GTClub_wajdi
Registered
An angle adjustment is very useful when you use a low FOV like me(24-26), because with low FOV you can't see the side mirrors!
+1An angle adjustment is very useful when you use a low FOV like me(24-26), because with low FOV you can't see the side mirrors!
This and this! When I have multiview enabled I lose about 50%-60% of fps and that is too much !
For example:
With Multiview Off, I can set every thing on high-max and I still have about 65-80 fps!
With Multiview On, I have to put every thing on medium and even low( like shadows, reflection and opponents cars) to have a decent 30fps!
It's really ridiculous how the multiview option kills fps performance in rfactor 2!
No, just that I see notes of things that affect them in internal builds.Tim any more info on this and when it will be introduced ?
Can someone perform fps test for multiview on/off in iracing so we can compare the percentage performance drop difference in iracing and rf2?
An angle adjustment is very useful when you use a low FOV like me(24-26), because with low FOV you can't see the side mirrors!
Could somebody please explain me what the options Widescreen Hud and Widescreen UI actually do?
Nothing changes here if I enable them.
I have done this test with the AC tech and it was about 10-15 fps!
The impact in fps with for example iRacing is not as big (10 to 20 FPS lower) as with rFactor 2.
If rFactor 2 was running with at an average 150fps (remember...this is hypothetical)
utopia
Hmmm... I have to fire up AC tech tomorrow and I will do some test for you! However, I guess you know that AC tech has only one car @ small circuit, so I'm not sure it would be a good comparison with rf2!But what was the before and after average fps though?....so we can gauge the fps/performance difference as a percentage please wajdi.
Again, for people who don't have triple screens and for general interpretation of the data you present....this is meaningless to us mate.
Just a hypothetical example...If iRacing was running with at an average 80fps and then drops 15fps (between your 10-20fps lower as stated) to an average 65fps with multiview enabled, then that's a performance drop to 81% (65fps/85fps). If rFactor 2 was running with at an average 150fps (remember...this is hypothetical) and then drops 29fps (twice as much as iRacing) to 121fps with multiview....it has a much higher fps reduction but the relative performance drop is exactly the same, 81% (121fps/150fps), which would make them even in multi-view performance.
Hmmm... I have to fire up AC tech tomorrow and I will do some test for you! However, I guess you know that AC tech has only one car @ small circuit, so I'm not sure it would be a good comparison with rf2!
I think you misunderstood. "10-20 fps lower" from 80 fps is 60-70 fps![]()
EDIT: Yeah, scratch that![]()
Thanks, AC tech preview with only one car and a very short and empty track without HDR, dinamic lighting, real road and and and..!This is a big issue for me. Having the UI not hiding behind bezels sounds like it would be easy to fix. I'm surprised that it hasn't been fixed.
Triple screen performance is also really bad. I get 60fps in the AC tech preview, 80+ with a 20 car grid in game stock car, and 80+ with a 14 car grid in iRacing. To get 60 in rFactor2 with one car, I need to shut almost everything off. At least I assume it is 60 since I can only see one number. All three of the other games look better than rFactor2.
To do multiscreen right you really need to be able to adjust monitor angles, sizes and viewing distances.
Thanks, AC tech preview with only one car and a very short and empty track without HDR, dinamic lighting, real road and and and..!
RR will use CPU, RAM, GPU. It is created, calculated, stored and displayed.Btw: why real road could affect fps performance?