Minimum/Recommended System Specs for rFactor 2

Discussion in 'News & Notifications' started by 88mphTim, Sep 12, 2011.

  1. zim2323

    zim2323 Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'd have to agree with Hutch and Noel also.

    I personally can't stand ATI. I'm not an Nvidia fanboy, though that is my preference. But that said, Neither card is any better in terms of hardware then the other. I think there are still driver issues with ATI, but if you have a fairly mainstream game that they support, then no issue.

    In my experience, every video card problem I've run into, whether ATI or Nvidia, is directly related to antivirus or some other software/driver or hardware conflict on the system. Some cards do suffer from overheating and poor cooling.

    My advice, if you're having trouble with your card, uninstall AV, unplug ALL additional hardware (cameras, printers, etc), even disable or remove the sound card temporarily. There is no ATI vs Nvidia table that can accurately measure the 2 cards from one system to another. When you have 1 good stable system that run both cards without issue, they BOTH perform equally as well with no issues.

    So for anybody that complains one way or the other ATI vs Nvidia, look elsewhere. The card isn't your problem, something else in the system is.
     
  2. 88mphTim

    88mphTim racesimcentral.net

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    10,840
    Likes Received:
    314
    I haven't done anything side by side. Joe has, and hasn't mentioned any difference at all. He tests with everything he has.

    I personally have an ATI card (before they were AMD) and the performance is very good. You can see my system specs on my profile.

    Ding, ding, ding. This is why I go back and forth. My last switch was prompted by nV drivers crashing during gameplay in 2010. I'm sure that's fixed, but I haven't switched back yet. I'm sure I will though... Each brand does something to annoy me eventually. :)
     
  3. Marek Lesniak

    Marek Lesniak Car Team Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2010
    Messages:
    1,585
    Likes Received:
    101
    Any difference with what we see in rF 1 or any difference between Ati vs nV at similar performance level (as seen in general, in various benchmarks)?
     
  4. Lazza

    Lazza Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    12,346
    Likes Received:
    6,572
    It's frustrating when you try to approach a specific subject and it gets overthrown by people jumping in and defending this or that in general - instead of sticking to the specific topic at hand.

    No one's saying nVidia or ATI is better. No one's saying one is crap.

    LesiU asked if the performance of ATI and nVidia in rF2 is relative to the raw performance of the cards, rather than the ATI performing at a lower level than expected in rF1 (in comparison to other games/engines). This very quickly turned into a 'but ATI works fine / doesn't suck / nVidia has issues too' response which completely missed the point. One post even 'debunked' the suggestion entirely by pointing out the ATI in question was inherently faster than the nVidia card - which, again, isn't disputed and wasn't the point.

    Hutch, you laugh at 'scientific' yet your own testing is with cards with differing raw performance levels. When your ATI is twice as fast as your nVidia, sure it runs rFactor better... but does it run it twice as well? Have you done more testing? LesiU apparently has and has noticed ATI underperforming (again, relative to where it should, which isn't say to it's worse than any particular nVidia card... wish I didn't have to keep repeating this...), and I've seen similar suggested by a lot of other people in a lot of other places - 2 other people have agreed in this very thread.

    To reiterate: I'm not talking about stability. I'm not talking about whether ATI or nVidia is generally better. I'm not talking about which one currently has the most powerful card. I'm talking about performance, FPS, and ATI generally underperforming relative to nVidia in rFactor (1). Tim's post as quoted by LesiU above would suggest they are both performing as expected, but there's nothing wrong with him asking the question... again... an entire page later, after it all went OT...
     
  5. 88mphTim

    88mphTim racesimcentral.net

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    10,840
    Likes Received:
    314
    They go back and forth in all aspects. There is no wrong choice on manufacturer with rF2 until one of them releases a botched driver (which will happen eventually).
     
  6. Guineapiggy

    Guineapiggy Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's also worth remembering that certain processor/motherboard/driver/gpu/OS/codec/resolution combinations work better than others. All benchmarks should be taken with a real pinch of salt and it's a bad idea to assume that because it's happening to you means it's happening to everyone no matter how many ways you measure it.
     
  7. rambustibi

    rambustibi Registered

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hello!
    Rfactor 2 Come out for Crossfire?
     
  8. [NAR]Steve

    [NAR]Steve Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    349
    Likes Received:
    24
    I admit I am an ATI/AMD fanboy, but for a reason. My previous experiences with Nvidia were less than stellar. My last Nvidia card was a 6800GT ( i know, it is old ), and I had loads of problems with it, WHEN it wasn't locking up, it did perform well, but had too many "driver caught in loop" problems. Right now I have a 512 MB HD4850 card, and AMD 7850 Dual core, 4 gigs DDR2, and get very playable frame rates with everything set to max... I know i will have to upgrade for Rf2, but don't discount AMD/ATI.
     
  9. maz32

    maz32 Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2011
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    Back to the whole dx 9 vs dx 11

    the main visual difference is that dx 11 is tessellation, so things appear to have more depth and look better
    its hard to explane so here is an example

    [​IMG]
     
  10. otta56

    otta56 Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2010
    Messages:
    148
    Likes Received:
    4
    Maximum System Specs for SLI @ 6000X1200

    Hello Tim,

    Has anyone at ISI tested the tracks and vehicles @ maximum resolutions with all effects turned on? I ask because the amount of video memory used on a triple screen setup at high resolutions (6000X1200) varies by track and number of vehicles. For instance, the current Targa Florio with 25 cars and all effects at maximum except shadows (low) uses a minimum of 1.5 gig of memory address space per gpu. Even with an SLI setup this requires two 3 GB video cards since memory address space, i.e. the frame buffer used by the two gpus, is not additive. This effectively means two 2 GB AMD cards in cross fire or two 3 GB Nvidia cards. I found this out the hard way with two 1.5 GB Nvidia cards. Optimized textures for tracks and cars could fit into 1.5 GB cards but there would be no such guarantee for long mod tracks. Perhaps some tips for building optimized mod tracks could be included in the dev section of the wiki?

    Thanks.

    A. Ott
     
  11. Nuno Lourenço

    Nuno Lourenço Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2010
    Messages:
    593
    Likes Received:
    65
    I thinks that there's no need of that.

    I play since HD5000 came out with three displays with a 5870 1GB. I play at 5040x1050 with All maxed out 0xAA 16xAF and i have at least 60fps minimum with 30 cars with normal quality...

    The only thing we need to know is how much performance rF2 have lost comparing to rF1. For example with "same" conditions rF2 have less 30/40% performance and we can compare our settings.

    By the way i´m not concerned about that because i´m only waiting that HD7000 came out to buy a HD 7970 and play Rf2 without problems at same quality :p
     
  12. Satangoss

    Satangoss Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Messages:
    1,123
    Likes Received:
    7
    I hope people stop to say DX9 = DX11 after to see this image.
     
  13. MaXyM

    MaXyM Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    1,774
    Likes Received:
    29
    No one is saying that DX11 = DX9. But tessellation is one of the few improvements which looks cool in tech demos but doesn't affect overall final result significantly. As you can see on those screenshots, only stones on road are rendered more detaily (as 3d objects) comparing to previous DX. There is also a small difference in lighting but may be omitted since DX9 looks realistic too.

    What I have to say, we don't need tessellation until we got even no real-looking scene lighting. DX11 doesn't improve this area of scene rendering just by being 11th.
     
  14. JoshJ81

    JoshJ81 Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2011
    Messages:
    100
    Likes Received:
    1
    Is a 2nd gen i7 2670QM 2.0GHz considered better than minimum specs requuired?
     
  15. Lazza

    Lazza Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    12,346
    Likes Received:
    6,572
    Hmm... I'm not sure the better architecture is going to overcome the raw clock speed deficiency. Unfortunately all those extra cores aren't going to help.
     
  16. JoshJ81

    JoshJ81 Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2011
    Messages:
    100
    Likes Received:
    1
    well, I just check benchmarks at difference sites and the i7 2670QM was an average rating of 6700 and Core 2 Duo was 1200. So I'm thinking it will be better but still makes me wonder.
     
  17. Lazza

    Lazza Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    12,346
    Likes Received:
    6,572
    The requirements say 2.4GHz dual core... so if the clock speed isn't fast enough to run rF2 on 2 of your cores (really, on one of your cores, because the majority of the physics will take up one and everything else will be on the other) it won't be able to run in realtime.

    A lot of benchmarks will run on enough cores to tax the CPU as a whole - so the i7 will kill a core 2. That's not the issue here. It's like bringing ten 120kg front rowers to a 100m race... doesn't matter how many you have, you're not going to win :)
     
  18. JoshJ81

    JoshJ81 Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2011
    Messages:
    100
    Likes Received:
    1
    Thanks, I think now understand and will ditch my thoughts of a laptop now. The AMD FX series should be better route I have been considering.
     
  19. BanjoMaster

    BanjoMaster Registered

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi mate

    I've just recently went through the same thought process as I think you are, and ditched thoughts of a laptop (far too expensive and not powerful enough by a decent way) and went for one of these: http://www.cyberpowersystem.co.uk/system/Lan_Party_Evo_Game_Cube/

    It sits perfectly under my TV, and you'd hardly even know it was there. Packs a more than decent punch, and you save yourself a fortune over any gaming laptop with inferior performance. I honestly can't recommend this wee thing enough!
     
  20. SimonV6

    SimonV6 Registered

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    219
    Likes Received:
    3
    The i5 2500k is a better bet, its a great cpu for the price, std are 3.3Ghz and can overclock stable to 4.6Ghz on a nice air big cooler :)
     

Share This Page