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!
Tim any more info on this and when it will be introduced ? Q: Any plans to have proper support for Triplescreen? (angle, distance, bezel etc…) A: Yes. I (Joe) am currently working on a complete setup for triple screen including arbitrary angles between screens, bezel correction, and proper FOV based on distance to screens.
Can someone perform fps test for multiview on/off in iracing so we can compare the percentage performance drop difference in iracing and rf2?
Uhhhh FOV is something different than viewing angle. Set FOV on 25 en slide the seat in-game backwards till you see the mirrors en most of the side windscreen. The FOV is then unaffected and you'l see most of the side windows left and right wile the FPS remains the same. Adjust the FOV till the lines from your dashboard and surroundings are straighten out, this is the rigth FOV setting. afther this adjust your ingame seat backwards tll you see the side window mirrors. I am Using eyefinity with crossfire on a msi6990 the bezel comp is set in windows 7. The impact in fps with for example iRacing is not as big (10 to 20 FPS lower) as with rFactor 2. Wile the the eye-candy in iRacing remains maxed out and in rFactor 2 must be lowered to get playable fps. So here is a lot to gain. Keep up the good work ISI
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!
Never understood why people use that AC tech demo as a benchmark. 30 car grid, that sim is going to need some serious horsepower when its released, and iracing is using 10 year old code it should perform pretty good by now, however even nascar racing 2003 looks better than rfactor 2's graphics right now, no offense ISI.
??? Edit: read my post again right after where you've quote me. hahaha....lol. We all do it from time to time.
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..!
Maybe its worth to do a direct comparison with iracing in Lime Rock Park with skip barber. Btw: why real road could affect fps performance?
