Optimal Video and display settings for i5 2500K and ATI HD 7970

Hi guys,

Maybe someone can give me some help here As the screenshots display, I have an i5 2500K, ATI HD 7970 3GB (both cpu and gpu a bit overclocked) and 16GB ram. Resolution is at 1680x1050 (hopefully will buy a better monitor soon!)

When practicing by myself (no other cars on track), I get around 60 to 80 fps depending where I am on track. When I add AI, I get a low 20 to maybe 30 and 40 at times during race.

I know that display is all set to full, but the funny thing is that when I lower them, I don't gain much FPS.

When it comes to video res setting, the Anti Aliasing make a difference, myabe by 10 to 15 fps when i lower it, but the other options dont seem to change much the fps when I change them. I dont know much what these settings are, tried playing with them but I didnt see much difference.

So, maybe, can someone pls tell me what will be the optimal settings for an steady fps greater than, let say 35?

Thank you!!!

View attachment 1871

View attachment 1872

View attachment 1873

 

Shadows are the biggest FPS killer. Environment reflection is second biggest. You can also try road reflection in the off position.

 

as racer said turn down your shadows, and reflections are a big killer too also put a tick the the windowed mode it helps

 

Thanks guys! FPS went up to over 100 now

What shall I set Sync to?

Cheers!

View attachment 1874

 

Sync is somewhat personal preference. It will cause input lag so you might want it off. If you only drive slow cars you'll get accustomed to input lag and won't even notice it though. Keep in mind with it off you're going to get tearing.

 

i have everything on high, max, its only the grid that brings me fps hell.

 

Thanks guys

 

It's so depressing that this is the best RF2 can do with a 7970. There needs to be some MAJOR optimizing done.

 

I was thinking it might be something to do with the Directx9 engine, I know Directx10/11 cards can't do Dx9 as well as a native dx9 card would. Not 100% sure by how much. Then again Rfactor 2 might be using dx10/11 for other things than gfx. who knows

Its getting better every build (like the beatles song) But if you want gfx I say try project cars, which feels a little like cardboard....

I i could breed racing games, Rfactor 2 physics with Project cars looks. i think i wouldn't do much else.

 

Here are the final settings I am using. With these, FPS does not go below 50 (as far as I know)

View attachment 1886


View attachment 1887


View attachment 1888

 

I'd be interested to know how high FPS you get with everything turned on/high on a track by yourself. I'm running 1080P with a 'mere' 6850 and by myself with everything max i get 25-50 FPS. I was considering spending 500 for one of these cards but im not sure if its worth it.

e: i dont consider it acceptable to have to turn off shadows and reflections, to run a DX9 game with current hardware.

 

OK, I'll try now and get back to you soon. Mind you, with the other games (C.A.R.S, iRacing, nkPro, LFS, rfactor 1 etc) I run everything high with no problem.

Cheers

 

If it's only rF2 that you want better performance on, wait till you get a new card. I went mid range and got a 7950 and I get very good FPS and graphics in other games I play.

ISI hasn't said much about performance here or asked for benchmarks so I believe they knew performance was bad when they released beta and are working on it. Most people forget this beta was basically for modders to get their hands on rF2. They never promised something that was polished. Alot of people didn't read ISI's disclaimer. Heck one guy yesterday said he's getting a refund after 30 minutes. Now there was a guy who expected a finished game. Unfortunately there are alot of those guys.

 

7950 is mid range i thought the only things above were its 7970 cousin and those dual gpu single slot cards? :O

 

Yep 7950 is considered mid range.

 

I understand totally what you mean CdnRacer. I agree, it's still beta and I am sure it will be much better I'm happy for now to drive rFactor 2 without reflections and a few options lowered, it's still a great driving experience and with some options switched off or lowered, game still looks good

SG333..here are the results. But like I said in my post above, I found the optimal settings where fps is never lower than 50 and game still looks good....for a beta

Settings set to full but Anti Aliasing set to level 4 (FPS goes to min 10 up to around 32 depending where on track)
View attachment 1891

View attachment 1892

View attachment 1893

Settings set to full but Anti Aliasing set to level 8 (FPS goes to min 3 up to around 10 depending where on track)
View attachment 1894

View attachment 1895

 

It would be nice to inform testers of this, though. Right now we can only hope and assume it will get better. The lack of information from ISI kind of puts us in a box, do we take it that current performance is normal and upgrade, or stick it out and hope for a miracle cure in a future update.

I can play Metro 2033 at decent FPS on the same machine; the supposed 'end boss' of games

 

Thanks B1k3R

Thats some depressing looking frame rate! I'm going to try some similar test later and see how i get on. I dont think ive ever seen my own FPS that bad

 

Yeah, but like CdnRacer said above, when switching off the shadows and reflections FPS goes up. I know, shadow do make a difference, but I accept this since its a beta

 

B1K3R, i just tried your exact same settings on my PC, except at 1080P, and by myself on track i cannot get under 35 FPS. The only difference i see is that i dont have a Level 4 Anti-aliasing option (not sure what this is about? using Level 3,) but otherwise, im running a higher resolution, on a slow card, with a slower CPU - and alone on Portugal im getting 37-43 average (using Ctrl+F in game to gauge).

Scratching my head over this one. Seems like you should be getting much higher?