Assetto Corsa Competizione | Version 1.3.11 Is Here

[Paul Jeffrey]

Assetto Corsa Competizione has received the hotfix treatment today - with build 1.3.11 having dropped on Steam earlier this evening.

New build time! Ok, so it isn't the v1.4 we are all waiting for, but Kunos have nevertheless done a good job with this latest hotfix update posting for Assetto Corsa Competizione - adding a number of useful and important fixes and improvements to the official SRO GT World Challenge Series racing simulation.

Highlights of the latest build include some fine tuning to the behaviour of both wet tyres and tyre tearing model, amongst an array of different tweaks and improvements that can be seen below:

V1.3.11 Hotfix Update Notes:

• Fixed a potential crash when using trackIR with helmet camera.
• Added ignition/engine running indicator to speedo/rpm widget.
• MFD will now only store its state when HUD is removed from screen (potential fix for stutter when cycling MFD pages after HDD power down)
• Fixed currently viewed car label indicating wrong car brand in replay under specific conditions.
• Fixed nationality information not transferring correctly for MP opponents in the broadcast HUD.
• Broadcast HUD TAB leaderboard now scrolls on mouse input.
• Fixed MP car showroom not displaying cars when official filter was selected under specific conditions.
• Tyre tearing model fine tuning.
• Audi R8 EVO preset setups strategies fixes.
• Huracan EVO fine tuning.
• Huracan ST Paul Ricard aggressive setup.
• Huracan ST preheated tyres fix.
• Wet tyres rear radius correction.
• Minor rearrangement of the lights and ignition indicators.
• Fixed the flash light HUD indicator getting stuck in the Mercedes.

Original Source: Assetto Corsa Competizione Steam

Assetto Corsa Competizione is available now on PC, with console release to follow in the coming months.

Got questions that need answers relating to ACC? Start a thread in the ACC sub forum here at RaceDepartment, and let our epic community help you out!

 

[Bonoldi]

Considering ACC the best sim in all features at the moment (at least for me, I have all other major sims), running it at 60 FPS is more than enough to have an excellent experience and joy!!!! Worth it!!!

 

[911nick]

I echo what Bonoldi says...and ACC can only get better. I'm excited to see the improvements and additions that will come our way. In the meantime, I continue to be captivated by this sim.

 

[maelstrom]

Is it just me, or are you basically saying "it will seem well optimized to you if you throw enough CPU/GPU power on it" If yes, then I don't think that's how optimization is supposed to work

Almost, but not quite. My system (6700k, GTX 1080, 16GB RAM, 1440p/60 Hz monitor) is hardly state-of-the-art but ACC runs really well on it at mostly very high settings. So, for me at least, it seems well optimised. Yes, you could probably try to optimise more for VR but they may have already done as much as they can in that area. Having the AI physics the same as the player was a decision which possibly cost Kunos the best VR performance but, as a non-VR user, that doesn't bother me particularly. You have to draw the line with optimising somewhere or you'd disappear down a rabbit hole with no trace - hence the minimum system requirements. There seem to be plenty of people around the forums who believe that because they meet the minimum specs, they should be able to run with high settings and large grids and when they can't, say that it's badly optimised. They usually go on to complain that their favourite sim (several years old, with a much less demanding game engine and worse graphics) runs really well on their system so why doesn't ACC?

 

[Jens Roos]

ACC might be optimized for certain hardware configurations, for SLI and triples on Pascal (10xx) it's not. Stuttering slide show at 45 fps using 1080 TI SLI all maxed out using Mid/Low settings. Turing (20xx) only is supported in SLI, but it's possible to add Pascal to UE4 (says google) but has to be done by the developer. But i'm not holding my breath for that optimizing to happen, to bad as ACC seems to be good at the GT3 segment.

 

[Case_]

@maelstrom That's still a pretty hefty system tbh. Maybe not top of the line, but I wouldn't hesitate to call it upper midrange. And I'd expect that you're still barely maintaining 60 fps once you start adding AI.

And I also still don't think what you're describing is how optimization works - you're still basically saying that throwing raw power at an app/game makes it better optimized.

 

[Michael Hornbuckle]

Funny, I remember back when AC first came out and everybody cried because you needed a super-computer in order to get 60fps in 1080p while using max graphics.
-------------

Stuttering slide show at 45 fps using 1080 TI SLI all maxed out using Mid/Low settings.

You have an issue somewhere because my i5 9600k with a 1080ti yields 65-85fps when using 49 ai at night while using max graphics at 2560x1440 resolution.

 

[Jens Roos]

You have an issue somewhere because my i5 9600k with a 1080ti yields 65-85fps when using 49 ai at night while using max graphics at 2560x1440 resolution.

Yes, Kunos have not implemented SLI for Pascal cards, I'm on 2x1080TI (SLI) and triples 7680x1440p. This setup is when SLI scaling is working, equal or more than 2080 TI, when not proper supported, no gain over single card or as in this case, less performance than an singel card. +100fps in the other sims are normally not an issue, with AI.

 

[maelstrom]

And I'd expect that you're still barely maintaining 60 fps once you start adding AI.

To be honest, I'm not a big fan of obsessing over FPS. If it runs smoothly with no obvious stutters (as it does, in my case), that's good enough for me.

And I also still don't think what you're describing is how optimization works - you're still basically saying that throwing raw power at an app/game makes it better optimized.

Not at all. I said that ACC seems well optimised for my system as I like to run with very high settings. My understanding of optimisation is that it consists of refining the code to get the best performance on the lowest spec system that you think would realistically be capable of running it. Once it runs acceptably (not necessarily well) on that system, you start to aim for better/higher settings on better systems. However, you have to be realistic. There's no way you could hope to get good performance with something like VR from a low-spec system so there's probably no point in even trying. What you'd probably aim for next is to use a mid-spec system as your baseline and try to get VR to run acceptably (but again, not necessarily well) on that. It's an iterative process and one where the end user has to use some common sense as well (which doesn't always seem to happen). In the end, you are optimising different things for different ends of the system capability spectrum.