@Stan You don't know what difference 400 -> 500 Hz would make. You're just seeing a bigger number and assuming it would be tangibly better, largely because an increase in rate in the rF1 engine felt better. Again, rF1 isn't rF2, and you don't know that 400Hz for the base rate isn't already overkill and 200Hz wouldn't feel any different. That's why numbers are just numbers.
Agreed. What causes biggest simulation error should be addressed firs in order to decide what to do in a more refined way.
@2ndLastJedi: 10^24 (yotta) is the google, the biggest possible number... @Lazza: You are right again, I don't know if "the base rate isn't already overkill and 200Hz wouldn't feel any different", but you don't know either what 500hz would do... it was just an idea, I didn't say that it have to be done! For my part, I'm not trying to give lessons, neither that I look for fights or for bashing rf2... that I already LOVE as it is... @stonec: Thank you for your suggestions regarding the physics engine, they seems objectively more needed right now than the refresh rates upgrades... but does those physics upgrades will ever be addressed/implemented by S-397? Are they planning to refine the physics as they do/did for the graphics? Are they allowed by ISI to do it?
@Stan hate to correct you on a minor point, but googol is 10^100. By 'biggest possible number' I guess you might be thinking an integer in computing terms, though 2^24 isn't that either (oops, 10^24 you said... anyway, doesn't matter) I didn't mean to suggest you were asserting anything regarding such a change, but it's easy for people to see a number and assume a higher number is better - whether it's you or someone else reading - and completely dismiss the practical limitations imposed by CPU power and the model itself. The tyres running at 2400Hz for example - you think that's plenty, but that's because it's a big number you weren't expecting. You don't really know if that's 'enough', and if they changed it to 1200Hz you might even think maybe it's a compromise and the sim won't be as good - but if it had been 1200Hz already, you'd probably think it was 'enough' too.
@Lazza: Right, it's not the googol, it's the "yotta", It was a shortcut to explain it faster @2ndLastJedi... Regarding the rates upgrade... so the numbers chosen by ISI are the best for now and for ever... they should never be changed or bettered... and you'll be here to prevent it... ok... thank you for saving us of more accuracy! Excuse me, but except the end-user spec's argument, I still haven't read a valuable reason!?!
The number at which the physics cycle, is not an "empty" number, the more , the better. The software must make complex sorcery in that timeframe, less time is avaiable, less complex is the sorcery it can make, or more powerful is the computing power required to run it. Now, I expect developers know how to employ that loop time, and I hope they refine, increase the sorcery level, mantaining the software in the realm of domestic PC capability. I would not focus on those number that mean very little, but on the features that developers will be able to stick inside it.
The rates should be increased as far as a human could perceive the difference, should the CPU power allow it. The fact is, per-core CPU power has sadly increased barely at all since 2012 (compare this and this single-thread rating number) when rF2 beta was released and the physics rates were presumably set. A 3rd gen i5/i7 from 2012 is still more than good enough for all modern games, in fact the second gen i5 is still hugely popular. Since there has been no big CPU jump since 2012, I don't see why you expect the physics rates to be increased, unless they were originally set too conservative.
My 7/8 years old cpu is capable of handling rf2 very well, in the mean time I have had to upgrade my gpu few times, as you probably did... why wouldn't it be the case with cpu, does the sim's softwares have to be limited by +/- 10 years old spec's? Upgrading every 8-12 years is nothing incredible (still far from Moore Law and the gpu market). So maybe we could ask him a bit more now... just maybe!
The difference between 400hz and 500 hz is 0.5 ms . A car going 360 Km/h in that time move 5 cm ... do you really think it make some difference? I think not. Our brain is too slow for that to matter.
Stan, do you realize that Comante's 0.5 ms is 20x less than Marek's 10 ms? That's only a mere 5% of Marek's number.
For those still demanding a raise to 500Hz: Get a 144Hz monitor. Stop complaining. Hopefully one of those things will actually show you what a huge difference actually means. Just that alone will make the cars seem so much more direct and real that no FFB raise in the world could improve it anymore. And for monitors, refresh rates are much more critical than they are for FFB rates. Also, while you're at it: When you have a 144Hz monitor, set it to 120Hz for a session. You will not see any difference at all, and the difference should in fact be as big as a 400hz to 500hz raise in terms of details and smoothness. People who don't complain about their monitors running at 60Hz but yet demand higher numbers for other stuff in games have literally no idea what they are actually talking about or demanding. And yet again, what if I told you that rF2 did in fact run on 500Hz all the time?
@Emery: To be honest, I didn't realize at first read... @Devin: I could probably be one of those pointed as "demanding a raise", it was just a thought... not a priority, so please stop "giving lessons" (Get a 144Hz monitor. Stop complaining.), written language require more subtility when we don't know each other; and thank you, I am aware of the importance of the monitor refresh rate! But if those 400hz or 500hz were only linked to the monitor, why would they even need to be over than 144hz? "When you have a 144Hz monitor, set it to 120Hz for a session. You will not see any difference at all..." ... not everyone opinion... "And yet again, what if I told you that rF2 did in fact run on 500Hz all the time?" Well, let's go for 600hz or 720hz... the smoother... the better... I don't care of the number "500" itself!
I can confirm that rfactor2's ffb rate is 50,000hz there for the people that have been bothered by this can be happy now and enjoy the ffb