Poor performance and bad graphics

2ndLastJedi

2ndLastJedi

Registered
I've been gone for heaps from rF2 hoping to come back after months to find a new game but instead i come back to the same look really (probably worse now) and performance has tanked ! I thought there would be a big improvement but it seems like shadows and AA are far worse now and if the shaders now look better it cant be realized on a 1080Ti/7700k system at only 1080p x 3 :(
The shadows are rendering only like 2 meters in front of the player car and are of such low resolution that the shimmer and flicker like pC2 shadows now ! Fences look horrendous even on the "new" shaders tracks .
I'm really sad to come back to have to post a bitch post but wasn't the focus on trying to make rF2 look like a 2020 game ? Well if i get a chance i should test the new and improved Ai that i assume has been done by now :rolleyes:
20200906125701_1.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 20200906125848_1.jpg
    20200906125848_1.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 300
2ndLastJedi said:
I've been gone for heaps from rF2 hoping to come back after months to find a new game but instead i come back to the same look really (probably worse now) and performance has tanked ! I thought there would be a big improvement but it seems like shadows and AA are far worse now and if the shaders now look better it cant be realized on a 1080Ti/7700k system at only 1080p x 3 :(
The shadows are rendering only like 2 meters in front of the player car and are of such low resolution that the shimmer and flicker like pC2 shadows now ! Fences look horrendous even on the "new" shaders tracks .
I'm really sad to come back to have to post a bitch post but wasn't the focus on trying to make rF2 look like a 2020 game ? Well if i get a chance i should test the new and improved Ai that i assume has been done by now :rolleyes:
View attachment 33226
Click to expand...

hmm something must be wrong. My 2070S with a bit more pixels can do 120-160 FPS. I cant imagine how 1080TI wouldnt be able to cope.
I find post effects setting gave me about 50FPS maybe more. But certainly wasnt 20 at highest settings.
 
Shadak said:
hmm something must be wrong. My 2070S with a bit more pixels can do 120-160 FPS. I cant imagine how 1080TI wouldnt be able to cope.
I find post effects setting gave me about 50FPS maybe more. But certainly wasnt 20 at highest settings.
Click to expand...
Is this at 5760x1080?
 
mantasisg said:
Did you only drive in Drummond in your test ?
Click to expand...
No i drove Portland also . I was trying out these new graphics tracks i read about in the latest news . I had all maxed settings but rain drops off and PP at medium , then i lowered settings down a step and PP off and was getting more consistent FPS but still dips down to mid 30's still.

@Shadak What settings are you running ? and what do you mean by "I find post effects setting gave me about 50FPS maybe more. But certainly wasnt 20 at highest settings" ??
 
2ndLastJedi said:
No i drove Portland also . I was trying out these new graphics tracks i read about in the latest news . I had all maxed settings but rain drops off and PP at medium , then i lowered settings down a step and PP off and was getting more consistent FPS but still dips down to mid 30's still.

@Shadak What settings are you running ? and what do you mean by "I find post effects setting gave me about 50FPS maybe more. But certainly wasnt 20 at highest settings" ??
Click to expand...

I meant that when I ran highest PP, the FPS wasnt as bad, maybe around 60-80 when it got busy with a lot of cars.

Settings are PP medium, AA level 3. Ingame most highest except reduced mirror distance in JSON file and lower number of rendered cars when racing, 15 I think. But I never had FPS as low as 30 its crazy, have you tried fiddling with Nvidia settings? Things like forced off vsync, max power management, etc. , maybe even different drivers. I still use fairly old drivers, i dont switch unless it adds noticeable performance and latest nvidia drivers apparently make it worse.
 
Im still on a 2019 driver , 441.41 and have power management on max in NVCP . AA is x5 because even at that it looks shit . Thanks for your help but im just going to park rF2 again i think and come back in 6 more months and hope for better and i will have a 3080 at least by then ;)
 
2ndLastJedi said:
No i drove Portland also . I was trying out these new graphics tracks i read about in the latest news . I had all maxed settings but rain drops off and PP at medium , then i lowered settings down a step and PP off and was getting more consistent FPS but still dips down to mid 30's still.
Click to expand...

You should be having it much better at Portland. I am running rF2 with midend PC, 1060 6GB graphics card (very inferior to 1080Ti), 2k 32" monitor, caped 100fps. Using mid to high graphical settings I have mostly smooth and flawless performance.

However, if I want to use rain - performance drops dramatically if there are more cars at the track, so to experience rain I just try to run solo or with very few AI cars. There has been something terribly wrong with rain performance in rF2 since quite a long time, not sure if maybe it was always like that. Additionally, in worse optimised or/and higher detailed race tracks there seems to be performance hit during low sun angles, understandably lighting becomes more complex, more shadows, more specular effects and everything. At some tracks night also feels demanding on performance, but I guess that also depends on optimisation, amount of light sources around and so.

Despite all these negatives in terms of performance, even user with mid-end, or perhaps it could even be considered as low-end PC by now, I can get a lot of smooth and stable driving without any issues. If there are troubles at any scenario, there is usually a possibility to use less AI cars, or choose different time of day with more simple silghting. I agree it is fair to say that many things could be improved, but I disagree that rF2 is not usuable. I don't remember last time I have experienced a freeze for example. Some time ago I couldn't enjoy S397 Nordschleife due to poor performance, now it feels quite optimised and runs well, will see how it will be after it gets updated to newest stuff.

However, as NVIDIA again surprises everyone with massive technological leap. I am already looking forward to get used 2080 before new year arrives :D I think it will uncover rF2 properly. Although, I believe, it probably still wouldn't pull out max performance (144fps at 2k single screen in my case) in rF2 at its most challenging scanario, and what could it be ? Some unoptimised track and unoptimised cars + most AI and all visible cars + darkness to sunlight shift + heavy storm rain ? Triples and VR is not important to me, but I suppose those things effectively tripples and doubles the demands.
 
2ndLastJedi said:
No i drove Portland also . I was trying out these new graphics tracks i read about in the latest news . I had all maxed settings but rain drops off and PP at medium , then i lowered settings down a step and PP off and was getting more consistent FPS but still dips down to mid 30's still.

@Shadak What settings are you running ? and what do you mean by "I find post effects setting gave me about 50FPS maybe more. But certainly wasnt 20 at highest settings" ??
Click to expand...
Portland is a 3rd party track, although it is a showcase for the new graphics. It has been noted the fps are lower at Portland than at another updated track like Silverstone.
 
How much lower ? And in equal conditions ? Although, I would suppose Portland to be bit heavier than Silverstone, mostly because more detail is packed into same space comparing to silverstone, in silverstone everything is more spread out.
 
DrivingFast said:
Leaving rF2 aside for the sake of sufficiently good graphics is really a bad reason in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I was very happy with the way rF2 looked before all these new updates! So the "graphics" as such aren't my concern, I was able to get a very nice smooth aliased free image back in the DX9 days and was very happy. Now we have what is supposed to be better graphics yet I find the image to be worse with tonnes of jaggies.
You may be right and I'm silly for putting it aside but I'm just frustrated that all the work on trying to bring rF2 to look like a 2020 game has actually made it look worse! Jaggies and shadows are now terrible.
 
I have been using rF2 constantly, and I have found graphics and a lot of other stuff improved. It is rather rare opinion that it got worse, I haven't heard much if any opinions like that. I just had a hour or so hot lapping, testing our endurance mod paces, and I was very pleased to drive and race AI at: Thruxton, Castle Combe, Oulton, Imola '72, just to name what I have used this very night, I was enjoying the graphics very much and was very immersed. And not a single moment under 100fps, I think I got maybe four five micro stutters like 20-50ms (of which I am not sure if I wasn't stuttering myself falling into microsleep lol), not a single freeze, and rether respectable fights with AI.
 
mantasisg said:
I have been using rF2 constantly, and I have found graphics and a lot of other stuff improved. It is rather rare opinion that it got worse, I haven't heard much if any opinions like that. I just had a hour or so hot lapping, testing our endurance mod paces, and I was very pleased to drive and race AI at: Thruxton, Castle Combe, Oulton, Imola '72, just to name what I have used this very night, I was enjoying the graphics very much and was very immersed. And not a single moment under 100fps, I think I got maybe four five micro stutters like 20-50ms (of which I am not sure if I wasn't stuttering myself falling into microsleep lol), not a single freeze, and rether respectable fights with AI.
Click to expand...
Like I said, it is the aliasing and shadows that are bothering me. I suppose on a whole the image does look better if only the AA worked like it used to and get the shadows to render another 100 meters further in front of the player instead of only 10 meters.
 
2ndLastJedi said:
Like I said, it is the aliasing and shadows that are bothering me. I suppose on a whole the image does look better if only the AA worked like it used to and get the shadows to render another 100 meters further in front of the player instead of only 10 meters.
Click to expand...

Can you post screenshots or video showing the issues? If there's any possibility it's something going wrong on your end it would be good to identify and fix it. Official content obviously.
 
Lazza said:
Can you post screenshots or video showing the issues? If there's any possibility it's something going wrong on your end it would be good to identify and fix it. Official content obviously.
Click to expand...
I have recently reinstalled rF2 and only official s397 workshop content as I was getting frustrated by the lack of consistency. You can see in the first post a pic of the shadow cascade only just in front of my car. The aliasing is hard to show in screen shots but clearly evident on fences at Portland, but also on all tracks I've tried and the shadows also in OP show the them flickering but again not visible in screen shots.

Previously I could force AA in Inspector and get similar performance but far better AA. Now it looks the same with no visible gain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top