Looking for the best sim and asking for a slower api (dx11), isn't it a bit of a nonsense in itself? Does F1 and alike simulators went for dx11? Did they wanted bloom or blur effect (for having more beautiful sreenshots or replays)? DX11 takes longer to display/draw a frame than dx9, it's called latency. It's a known fact and the reason why pro simulators don't use it!
I'm told DX11 is easier to code for VR than DX9, whether that's true or not is not for me to say. Anyway essentially DX11 is not a necessity for VR as Sector3 have shown with RRE (DX9), the move to DX11 is more than likely just a progression moving forward in various areas I think.
People complained that graphics were old and DX9 were old ... then they did their best to upgrade graphics without destroying all content, and to switch to DX11 ... Rf2 is a product destinated to home entertainment, RFPRO, putting aside the fact that is produced by another firm, has a little different customer base as you may imagine. But if you want the best simulator, you may inquire them for a quotation...
Thanks all for answering. It was not a teasing or ironic question, I am sure that you all love cars, racing and on top of that rf2 (because it's the best) as I do. @MarcG Thank you, I didn't know about RRE_VR, in fact, I saw that Piboso KRP used openGL to go VR and that was one of the purpose/motivation of my question. @Comante Sure it is/was an incredible home entertainment product, some would say nearly a professional tool, so why does people who love the best simracing, for it's advantages over the others sim's (physics), would like to make it (even if it's a bit) worth in one of the most important domain (realtime), just for screenshots? As we have seen that VR could have been done another way. It's the purpose of rf2, being the best and being always bettered!
It would be nice if DX11 would open up the option to stream rfactor2 better. I have tried, but my (potato) pc couldn't cope while it can stream other sims. RF2 visibility on twitch is virtually non-existent, which is a shame. Not sure if dx9 is in the way, or the way the graphics engine works.
It should be called "Rfactor 3D-VR",with the DX11 support and DLC ,it's quite a new game,when ready. Ok,Ok i pay again.But THIS time i will have a Demo,a real Demo,and then only DX11 Mods...4K...Hyper I on my side don't need that ,i prefer a good performance on any DXblabla...version. There are enough examples of fine grafix in raceing sims includind ay/night cycles.But good performance is the key. And i have never seen a sim,where the frame rate drops when the rain begins to fall... Cherio DC
General opinion regarding dx9 vs dx11 seems to be that dx11 produces slightly better performance. I think this can be skewed sometimes by games in dx11 enabling dx11 features that then hurt performance, and rF2 does fit into this category just a little (ambient occlusion, for example). For 'professional' simulators, they usually seem very basic graphically. A lot of gamers out there already consider rF2 (dx9, at least) unattractive visually, so I don't think regressing to proper simulator levels would be helpful at all.
@Lazza Thank you, the ambient occlusion has indeed been a major graphic enhancement, giving a real lot more depth to the field... But It's also a bit "disapointing" that you confirm the rest... Isn't it a bit of ""screwing"" rF2, Kunos already diluted a lot the base community, modders and forumers from BlackHole and RaceSimCentral times, introducing a lot of console racers on the simracing actuals forums... pCARS did even more. I understand the financial reason obviously (that have been clearly and honestly mentioned by Kunos), but why going that way with rF2, as it has always been built at the intend of a niche market?
rF2 right now (dx9) is the rF2 from 2012 with some non working features at least partly fixed, some minor enhancements, and a half aborted packaging system that's quite useable if you know how. I don't see how rF2 was going to last much longer with nothing changing, as it wasn't attracting anyone else into its niche and wasn't getting money from current owners. If what they're doing now doesn't work, it doesn't leave the users in a worse position than rF2 development being halted completely - which didn't look far off.
one day i won't have a stupid question...until then... What the hell is DX9 DX 11?!? are they different versions of the game? how do I know what I have lol. I bought this game to "practice" the tracks I take my miata to and find myself wanting to learn more...but I am NOT a computer guy..haha
Two versions of the same title. DX11 is currently available via opt-in using the game's properties in Steam. Refer to the two links below re: how to make the switch. By default the game will use DX9 at the moment, although based on developer updates, it is likely the game will switch to using DX11 as its primary graphics API in the near future (at which point DX9 is likely to require you to change the game's settings in a similar manner to opting to use DX11 at the moment). ...does that make sense? bottom line - if you want to use DX11 right now, you need to change the game's settings as shown below: 1) https://www.studio-397.com/2017/05/open-beta-with-directx-11-and-virtual-reality-support/ 2) video guide - @Stan - if DX11 is slower for you at the moment, it's likely down to 2 things: a) the DX11 parts of the game are clearly in beta status, until confirmed otherwise by the developer. considering how much optimisation has occurred since its implementation, it's likely to be improved a little more prior to being the main API the game runs on (by default). complaining about beta features isn't really particularly valid - in my opinion. you need to opt in to use the feature. if you don't like - don't use it until it's rolled into the production version of the game (i.e. it's no longer beta status). b) depending on your PC's specifications and GPU in particular - different versions of DirectX may run better or worse on your hardware. that's life. Consider the age of your hardware. You list your GPU as a GeForce 780 GTX. That dates back to a release in mid 2013. You might want to give that some thought relative to the software you are running.
@Lazza "it doesn't leave the users in a worse position than rF2 development being halted completely"... truth! But does rf1 ever needed to be "revised" to last that long, even with it's flaws... It could simply means that "real simracing" is doomed at a niche market!?! For now, none of the known bugs have been solved, S397 switch to dx11 is a graphic cosmetic (that I was not really looking for, I was quite happy already, as I am with AMS graphics), more I am not able to enjoy it at all because of the stuttering/fullscreen bug, so that it's hard for me to see some "enhancements". But you are right, we'll see. @muz_j Excuse me but it seems that your answer is out of topic... it's not a matter of fps, it's a matter of latency... dx11 has more latency than dx9... with any cards, for everyone.
Fair enough. Now you're being specific. I'm not being critical - but your latency comment to me is the first mention of that word in the thread. Do you use triple buffering and how many frames ahead is your GPU set to render ? (i.e. max pre rendered frames). Have a look at both settings, as both directly impact rendering latency. Triple buffering should be enabled to minimise latency and pre rendered frames should be reduced - I have mine set to 1. examples of what I'm getting at (picked purely at random - I could find a whole lot more info to make my point, but i'm sure you can look into both settings to see what I'm referring to) http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/1148845-directx11-causing-delay-lag https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/58481/does-directx-implement-triple-buffering None of that changes the fact that I was implying regarding older card generations typically being less efficient with more modern API's. I can't perceive any increase in rendering latency with RF2 versus other games - nothing substantial anyway. My point being it's not consistent for all people. hardware will play a factor and so will system performance and GPU settings.
Here's an illustration of something I was pointing out. GPU architectures are optimised differently through different generations and as a result, performance can (and generally does) vary considerably from one graphics API to another for a given GPU generation. So making statements like DX11 has higher rendering latency vs DX9 is incorrect. That's a very broad statement with lots of variables. Which GPU? What hardware? What driver settings? Are both cards rendering the exact same data with no visual differences... Old generation GPU offering better performance with DX9 (Radeon 5700 & 5800 series - article from 2009) http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/dirt-2-performance-benchmark,2508-9.html Direct video comparison of iRacing performance - showing a clear advantage with DX11 (using GTX970 series cards in SLI - which it should be noted is typically less consistent than a single card) - March 2016
We are currently using B1108 which is more than 7 months old. I wish we have had more bug fixing in between. Considering that physics within the same build number are compatible for multiplayer, it seems there has been no game development in terms of physics for over half a year. The achievements during S397 era are still to be seen. We have roadmaps and promises but I am playing the same game and content as in late 2016. DX11 for sure is important but it seems to be the responsibility of only one developer (4th World). I wonder what else has been worked on. I must be missing something.
