Just got an extra 30 fps...

[Kek700]

Forgive me for stating the bleeding obvious;
but i have always known, assumed, that app’s cause you
to loose some Fps, at a guess i would have said 4 or 5.
and as i am hoping for 144hz, 4 or 5 is neither here nore there.

So i was so shocked to find i had lost approximately 30 fps.
So now i am running just sidekick and Realtime, both of
these app’s give me most of the information i need for online
racing. I can still use the useful app’s in practice and qualifying.

I am sure most of you except “me” knew this, so i have put
this on the forum for those who maybe did not realise how
much effect these multiple app’s with driver labels can have.

I realise it may just be something that applies to my system
and someone running 1080p may not incur this penalty.
But VR maybe another matter, i have noticed people with
VR sometimes running loads of app’s.

Silverstone GP circuit , GT3 , 24 AI.

i5 6600k not clocked
Gtx 980ti not clocked
Mini itx
5760 x 1080 144hz triple screens

( i do not use Nvidia inspectors settings apart from MFFA )
so AC settings =
2x AA
16x Anisotropic
World detail = high
Shadows = low
No post processing
Smoke generation = low
Mirror resolution = high
Reflection quality = low frequency = static.

“ Full display my many of apps on screen + teamspeak + crew-chief.”
i have always run lots of app’s plus name tags on opponents cars.

Fps start line = 60
Fps after one lap = 72

Just teamspeak + crewchief + realtime app + FFB app + sidekick app.

Fps start line = 90
Fps after one lap = 102

30 fps, not bad, it would equal me getting an RTX2080
which i have been considering.

May help somebody. On the other hand it may not help anyone

 

[Jens Roos]

The latter. If they are not on screen the apps are not active

Well, that actually depends on the app and how it's coded. Non visual code could still run but that do in general have rather small cpu impact. To disable it completely you need to un-tick the app in settings.

 

[Victorqn]

If you have asw on auto or in it will go with either 90 fps or 45, nothing in between.
You need to monitor your graphics card load and test. If it's not at over 90% then it is your processor that it's limiting.
It's difficult to determine it with locked fps as your limit will probably be at around 85 fps with your PC specs.... Can you disable asw and suffer the tearing and stuttering for some short period to run the exact fps your PC is able to run at and monitor your loads?
I know that a friend of mine couldn't run ac in VR at 90+ fps with an i7 4790 @ 4.9 GHz!
With his 8700k at 4.8 GHz however it's possible without problems...

I can try to disable I will let you know the results.. but, I dont know how to test my GPU..

 

[Victorqn]

If you have asw on auto or in it will go with either 90 fps or 45, nothing in between.
You need to monitor your graphics card load and test. If it's not at over 90% then it is your processor that it's limiting.
It's difficult to determine it with locked fps as your limit will probably be at around 85 fps with your PC specs.... Can you disable asw and suffer the tearing and stuttering for some short period to run the exact fps your PC is able to run at and monitor your loads?
I know that a friend of mine couldn't run ac in VR at 90+ fps with an i7 4790 @ 4.9 GHz!
With his 8700k at 4.8 GHz however it's possible without problems...

47.3 fps
single player with full grid

 

[Deleted member 197115]

@Kek700 lower your anisotropic filtering to 8x and you'll get another big boost with even better visuals (I know, seems absurd but that's how AF works in Assetto, 8 is better than 16)

In which way AFx8 is more visually appealing than AFx16.
Is it in VR or flat screen?

Trying to test it out to see if our findings match.

Thanks

 

[RasmusP]

I can try to disable I will let you know the results.. but, I dont know how to test my GPU..

Simplest way in my opinion would be to download and run "openhardwaremonitor". Small standalone exe you can just run and it monitors most.
Scroll down to gpu load, select the little checkbox on the left of it and then search the top bar menus for "show plot" and select whatever you want. I always use "right" so the graph gets shown right to the values. There you'll see your gpu load!
Then run the game and see afterwards if the gpu load went near 100%. If yes, you need to lower graphic settings. If not... It's in this thread what to do

47.3 fps
single player with full grid

With full AI it eats away your fps. Even the best CPUs on the market won't reach 90 fps in VR with it. It's a shame as 90% of your cpu are basically idling around due to the game only using one and a half real threads...

 

[Victorqn]

UserBenchmarks: Game 109%, Desk 100%, Work 75%
CPU: Intel Core i7-7700K - 90.7%
GPU: Nvidia GTX 1080 - 125.4%
SSD: CT500MX500SSD4 500GB - 120%
HDD: Toshiba DT01ACA200 2TB - 105.5%
RAM: Crucial BLS16G4D240FSE.16FBD 1x16GB - 40.5%
MBD: Asrock Z270 Pro4

maybe this helps?

 

[RasmusP]

UserBenchmarks: Game 109%, Desk 100%, Work 75%
CPU: Intel Core i7-7700K - 90.7%
GPU: Nvidia GTX 1080 - 125.4%
SSD: CT500MX500SSD4 500GB - 120%
HDD: Toshiba DT01ACA200 2TB - 105.5%
RAM: Crucial BLS16G4D240FSE.16FBD 1x16GB - 40.5%
MBD: Asrock Z270 Pro4

maybe this helps?

Not for me, sorry. I never understood the benchmark of ac.. Really just load openhardwaremonitor and check the gpu load.

 

[Victorqn]

78.6 in practice
87.9 in pitstop

 

[Stereo]

With full AI it eats away your fps. Even the best CPUs on the market won't reach 90 fps in VR with it. It's a shame as 90% of your cpu are basically idling around due to the game only using one and a half real threads...

Yeah the biggest bottleneck is the directx CPU thread, with a bunch of AI visible it has to do a bunch more work. ai physics is all fully multithreaded no problem which is why once the field spreads out a bit it's fine.

 

[RasmusP]

78.6 in practice
87.9 in pitstopView attachment 274839

Drawing the plot would be more accurate as you can see whether it's spikes or constant load but current value being 95% with maximum being 98% tells that you should lower your graphic settings and see how much improvement it brings!

I would recommend to put msaa to off and lower anisotropic filtering to 4x. Then check again the gpu load in openhardwaremonitor

 

[Victorqn]

Drawing the plot would be more accurate as you can see whether it's spikes or constant load but current value being 95% with maximum being 98% tells that you should lower your graphic settings and see how much improvement it brings!

I would recommend to put msaa to off and lower anisotropic filtering to 4x. Then check again the gpu load in openhardwaremonitor

ok, with your settings I got 85 fps, but with ASW even with 45fps it was smoother

 

[Victorqn]

Thks everyone for the help.. much apreciated!!

 

[RasmusP]

ok, with your settings I got 85 fps, but with ASW even with 45fps it was smoother

View attachment 274840

Now with the GPU load clearly being below 95%, you definitely hit the CPU limit instead, which seems to be right at around 85 fps.
Now you could try to reduce your apps, set reflections to static, lower shadow and reflection maps, reduce mirror and reflection rendering distances, putting Anisotropic Filtering to only 8x (has very little CPU impact but it has a tiny one) and try not to run too many AI. Multiplayer should be better too.
Maybe world details might help and it's also a little bit track dependent!

With VR it's really 45 fps with ASW or 90 fps. Everything in between will be asynchrone and therefore stutter! ASW is a mixed bag. If you're fine with using it, great for you! I don't own VR yet but I've heard a lot about ASW inducing motion sickness due to the interpolated frames and increased input lag.

Happy to help

 

[Victorqn]

Now with the GPU load clearly being below 95%, you definitely hit the CPU limit instead, which seems to be right at around 85 fps.
Now you could try to reduce your apps, set reflections to static, lower shadow and reflection maps, reduce mirror and reflection rendering distances, putting Anisotropic Filtering to only 8x (has very little CPU impact but it has a tiny one) and try not to run too many AI. Multiplayer should be better too.
Maybe world details might help and it's also a little bit track dependent!

With VR it's really 45 fps with ASW or 90 fps. Everything in between will be asynchrone and therefore stutter! ASW is a mixed bag. If you're fine with using it, great for you! I don't own VR yet but I've heard a lot about ASW inducing motion sickness due to the interpolated frames and increased input lag.

Happy to help

Thank you Rasmus! It was a lot of help!

 

[Davide Nativo]

In which way AFx8 is more visually appealing than AFx16.
Is it in VR or flat screen?

Trying to test it out to see if our findings match.

Thanks

I use a flat screen.
At 8x there are less shimmerings and more consistent colours, from what I see.

 

[RasmusP]

In theory anisotropic filtering is really great but there are two problems:
1. It only really works with clamped lod bias (positive is possible, negative overly sharp is not). Sadly it's broken for nvidia and not even possible with amd. So if you have a jaggied aliased image and run the af on top it can become weird

2. You need good anti aliasing to get a clear image without being overly sharp and just create crisp garbage. With 4x sgssaa af at x16 looks definitely better than 8.

Strangely in ac, af takes a real hit on the gpu so 8x is the sweet spot overall

 

[Deleted member 197115]

Quick test:
AFx16

AC VERSION: 1.16.3 (x64)
POINTS: 21707
FPS: AVG=148 MIN=88 MAX=172 VARIANCE=1 CPU=55%

LOADING TIME: 15s
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (3840x2160)
OS-Version: 6.2.9200 () 0x300-0x1
CPU CORES: 12
FULLSCREEN: ON
AA:4X AF:16X SHDW:4096 BLUR:0
WORLD DETAIL: 5 SMOKE:1
PP: QLT:5 HDR:1 FXAA:0 GLR:5 DOF:5 RAYS:1 HEAT:1

AFx8

AC VERSION: 1.16.3 (x64)
POINTS: 22854
FPS: AVG=156 MIN=97 MAX=215 VARIANCE=1 CPU=58%

LOADING TIME: 16s
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (3840x2160)
OS-Version: 6.2.9200 () 0x300-0x1
CPU CORES: 12
FULLSCREEN: ON
AA:4X AF:8X SHDW:4096 BLUR:0
WORLD DETAIL: 5 SMOKE:1
PP: QLT:5 HDR:1 FXAA:0 GLR:5 DOF:5 RAYS:1 HEAT:1

AFx16 does look better though on 4K. With AFx8 textures losing definition (getting out of focus) sooner and more abrupt.

 

[Kek700]

weird that you only got 2 fps more well, at least you got better visuals

Just to complete the circle of knowledge, I miss read my notes, it was an extra 7 FPS.

Yes I know, my writing must be illegible... Yes it is most of the time.