Optimize the graphics engine (performance) in 2023 ?

@AlexHeuskat ... Not sure I totally follow what you are suggesting... Are you saying that Vsync is better (the same) than g-sync (or FreeSync) with a frame cap? Overall?

Or are you Just speaking about input lag...... if that the case... I would tend to agree...
At a fix 120fps Vsync... vs a cap 119fps with g-sync... Input lag would probably be Very similar...

But Vsync is still something to avoid as much as possible... FreeSync with a frame cap is the way to go... because it's not all about input lag... there is a lot more to take into account.
 
Last edited:
Kahel said:
@AlexHeuskat ... Not sure I totally follow what you are suggesting... Are you saying that Vsync is better (the same) than g-sync (or FreeSync) with a frame cap? Overall?

Or are you Just speaking about input lag...... if that the case... I would tend to agree...
At a fix 120fps Vsync... vs a cap 119fps with g-sync... Input lag would probably be Very similar...

But Vsync is still something to avoid as much as possible... FreeSync with a frame cap is the way to go... because it's not all about input lag... there is a lot more to take into account.
Click to expand...
there is a myth, it's to cap at 117fps if the monitor is 120hz, to prevent "vsync" kicks and higher input lag....but there is no true stat about this, it's just a myth
 
CeeBee said:
Another thing to consider is if you actually need more than 60fps for simracing on screens, my monitors are Sony 100hz TVs but I've locked them in vsync at 60hz for the last year or so, no appreciable difference in game play or ffb (my Vive runs at 90hz and feels exactly the same)

But at 100hz the GPU is hot AF and turning corners into lots of geometry can cause stutters on my system. Same deal with MSFS, since I locked to vsync 60fos I can run it on triples at ultra and never stutter.

The only game where more fps == better gameplay for me is modern warfare and other fps shooters.
Click to expand...
I can't agree with that.
Try turn off any of the head movement and turn off stabilize horizon, then go on Sebring with LMP car...
I see noticeable difference between 60hz and 77hz, especially on back straight when you look at banners above the track.
 
This is my opinion, based on my experiences and testing.;)
With Gsync+Vsync On+framelimiter from nvidia cp at 117 the experience is smoonth as butter and feels inmediate. With ingame limiter at 117 sometimes i have random stturering. My guess is that the game limiter in certain scenarios allows more than 120 fps and that increased lag when Vsync is activated causes sttutering.
Yo can see many test and conclusions here https://blurbusters.com/gsync/preview2/
 
grudevart said:
I can't agree with that.
Try turn off any of the head movement and turn off stabilize horizon, then go on Sebring with LMP car...
I see noticeable difference between 60hz and 77hz, especially on back straight when you look at banners above the track.
Click to expand...
looks ok tome? I guess depends on why we race, when im racingthe ONLY thing i see is my corner markers and the tail of the guy in front of me, if we drive for site seeing different thing maybe?
 
grabbed a clip running at 60fps vsync'd in both rf2 an iRacing, the 60fps is captured in OBS at 30FPS so halved again.. but even reviewing video its hard to say there is not fluid enough visual input to play a driving game?
 
I didn't say that when I driving I'm watching tracks peripherals;)
I'm just very sensitive to background fluidity, and for sure 77 hz it's less choppy, especially on bumpy tracks.
Also this can vary when it comes to camera setting. Any head movement, and stabilizing horizon will reduce the difference between 60hz and higher refresh rates...
 
CeeBee said:
grabbed a clip running at 60fps vsync'd in both rf2 an iRacing, the 60fps is captured in OBS at 30FPS so halved again.. but even reviewing video its hard to say there is not fluid enough visual input to play a driving game?
Click to expand...

We used to play games at 8 fps (or less) when computing power was much lower and 3d was in its infancy. 'Fluid enough' isn't just about functionality, and it's going to be down to personal preference as well. If I'm staying somewhere and the place has a TV with what I'll call 'motion smoothing' on, I can't stand the effect as it smooths some scenes to 100Hz (or higher) and then occasionally loses track of movement and things flick back down to 50Hz, then back to smoothed again. I prefer to just have everything at 50Hz than to have that switching. Meanwhile, hardly anyone else who has been around at the time has even been aware of it.

Desktop mouse movement at 60Hz is fine, until you run on 144Hz for a while and then go back to 60 again. If I have my TV running at 24Hz in preparation for watching a movie I can do things with the mouse just fine, but I certainly notice the jerky movement of the pointer compared to normal. (I haven't subjected myself to 144Hz yet; I know that's a step I'll need to commit to when it happens) And even then, I'm sure some people won't notice or care about it.
 
Without talking about VR, I can confirm that using vsync on screen, the difference between 60 and 75 hz is really significant.
 
I think I found my settings after quite a few hours testing.
I have a mix of full, high, medium and off settings and OpenXR tool set to 2700x2700 per eye on my new Reverb G2. While overall the graphics don't look as modern as say ACC or AMS2 the image is much crisper and cleaner and I have it probably looking "more real" than those other sims.

Oops, I posted in the wrong thread.
 
Last edited:
I went from 60Hz triples to 144Hz triples and not only did everything look smoother but the image was so much cleaner. It's like the faster the pixels render the less smear they create. Was i faster, no, will I ever go back to 60Hz, no. Although I have just dropped to 90Hz in VR and it's fine. I did try 60Hz in VR and its noticeably stuttering and smeary.
 
CeeBee said:
grabbed a clip running at 60fps vsync'd in both rf2 an iRacing, the 60fps is captured in OBS at 30FPS so halved again.. but even reviewing video its hard to say there is not fluid enough visual input to play a driving game?
Click to expand...

Something is wierd here, in my case I can clearly notice the difference when playing, to be really comfortable to my eyes I need to run at 120fps.

This one I recorded, running around 100 fps, and youtube reproduces 60fps in higher resolutions.

 
I think 60hz is insufficient, 75hz is a major gain but not enough, and 90hz like on my VR headset is ideal.

Above 90 hz, there is necessarily better, but you have to have lynx eyes, and it's luxury in my opinion.
Not essential I mean.
 
I think youll be surprised how much better "higher than 90fps" is in VR.
Ofcourse frametiming is a big part of it and 90fps looks fairly fluid for me, but for me its also the absolute minimum where it starts being fluid and I really dont think thats where our eyes stop.
 
pilAUTO said:
I think 60hz is insufficient, 75hz is a major gain but not enough, and 90hz like on my VR headset is ideal.

Above 90 hz, there is necessarily better, but you have to have lynx eyes, and it's luxury in my opinion.
Not essential I mean.
Click to expand...
I have the pg27aqn on my desk for FPS game, it's 360hz 1440p, and I don't need to have lynx eyes to see how 360hz is smooth, but for sim racing, I'm stuck at 120hz for triple 1440p or 4K oled.....it's less smooth but it's the minimal acceptable for me
 
In the video I see that your frame time is not stable or there are minor interruptions.
That's why you think 120 is better than 60.
If you set your system correctly to 60Hz, you will see a slightly smoother image compared to this on video.
There is a very good tutorial, here:
Click here
 
Headroom + frame cap at least equals your lowest fps and anyone will be golden ;) no matter system, res,, hz or anything else

gmotor sims can have wide variation in mods and track performance nothing new....GTL rF AMS rF2 basically the same.

So I can run BTCC mix ultra/high/med settings with min above 120 to 160 ( start to finish )
Lemans full grid night with all DLC/ Pay ware I get 120 to 150
However I set 120 cap leaves good headroom and latency.
Racing above 3440 8x4x looks as good as 16x8x and big benefit to bottom fps
As well lower shadows and other effects a notch will make all the difference
Run Ultra for screenshots

rF2 if you using a lower fps combo then I would adjust major setting like PP or AA/AF, so to maintain your base lower fps whether it be 60 90 120.
I just save profiles for cars because there is HUGE difference between say F3 Eve community mod and DLC / and/or poorly optimized content.
That is better for me then having fps vary all the time depending on combos.
Heavy car/ track lower settings to preserve your base fps.
That is life with ISI :) dynamics what you going to say.

Again though something LMU dramatically improved, anyone noticed virtually zero drop around the pits, common issue with rF2.
As well I can run races or use Watch mode in any cam and sit on 120fps no matter
Clone my butt cheeks lol
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top