are not using under options-General-UI modules.
    That'll give you a massive boost in fps.
    Congrats on the card...I plan on adding it's 'little' brother, the 970 in a few weeks.
     
  4. Seahawks1Fan

    Seahawks1Fan Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2011
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks for the info guys. I'll check on those settings for sure.
     
  5. Seahawks1Fan

    Seahawks1Fan Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2011
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    I checked my player.json file and it was set to 60 max fps by default. I changed it to zero and that uncapped it. Thanks for the tip.
    When running without multiview checked, I am getting about 70-72 fps. With it checked, didn't make a huge difference. It did get up to about 65 fps when traffic wasn't as bunched up.
     
  6. Seahawks1Fan

    Seahawks1Fan Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2011
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey - my 5 minutes of fame. :)

    http://www.virtualr.net/nvidia-gtx-980-review-sim-racers-perspective

    http://www.bsimracing.com/nvidia-gtx-980-sim-racers-review-by-gone-broke-racing/

    ----

    I've got an i5-2500k and the Asus Maximus GeneZ/Gen3 motherboard. I am curious if my processor is bottlenecking my system as it only supports PCI-E 2.0. I wonder if I upgrade to an Ivy Bridge like the i7-3770K if that would make any difference (that processor will support PCI-E 3.0). I just checked pricing and even though that processor is over 2 years old, it's still going for around $330 USD. OUCH!
     
  7. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
    If I remember correctly it would be an additional 27% fps on 3.0 vs 2.0 for a 980.

    But you don't need an i7 right? The i5-3000 series will do. And whether you buy new or second hand, you'll recoup some of the costs when you sell on your i5-2500k.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 11, 2014
  8. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    There are massive differences between PCI-E 3.0 @16x and PCI-E 2.0 in rF2. In most games you're only looking at 5% or so differences, for whatever reason it's much, much larger with rF2.

    A 4690 or 4690k is a great processor. You can sell that 2500k for maybe $140, definitely $100, and probably $115 or $120 (lol, how's that for an estimate). Also, you can sell your motherboard for $50-$70 (maybe more, but I'm too lazy to look-up your particular motherboard's value at the moment :) ). Then get a non-k 4690 w/ an H97 motherboard (less expensive option but most likely difficult to overclock the processor) or a 4690k w/ a Z97 motherboard. You don't really need to overclock your CPU, and i believe the non-k 4690 will perform at 3.9 GHz during gaming anyways (raw speed of it @ 3.9 GHz is about equivalent to a 2500k @ 4.5 GHz or so).

    You can also keep your RAM. I'm assuming you're using dual channel 1600 MHz sticks, and @ CL 8 (or even better, 7)?
     
  9. Jamie Shorting

    Jamie Shorting Registered

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2013
    Messages:
    2,628
    Likes Received:
    2
    IMO an i7 for gaming is a waste of money. An i5 will do just fine for gaming.
     
  10. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    Yup, definitely, like a 4690/4690K. Absolutely perfect.
     
  11. oHOWEo

    oHOWEo Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have i5 2500k also, I'm running 970s in sli therefore I'm at 8x at 2.0 it doesn't seem to affect performance so double it in your case. I don't understand peoples results with 3.0 in rf2 only.
     
  12. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
    You're getting PCI-e 3.0 x16 performance from your GTX 970's in PCI-e 2.0 x8 in rf2?

    Have your performed the rf2 live benchmark?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 11, 2014
  13. oHOWEo

    oHOWEo Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    0
    No Im getting x8 at pci 2.0,

    Point me in the direction of the benchmark and ill try it

    Sorry didnt read your post properly,
    I dont see why not, I dont think they are bandwidth limited.
     
  14. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
    Because out of the 10 or so of us who have checked, each and every one of us have reported significant differences in performance in rf2 and consistent differences between the same card owners.
     
  15. oHOWEo

    oHOWEo Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    0
    2014-12-11 23:28:10 - rFactor2
    Frames: 6265 - Time: 63445ms - Avg: 98.747 - Min: 77 - Max: 123

    Sli disabled, PCI 2.0 Im guessing still at 8x
     
  16. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
    wowzer, yeah, that looks about right off the top of my head. TechAde was getting 190fps i think with pci-e 3.0 x16. Your cards would be running at 1.1 x16 (equal to 2.0 x8).

    If you have 2x GTX 980's you're on a PCI-e 2.0 x16 lanes limited CPU, your cards are going to perform like 1x GTX 980 on a PCI-e 3.0 x16 lanes limited CPU. You want to upgrade and get a PCI-e 3.0 x32+ lane supported CPU for those cards. As it stands, even if you could get 100% efficiency out of your SLI in rf2 (which we know can't be done), i would guess you're losing around 50-60% performance at least on that cpu and mobo.

    If you pull out one of the two gpu's from the mobo, it should allow the one left in to operate at PCI-e 2.0 x16 which should give you around 150-160 fps and with 3.0 x16 around 190 fps.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 11, 2014
  17. oHOWEo

    oHOWEo Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    0
    It seemed to be bugging out a little, the shadows were wrong

    I'm on 970's not 980's unless your talking to op
     
  18. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
    That may have just been a glitch. Try going back to graphics menu page, flip shadows to another setting and then back to max, then go to resolution page and click apply again. You won't see anything change but it worked for me with the problem you described i've experienced before. Then try again, shadows should be fixed.
     
  19. oHOWEo

    oHOWEo Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ha wont be pulling them out!
     
  20. oHOWEo

    oHOWEo Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    0
    My screen is 3440x1440 when running it at 1920x1080 with black borders seemed to bug it out.

    Just looking at scaling options, I have it set to "no scaling" perform scaling on display which is set to 1:1 pixel ratio. Just noticed another checkbox "override the scaling mode set by games and programs" should I check this also?
     

Share This Page