PDA

View Full Version : [**Pre Patch 2.0**] Recommended settings for Rift at 90fps? i5 4690K + 1080ti



gs2004
23-09-2017, 10:06
Having trouble achieving 90fps for any length of time with any settings other than Low for everything and all AA and PP off.

Trying trial/error but FPS always seems to be varying from 90 to 70 or so.

Testing on 8 car race at Azure circuit - clear weather, sitting on start line.

Anyone have success? Or is this normal.

Possibly would have expected better with 1080ti.


i5 4690K at 4.2, 1080ti FE, 16GB DDR3 1866, SSD, CV1

Gloomy
23-09-2017, 10:35
Could be your i5 bottlenecking it a bit, try bumping up the settings and see if you get the same results.

Saloei
23-09-2017, 10:37
Read a post here stating nVidia has new drivers for this game. Nvidia.com/drivers (http://www.nvidia.com/Download/index.aspx?lang=en-us)

daz1976
23-09-2017, 10:39
Having exactly same issue. I5 7600k and GTX1080. Terribly unstable FPS no matter what settings I use.

Daz

daz1976
23-09-2017, 10:40
Tried new drivers btw. No change.

gs2004
23-09-2017, 10:40
Running 385.69 drivers. Will reduce driver quantity in race and see if makes difference.

Moving my head around when static at race start shows significant FPS changes.

Boskapongen
23-09-2017, 10:45
Just wish there was a FPS counter in-game. Hard to adjust settings without knowing how the performance is doing...

gs2004
23-09-2017, 10:49
Use the oculus tray tool or debug tool to set HUD option to 'Performance'. Gives an overlay in HMD, gets in the way, but it least it works.

Changing driver quantity doesn't change anything noticeable.

The angle I have my head at causes the biggest change, get 45fps to 90fps depending on where I look (car not moving). At start line on Azure Circuit, looking to the right and down is an FPS killer...

Boskapongen
23-09-2017, 10:52
For some reason Oculus Tray tool does not work for me. When i start it, it disconnects/knocks out my sensors.....and I need to restart PC and sh!t.

gs2004
23-09-2017, 10:56
in that case the official Oculus debug tool is the one to use, google it :)

Boskapongen
23-09-2017, 10:56
Here are my settings at the moment, works ok in steady 90fps. Not tried night or heavy weather yet though...
And Super Sampling in game: 1.5

240324

Boskapongen
23-09-2017, 10:59
in that case the official Oculus debug tool is the one to use, google it :)

Actually, it does the same thing. LOL.

gs2004
23-09-2017, 11:16
Tried those settings, worse FPS.

Interestingly, the same thing happens before I actually click Start to begin the race.

FPS varies from 60fps to 85fps depending on where I look.

Shame I can't get a Steam refund because it's says I have played for 3hrs despite not having left the start line whoops.

xeek
23-09-2017, 12:22
Here are my settings for a 1080:

https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/871867316827904913/FBEEC2791167F6D0C43C36225C370D780F9AF4AA/
https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/871867316827905174/4F3768F2FAEA2E8446FB2B5F85A794A2DBBCE24F/
https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/871867316827905388/89140E0FBB7D2C2E077A67743D15CC04A66BE189/

You guys with a TI might be able to run 1.3 SS not sure.

ps: I changed camera near clip plane back to default 0.05, not really sure whats best here.

Cbrriderr
23-09-2017, 12:30
should V-sync be on when using Rift?

gs2004
23-09-2017, 12:52
Thank you - tried those settings, and frame rate seems higher for most of the time. Still dips to 70ish and up to 90. It's all over the place.

Don't see this in other sims that I play, they seem to have a more stable frame rate.

Vsync on or off makes no difference in VR in this game as far as I can tell. It certainly doesn't cap it at 60fps (my monitor).

Racer66
23-09-2017, 13:00
I'm very curious how to improve FPS. I've struggled through this in PC1, and hoped it would improve in PC2 with the amount of money I invested in my setup, see my signature.

WMD, could you please let me know if the game recognizes and utilizes the 2nd SLI video card?

clarification: I can achieve the high fps with the settings you've all shared, but many settings are set to low and medium. I want Ultra baby. How much more money do I need to spend to get there?

gs2004
23-09-2017, 13:09
Tried running on desktop at 2160p via DSR - no VR. Stable 115fps shown via Geforce overlay, no wild variances. There's something wrong with the VR pipeline.

daz1976
23-09-2017, 13:27
I agree. I just did almost the same and it ran butter smooth. As soon as I'm in VR even just me on the track it won't hold 90fps at all.

The only way I can get it to be smooth is to enable ASW in the dedebug tool but even then adding 15 cars on track it'll struggle to hold even that. Not comparing games as such but when I can run Assetto with 10 cars with a solid 90fps then something isn't right here.

Daz

gs2004
23-09-2017, 13:42
Absolutely, the VR isn't good enough for released product. I also run AC with all on, PP, mods, etc., and get 90fps (capped).

Really wanted to give this game and WMD a fighting chance but right now, it's just not playable for me in VR, I find ASW etc distracting.

Tried a race and the amount of pop-in at Monaco was crazy. Whole buildings didn't appear and I drove through the tunnel with no tunnel supports or roof until they paged in.

Hope they fix it and I'll come back because clearly a lot of effort went into this, but it's disappointing really.

Fight-Test
23-09-2017, 13:49
So I'm not having any frame drops at all but my overhead is low. You guys know what it should be at? I7/1080 if that info is needed.

daz1976
23-09-2017, 14:06
Absolutely, the VR isn't good enough for released product. I also run AC with all on, PP, mods, etc., and get 90fps (capped).

Really wanted to give this game and WMD a fighting chance but right now, it's just not playable for me in VR, I find ASW etc distracting.

Tried a race and the amount of pop-in at Monaco was crazy. Whole buildings didn't appear and I drove through the tunnel with no tunnel supports or roof until they paged in.

Hope they fix it and I'll come back because clearly a lot of effort went into this, but it's disappointing really.

Definitely. I've noticed the pop in too. On bollards, spoilers,the odd part of a building. Light flickering here and there. I was looking forward to the release of this but pretty disappointed considering the rest of the game seems a good leap in the right direction. Hopefully they will patch it with something to help the overhead. Saying that, I'm not surprised they didn't go PSVR with it now. How on earth would they have got it to run on a standard PS4.

Daz

Daz

daz1976
23-09-2017, 14:08
So I'm not having any frame drops at all but my overhead is low. You guys know what it should be at? I7/1080 if that info is needed.

I'd say as with most of us, you should be getting a solid 90fps with some overhead to spare as long as your settings aren't too high for everything.

Daz

Fight-Test
23-09-2017, 14:12
I'd say as with most of us, you should be getting a solid 90fps with some overhead to spare as long as your settings aren't too high for everything.

Daz

I'm using gamer muscle recommended settings he did the video about and made the vr look twice as good. He's on a little slower system so I figured I was ok but just wanted to check.

Boskapongen
23-09-2017, 14:16
I'm using gamer muscle recommended settings he did the video about and made the vr look twice as good. He's on a little slower system so I figured I was ok but just wanted to check.

Can you link that video? Thanx.

daz1976
23-09-2017, 14:25
We're not the only ones posting on this. Seen on quite a few forums now starting to pop up threads of massively inconsistent vr performance between users with similar set ups.

Daz

xeek
23-09-2017, 14:30
did you guys try the settings I posted a page back? Also did you install the newest Nvidia drivers? There was an update yesterday for pcars release.
The pop-ins can be changed with the "Camera near clip plane" setting, but im not sure yet whats the best.

Fight-Test
23-09-2017, 14:32
Can you link that video? Thanx.

Here you man. I'm new to this stuff so it was a big help.
https://youtu.be/dGc1mbFFGkY

daz1976
23-09-2017, 14:39
did you guys try the settings I posted a page back? Also did you install the newest Nvidia drivers? There was an update yesterday for pcars release.
The pop-ins can be changed with the "Camera near clip plane" setting, but im not sure yet whats the best.

I tried them yes but as seems the case with the settings. No matter what I change, not much seems to effect the overhead and stuttering.

One really odd thing that someone who's smarter then me might get some clue from. I uninstalled the game last night and downloaded it again for this morning. First go, everything played smooth, then changed a few settings, restarted and stuttering was there. Whether this is relevant or not i don't know.

Daz

gs2004
23-09-2017, 14:43
did you guys try the settings I posted a page back? Also did you install the newest Nvidia drivers? There was an update yesterday for pcars release.
The pop-ins can be changed with the "Camera near clip plane" setting, but im not sure yet whats the best.

Yes I did thanks, all manner of settings fail to stop the instability. Don't think it is related to any quality settings based on what I have seen so far. The FPS variance is there regardless of setting - apart from when running on desktop.

Might uninstall and reinstall, nothing to lose really,

daz1976
23-09-2017, 14:58
Yes I did thanks, all manner of settings fail to stop the instability. Don't think it is related to any quality settings based on what I have seen so far. The FPS variance is there regardless of setting - apart from when running on desktop.

Might uninstall and reinstall, nothing to lose really,

If you do, then note if you have the same occurrence I did where on my first run, the game ran smooth. Only when I changed a setting did it get choppy.

Daz

gs2004
23-09-2017, 15:02
There's a performance comparison spreadsheet posted on reddit. It's here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13vH7xrVdCUdYgy4M3uJ0Vx-9TH_JMSeTbsl3_5Ex9OQ/edit?usp=sharing

daz1976
23-09-2017, 15:05
There's a performance comparison spreadsheet posted on reddit. It's here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13vH7xrVdCUdYgy4M3uJ0Vx-9TH_JMSeTbsl3_5Ex9OQ/edit?usp=sharing

Taking a look now. Cheers.

RomKnight
23-09-2017, 15:05
I use VIE but I have no issues with it.
HW in .sig

gs2004
23-09-2017, 15:23
Official tester on pcars sub on Reddit also reports stable FPS on Rift, if change reprojection setting. This might be Rift-only issue. Re-downloading... Would be worth taking logs in afterburner to see if CPU is maxing or whatever.

daz1976
23-09-2017, 15:24
Ok I just noticed something odd by mistake.

I started PC2 but using the non vr link by mistke and when the game fired up I looked at the performance settings. These were completely different from how I had set them launching in vr mode. Most things were set to high. So I lowered them all to the same as what I had set in vr mode and tried again and I got a smooth lap with no stuttering at all. Going back in to see if there's something in this or it's just coincidence but odd that the settings via each shortcut were different.

Daz

gs2004
23-09-2017, 15:29
I saw the same, assumed two sets of settings - one for Rift and one for desktop.

daz1976
23-09-2017, 15:41
But it seemed when I changed the settings in the desktop mode it effected the vr mode. It might be coincidence or me going mad (feel like it after 2 days of messing) but I've never had a game with different settings for each display version.

Daz

gs2004
23-09-2017, 16:18
I hear you. The Settings could be getting mixed up and/or wrongly applied.

gs2004
23-09-2017, 17:06
Number of thread views on this may be a clue that this issue may not be isolated to a couple customers.

daz1976
23-09-2017, 18:15
I think You're right. I looked on the Steam discussion board and a healthy thread there is going on the same topic. It's certainly frustrating. I've been playing all afternoon with settings and nothing seems consistent at all. I lowered the settings at one point and got even worse performance.

So in the end I did a few laps in Assestto in the new 2004 Ferrari at Spa and was bliss. Not a single frame drop :)

Daz

msmith792
23-09-2017, 18:25
I've found I can crank things up fairly well on the settings if you don't super sample. Super sampling seems to kill performance here for some reason. In AC, i run 1.7 PPD. In PCars2 I have to run 1.0.

gs2004
23-09-2017, 18:31
Tried umpteen Ss settings, frame rate drops as you would expect but stability isn’t a deliverable.

mattan
23-09-2017, 18:48
I've found I can crank things up fairly well on the settings if you don't super sample. Super sampling seems to kill performance here for some reason. In AC, i run 1.7 PPD. In PCars2 I have to run 1.0.

Yes, the same results on My system (I7/1080Ti) i Can use Ss 1.2 and get quite solid 90hz.
Higher settings 1.5 or 2.0. 45hz..
In pscars 1 i used Ss 2.0!
Latest nvidia drivers installed. Win 10-64 Ssd disk, 16 GB ram.
There must be something wrong, pscars 2 is running on a later dx version and "is" optimized for VR..

gs2004
23-09-2017, 19:07
Interestingly I tried a replay after sitting on the grid with random FPS for a couple mins. In replay, cockpit, chase and hood are all basically broken dropping to 45fps or so. The other replay options, e.g. Track all have solid 90fps.

This is after uninstalling and installing.

My computer isn't broken, I think the thing I just bought for 37 is. For now.

programmer8922
23-09-2017, 20:05
I noticed major inconsistencies using a GTX Titan Black, but using the -skipcrowds flag made things noticeably more consistent even at much higher graphics settings.

mattan
23-09-2017, 20:09
I noticed major inconsistencies using a GTX Titan Black, but using the -skipcrowds flag made things noticeably more consistent even at much higher graphics settings.

How high Can you run SS and maintain 90hz / FPS ?

daz1976
23-09-2017, 20:14
I'm finding it's the same places on a track. No matter what settings I use it'll stutter in that place. I went back to PC1 and tried the same tracks and not surprisingly the stutters are there in the same places if the settings are pushed in that too. So it's just asking too much of our systems for some reason even at what would be considered low settings. How some people are posting that they are running on high settings is beyond me.

Daz

gs2004
23-09-2017, 22:34
Foolishly spent the last 3hrs trying to get a solid playing experience. Not happening.

However, had the closest to 90fps yet - varying wildly between 80 and 90, standing still.

Issues:


The wacky frame variance is track-dependent
MSAA switching on and off is something to be avoided
Changes in settings are arbitrarily applied, restart recommended on every menu setting change but not guaranteed to be actually applied on restart
Number of cars in grid is irrelevant
SS has minimal impact on FPS variance - not level. Ran 1.0 up to 1.8 and lost about 10fps with 1.8. But in all cases at least 10% variance in FPS irrespective of SS actual setting.
Windowed mode is broken if using DSR, first time in it works, after that, it goes to windowed mode even if full screen set, means can't navigate the menus as settings off the bottom of screen. Massive window.
I had everything set to high, which I could not do earlier today. Earlier today Low was the highest could go without sinking below 70fps. I deliberately avoided clicking on MSAA as it's expensive and don't trust the toggle. I can't explain why I get better FPS now with High when had worse FPS with Low earlier today.
The limited options in the graphics settings menus basically don't work consistently in-game when in VR, or at least they have no visible effect when resume game
The SS slider number splits from the slider position, i.e. slider at 1.0 but the number says 1.5. Which is correct, etc.
Shimmering of buildings is present regardless of setting. I avoided switching on and off MSAA purely as test)
Used SMAA Ultra and SMAA Max (according to the menus) but neither seemed to be applied how I would expect without a huge FPS loss going from Max to Ultra. Odd.
Used SS 1.5 (according to menus) all the time. Going to 2.0, lost about 5-10 FPS (FPS variance excepted)
FPS varied from 90 to 75 wildly when static on Long Beach.
Tracks aren't optimised, at least that's what it appears in VR, as what you are directly looking at affects FPS immediately.


TL;DR - With regard to FPS: It's not great, it's inconsistent, it's unpredictable, I don't trust the settings menus, it's sloppy, and it's likely that clever people worked on this game, but it was left like this.

gs2004
23-09-2017, 22:53
Turning off PP in the menu made no difference to FPS. However - main change from prior install to now is running 720p on monitor instead of 1080p. This might explain better FPS in general, i.e High settings at 720p better performance than Low settings at 1080p it appears. Odd.

gs2004
23-09-2017, 22:55
Forgot to say - am using the -skipcrowds option.

programmer8922
23-09-2017, 23:03
Turning off PP in the menu made no difference to FPS. However - main change from prior install to now is running 720p on monitor instead of 1080p. This might explain better FPS in general, i.e High settings at 720p better performance than Low settings at 1080p it appears. Odd.
That seems to be consistent with the findings of reddit user TootsyPoopster in his Project Cars 2 VR Performance Headroom Chart.

gs2004
23-09-2017, 23:09
If a monitor output is purely a splurge rendition of an existing frame buffer, it explains why in AC switching the monitor output on or off, or changing monitor resolution has negligible FPS impact. But here, it has a material impact. Kinda more questions than answers really.

gs2004
23-09-2017, 23:40
For the hell of it I went into graphicsconfigoculusdx11.xml and set the resolution to 640 x 360. No faster than 720p. Blurry text. FPS was still not up to VR 90fps standard though.

RomKnight
23-09-2017, 23:43
You can disable mirror somewhere too... steamvr settings menu? But you won't be able to record (maybe even taking pictures) without it.

BTW, the resolution you set it'll be the one in which you'll record/stream AFAIK but don't quote me on this.

silverline is: let it be at your monitor's native resolution

gs2004
24-09-2017, 00:37
Might try to disable mirror, but got bored of trying to get a stable frame rate.

Went back to monitor resolution. Decided to try a lap at Knockhill (local track) at 2am in light rain. With regard to the atmosphere, sound, weather, all good. Amazing to drive in the dark in the rain. But - the building pop-in is silly, the overhead bridge isn't there until the last minute as are the other buildings that just seem to appear. Nowhere near 90fps so went to ASW. All text on billboards etc very blurry. Spoilt it really, looking forward to a 90fps VR experience as per other sims (with clear weather).

daz1976
24-09-2017, 07:41
Just quick FYI.

There's another thread on her guys posting similar things and Ian Bell has noted that he's seen the thread and will be monitoring it.

Daz

gs2004
24-09-2017, 11:49
Well. I have been using Azure as my test track in custom offline race. Decided to just have a go at the career (which I had not started). Did Clio Cup with first race at Brands Hatch. I can't explain it, but I have near 90fps all the time. SS seems to say 1.5 in the menu. A proper driving experience. No crazy flickering on pop-in. The graphics are indeed better than AC including the PP. When I tried racing with Bac Monos at Azure, the jaggies were horrendous and AA seemed to have no real effect. However the Clios and BH are smooth. Going to avoid the custom race options for a while and continue career.

gs2004
24-09-2017, 13:39
Tried some more tracks at random, Bannochbrae has bad pop in on trees and railing supports, etc., all in the same places on each lap regardless of track quality setting. Curiously during replay there is no pop-in and all looks good.

Also tried the long Azure road. It starts OK but after a while the pop-in and shimmering start and it's not really possible to complete a lap. The visuals seem to get worse the faster the car goes.

So, I think that trying to mess with quality settings is not really the point, the tracks don't seem to be constructed optimally or the visibility testing is wonky or whatever.

Anyways, still can't get stable 90fps apart from a couple limited circumstances. Graphics really do look great when they work and the dynamic lighting and weather gives immersion that I wasn't expecting. Just want stable frame without pop-in please :)

gs2004
24-09-2017, 17:42
Made a video capture of lap at Bannochbrae:

https://youtu.be/xHqdq-uCHkw

daz1976
24-09-2017, 17:49
I know how you feel gs2004. I've enjoyed what I've played and it's mighty frustrating when there's the potential for awesomeness marred by something like this. Especially when you know others are blasting round tracks and posting on here with how smooth it runs on their system and your system is the same or more powerful. I know it's been driving me crazy and is why I've decided to put the game on the shelf for a while and see what happens as I'm fed up wasting my hours tweaking it to absolutely no effect.

Daz

Guybrush Threepwood
24-09-2017, 18:30
I'm struggling with this also. I'm on an i7 6700k @4.6ghz, 16gb ddr4 3000 and an EVGA 1080Ti SC2 and Rift. If I add any sort of SS it kills my frame rate, I can get a steady 90 fps with max settings when I'm alone on track, add cars, or rain, or both and it struggles. If I turn all the settings down, and add some SS, ASW kicks in again, and becomes less than ideal.

In comparison, I can max out Assetto Corsa with 1.8 pixel density, and it's buttery smooth, same with Elite Dangerous, which I can get up to 2.0, DCS world also runs really well, and that's crap at VR.

proxzor
24-09-2017, 18:43
Forgot to say - am using the -skipcrowds option.

what does this option do?

GTsimms
24-09-2017, 18:48
I am running on a 1070, 1.1, text high, 16x, low/off everything, car/track med, player only, and rays/dirt/Vin/bloom off. I can go in more detail later, if needed!

Edit -skipcrowds -pthreads4 -notriplescreen

Gloomy
24-09-2017, 20:29
I did a complete reinstall stall after deleting everything.
Vr looks great now without all the previous performance issues, racing in a thunderstorm with that lightning looked awesome. Something was bugged for me the first time around, I reinstalled it once before and it didn't help but this time I deleted everything.

One thing I'm not sure if it's worth mentioning, the first time I opened the game I used steam vr, I didn't know there was an option to select oculus, after that I always selected the oculus option, I'm wondering if because I did it from steam vr the first time it messed something up. Maybe not, but thought it worth mentioning.

I'm running a gtx 1070 with an I5 6600k @4.2. So you guys with a gtx 1080ti should definitely be able to get it looking good.

daz1976
25-09-2017, 07:12
I did a complete reinstall stall after deleting everything.
Vr looks great now without all the previous performance issues, racing in a thunderstorm with that lightning looked awesome. Something was bugged for me the first time around, I reinstalled it once before and it didn't help but this time I deleted everything.

One thing I'm not sure if it's worth mentioning, the first time I opened the game I used steam vr, I didn't know there was an option to select oculus, after that I always selected the oculus option, I'm wondering if because I did it from steam vr the first time it messed something up. Maybe not, but thought it worth mentioning.

I'm running a gtx 1070 with an I5 6600k @4.2. So you guys with a gtx 1080ti should definitely be able to get it looking good.

I really think you may have hit on something as I experienced a smooth framerate when I re-installed too and after changing a few settings it all went to pot, and I did go in and change them on the non vr link at first until I realized that they held separate settings in each.

Daz

gs2004
25-09-2017, 17:11
Fixed 90% of the pop-in issues. :D

I had set my FOV manually in-game to 120. When I change this to 80 (for all cams), the trees and other stuff stop popping in. When driving Bannochbrae, only the railing mounts pop-in. Checking now for frame rate issues.

gs2004
25-09-2017, 17:12
I am running on a 1070, 1.1, text high, 16x, low/off everything, car/track med, player only, and rays/dirt/Vin/bloom off. I can go in more detail later, if needed!

Edit -skipcrowds -pthreads4 -notriplescreen

I have removed all the startup options FYI.

gs2004
25-09-2017, 17:44
I know how you feel gs2004. I've enjoyed what I've played and it's mighty frustrating when there's the potential for awesomeness marred by something like this. Especially when you know others are blasting round tracks and posting on here with how smooth it runs on their system and your system is the same or more powerful. I know it's been driving me crazy and is why I've decided to put the game on the shelf for a while and see what happens as I'm fed up wasting my hours tweaking it to absolutely no effect.

Daz

I gave it another go to try and get 90FPS. I can get it to vary around 80-90 if I switch everything+dog to Low with SS1.0. If I add anything else, all it does is vary more dramatically. I don't have more time to experiment really. Needs to get fixed - will definitely come back if that happens.

TOCA2FREAK
25-09-2017, 18:36
I too am getting frames fixed at 45fps. I have i5 6600k, Nvidia 1080ti, 16gb ram and game running off SSD. I have SS at 1.0 and have everything in game set to the lowest settings and still only getting 45fps. I am using the Oculus Rift CV1 all updated with updated gfx drivers. I do not have ASW forced on.

When playing RF2 or AC in VR I have no issues and is smooth even with SS at 1.5. I too will be giving PC2 a miss in VR until these issues are fixed. :(

daz1976
26-09-2017, 11:02
I gave it another go to try and get 90FPS. I can get it to vary around 80-90 if I switch everything+dog to Low with SS1.0. If I add anything else, all it does is vary more dramatically. I don't have more time to experiment really. Needs to get fixed - will definitely come back if that happens.

That's pretty much my scenario to a tee. Everything on low it fluctuates between 80-90 but if I start upping anything then the drops are massive. It's like the it's demanding more than it should for the settings. Must admit I haven't been on it since Sunday as I got too annoyed with it and I'm just waiting for a bit of news now with any patches or acknowledgement from SMS that they have found something and are correcting it.

Daz

Tummie555
26-09-2017, 14:24
So like everyone else i too had issues, gtx1080 gaming z and i6600K liquid cooled at 4.5. AC runs perfectly at 90fps

Anyway, I was trying to get the 90fps in pcars2, but most settings had to be on LOW to get this and still suffered from inconsistency. Besides if was to approach the limit of the headroom I experienced some stutters while cornering (ihave seen the tips regarding this issue).

BUT!!! When I tried "force enable ASW, locked 45fps" (oculus debug tool), all the stutters were gone. Besides, I could bump the settings up crazy high without diving below performance headroom. Running SS at 2.0, AA at medium/high, PP ON. All other settings could go up as well. (Except particle, reflection stuff, and shadow).

Offcourse you can set settings higher when going for stable 45 fps compared to 90fps, but difference is too big to be explained. In fact, the the game looks so much better now, so much smoother that I'm convinced it was meant to be played with Asynchonous Spacewarp On.

m00lean
26-09-2017, 14:31
I just came across this thread and I'm am bit confused. I'm running an i5 4960 as well with a GTX 1080 and I don't have any issues with my Vive. Textures on high, bloom, blur and light rays disabled (irritates me anyway) and everything else on medium expect shadows - those are on low. I use 2.0 SS in the Steam developer options and I'm on 90 fps most of the time.

VR works perfectly in PCars2 for me.

isniedood
26-09-2017, 14:34
I just came across this thread and I'm am bit confused. I'm running an i5 4960 as well with a GTX 1080 and I don't have any issues with my Vive. Textures on high, bloom, blur and light rays disabled (irritates me anyway) and everything else on medium expect shadows - those are on low. I use 2.0 SS in the Steam developer options and I'm on 90 fps most of the time.

VR works perfectly in PCars2 for me.

I honestly do not believe you have 90 fps all the time with SS on 2.0. That is pretty impossible. How did you check your framerate?

m00lean
26-09-2017, 14:36
I kept the compositor statistics logging it for a while. On very few occasions the fps drop a bit below 90 - especially with a full grid of cars, and the frame replay kicks in. But ingame I don't see any noticable lags.

Guybrush Threepwood
26-09-2017, 16:33
After endless fiddling, and not getting the best performance while using any of the in game SS setting. I instead tried the debug tool pixel density, have most setting on high, shadows are at medium, grass is also medium, and track detail at ultra, and the debug tool at 1.5, and it looks much better, the ingame SS didn't seem to do anything apart from kill my framerate.

Just ran a gt3 race at brands hatch, and got a mostly solid 90fps, with a full 30 cars on screen. ASW does kick in on certain corners, but only a couple of time around a lap.

Rain ASW seems to be on all the time, but its pretty smooth

I'm on an Evga 1080ti SC2, i7 6700k and 16gb ddr4 3000.

daz1976
26-09-2017, 16:45
I just came across this thread and I'm am bit confused. I'm running an i5 4960 as well with a GTX 1080 and I don't have any issues with my Vive. Textures on high, bloom, blur and light rays disabled (irritates me anyway) and everything else on medium expect shadows - those are on low. I use 2.0 SS in the Steam developer options and I'm on 90 fps most of the time.

VR works perfectly in PCars2 for me.

Exactly. This is why we're all so annoyed because many people have great performance and others dreadful for no apparent reason and no matter what we do we get no improvement.

Daz

crowhop
26-09-2017, 16:49
After endless fiddling, and not getting the best performance while using any of the in game SS setting. I instead tried the debug tool pixel density, have most setting on high, shadows are at medium, grass is also medium, and track detail at ultra, and the debug tool at 1.5, and it looks much better, the ingame SS didn't seem to do anything apart from kill my framerate. Debug tool sharpens it up nicely, I can now see further than 50m down the track.

Just ran a gt3 race at brands hatch, and got a solid 90fps, with a full 30 cars on screen. ASW does kick in on certain corners, but only a couple of time around a lap.

Rain ASW seems to be on all the time, but its pretty smooth

I'm on an Evga 1080ti and i7 6700k and 16gb ddr4 3000.
Initially I had issues with a lot of pop-in, but since I turned MSAA down to Medium from High, this thing works wonderfully at SS 1.4 with a mix of LOW/MEDIUM Settings, regardless of the conditions. No idea why my FPS is or if I am leaning on the ASW or not, but for me it looks and plays great.

But I am going to give the Debug Tool a try just to see if I can even improve from there. Thanks for the tip.

gs2004
26-09-2017, 17:57
Another experiment - deleted all the.xml files

Set Vsync to Adaptive in nVidia Control Panel

Then used the debug tool for SS 1.8, 2.0, 1.5 and 1.2

I have smooth graphics with basically 90fpson low settings and SS is applied as would expect.

Got cocky and then tried to up my settings in-game from Low. I have a working game, and putting the PP stuff on doesn't matter much to FPS at all.

Killer is shadow detail and setting some things to high. But it was much better than TOUCHING the SS in-game.

Guybrush Threepwood
26-09-2017, 18:54
Yup, it seems the ingame SS is the problem. I've managed to up a couple more settings to ultra and still maintain mostly 90fps now, kept the pixel density to 1.5. I'm going to actually enjoy playing the damn game for a while before fiddling anymore

mattan
26-09-2017, 19:17
Exactly. This is why we're all so annoyed because many people have great performance and others dreadful for no apparent reason and no matter what we do we get no improvement.

Daz

Yes, strange! I Can run with high settings, but if i use Ss in game or oculus tool. 45 Fps/Hz and studder.
Tried to delete the project cars 2 folder, xmls etc. No gain in performance.
Hope for a Patch from SMS to fix all this VR problems.
With performance like this and GTX 1080Ti, there must be something wrong!

crowhop
26-09-2017, 19:25
Exactly. This is why we're all so annoyed because many people have great performance and others dreadful for no apparent reason and no matter what we do we get no improvement.

Daz
The difficulty is there are so many various settings, options, and hardware combinations it would be nearly impossible to even create a control group for proper testing.

I am having a great VR experience with my 4790k and 1080ti and CV1. I have a couple of settings changed in the Nvidia software, primarily V-Sync is OFF. I do not use Steam VR at all. I launch the game through Steam and click the Oculus Rift option.

mattan
26-09-2017, 19:31
The difficulty is there are so many various settings, options, and hardware combinations it would be nearly impossible to even create a control group for proper testing.

I am having a great VR experience with my 4790k and 1080ti and CV1. I have a couple of settings changed in the Nvidia software, primarily V-Sync is OFF. I do not use Steam VR at all. I launch the game through Steam and click the Oculus Rift option.

Can you please post all your settings (in game and nvidia)

crowhop
26-09-2017, 20:17
Can you please post all your settings (in game and nvidia)
Will be glad to post the complete settings as soon as I get home. Should be in a couple of hours at the latest.

I know that when I first got the game and configured the Settings, I used MSAA on HIGH. This was a disaster. Dropping it down to MEDIUM made a huge difference for me with no other changes. Instantly made the game look and feel quite good in VR.

Also, in addition to not using Steam VR at all, I do not use Oculus Tray Tool or Oculus Debug Tool. The only Supersampling I am getting is straight from the game. If you run Supersampling in SteamVR and then run SS through the game options, I can only imagine the problems you are likely to run into.



EDIT:

Here are my Settings:

PC Settings

CPU 4790K OC to 4.5
1080ti
16gb RAM

https://i.imgur.com/cwA4gOv.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/hK32gNn.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/RI2sypG.jpg

To start Project CARS 2:
Open Steam > Library > Project CARS 2 > PLAY > Launch Project CARS 2 in Oculus VR Mode
https://i.imgur.com/COKOIML.jpg

Game Settings:
https://i.imgur.com/bB5QP1M.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/uKnbf36.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/2G0euLH.jpg

Qwaszx
27-09-2017, 06:44
Great info here guys, hope I can base my settings on this.
I have a 7700K with 1080gtx.

Thanks again.

crowhop
27-09-2017, 16:27
Update on my post above...

Last night I tried out Oculus Debug Tool. Using the same settings as listed, I set the SS in Debug to 1.4 and turned the SS in the game to 1.0. There was no difference in performance from one to the other. SS 1.4 in game was the same as SS 1.4 in the tool.

Boskapongen
27-09-2017, 16:36
Update on my post above...

Last night I tried out Oculus Debug Tool. Using the same settings as listed, I set the SS in Debug to 1.4 and turned the SS in the game to 1.0. There was no difference in performance from one to the other. SS 1.4 in game was the same as SS 1.4 in the tool.

As I understand the tool was made for older or games without in-game SS option. More and more games have SS built in now (in-game or .ini file).

geubes
27-09-2017, 19:12
I have a i5 6600k at stock 3.5ghz
GTX 1080ti
Oculus Rift

I was struggling with graphics performance, non VR I can max everything on Ultra at 1080p, VR no chance.

One thing I did just try and so far seems absolutely buttery smooth, is to open the Geforce Experience and make it Optimise the options (note a Nvidia specific AA multi-sampling).

screenshot example: i.imgur.com/hiX9SiC.png - sorry I dont have enough posts to make that image link useful

Looks great as well!

mattan
27-09-2017, 20:03
Will be glad to post the complete settings as soon as I get home. Should be in a couple of hours at the latest.

I know that when I first got the game and configured the Settings, I used MSAA on HIGH. This was a disaster. Dropping it down to MEDIUM made a huge difference for me with no other changes. Instantly made the game look and feel quite good in VR.

Also, in addition to not using Steam VR at all, I do not use Oculus Tray Tool or Oculus Debug Tool. The only Supersampling I am getting is straight from the game. If you run Supersampling in SteamVR and then run SS through the game options, I can only imagine the problems you are likely to run into.



EDIT:

Here are my Settings:

PC Settings

CPU 4790K OC to 4.5
1080ti
16gb RAM

https://i.imgur.com/cwA4gOv.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/hK32gNn.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/RI2sypG.jpg

To start Project CARS 2:
Open Steam > Library > Project CARS 2 > PLAY > Launch Project CARS 2 in Oculus VR Mode
https://i.imgur.com/COKOIML.jpg

Game Settings:
https://i.imgur.com/bB5QP1M.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/uKnbf36.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/2G0euLH.jpg

Thanks!!!! With MSAA Medium and SS 1.2-1.4 i have quite good Visuals and FPS.

crowhop
27-09-2017, 20:26
Thanks!!!! With MSAA Medium and SS 1.2-1.4 i have quite good Visuals and FPS.
I think it is a great balance. I've considered moving MSAA down to LOW and bumping the SS to 1.5 just to see if there is any improvement.
I know SS at 1.5 drops me down into ASW quite often with everything else as it is. I never dip into ASW at 1.4. Truly, never.

Honest question...can anyone truly tell the difference between locked 90fps and locked ASW 45fps? I really can't. I've heard some say you lose sense of speed, but that is even hard for me to discern.

daz1976
28-09-2017, 10:25
I have a i5 6600k at stock 3.5ghz
GTX 1080ti
Oculus Rift

I was struggling with graphics performance, non VR I can max everything on Ultra at 1080p, VR no chance.

One thing I did just try and so far seems absolutely buttery smooth, is to open the Geforce Experience and make it Optimise the options (note a Nvidia specific AA multi-sampling).

screenshot example: i.imgur.com/hiX9SiC.png - sorry I dont have enough posts to make that image link useful

Looks great as well!

Could you tell me how you got the Geforce Experience to see PC2 VR and not just the PC2 version?

Cheers

Daz

Flashgod
28-09-2017, 11:03
My conclusion is, you can't get the game running on steady 90fps in VR on all tracks. All talk about ultra settings and high super sampling is about Oculus's and Steam VR's optimization methods (fallback to 45fps). I tried everything on my 1080ti, lowest or ultra, i never get consistent 90fps even on super sampling 1.0.

check my post here:
http://forum.projectcarsgame.com/showthread.php?52521-KNOWN-ISSUE-Very-poor-graphics-with-htc-VIVE-on-project-cars-2&p=1372762&viewfull=1#post1372762

Morgan Henstridge
28-09-2017, 11:04
Bring on Volta :)

Flashgod
28-09-2017, 11:08
Ha, no. Please start to get the best out of current hardware, it's all there.

Eddy555
28-09-2017, 11:32
Anyone had any luck with SLi/Multi GPU?

CiccioFritz
28-09-2017, 13:06
My conclusion is, you can't get the game running on steady 90fps in VR on all tracks. All talk about ultra settings and high super sampling is about Oculus's and Steam VR's optimization methods (fallback to 45fps). I tried everything on my 1080ti, lowest or ultra, i never get consistent 90fps even on super sampling 1.0.

check my post here:
http://forum.projectcarsgame.com/showthread.php?52521-KNOWN-ISSUE-Very-poor-graphics-with-htc-VIVE-on-project-cars-2&p=1372762&viewfull=1#post1372762

Correct, same situation on Rift (and a strix OC 1080ti) and same test and results. The only solution, at the moment, is use AWS (the reprojection version rift-side) always on. I can use everything maxed out and a SS of 1.5 (but not with night and storm), with solid 45fps. For 90fps, SS 1.2 and everythink medium and low....

Fight-Test
28-09-2017, 13:47
Guys, I'm having a little different issue. I ran my oculus tray tool last night and I'm getting steady 90 fps everywhere but the start. With pretty decent settings. Just can't go above 1.2. Where I'm having issue is headroom. I never drop from 90 fps but I he 5 to 10% headroom now. I haven't check it since before oculus patch so not sure if something changed.

Any thoughts? 1080 and i7700. I do a flicker from time to time in a corner but pc isn't running hot or anything. I did a reinstall before I left this morning to just see if that helps but haven't seen snyone report this exactly. Any help appreciated.

Johngrim
28-09-2017, 14:07
I think alot of people are trying to run grafics too high ,especially supersampling which has a big performance hit.Turn things down and get some performance it's alot more enjoyable.with ss of 1.3 low msaa and everything else on low plus post processing off gives a solid 90fps on i5 6600k and gtx1070

CiccioFritz
28-09-2017, 14:59
I think alot of people are trying to run grafics too high ,especially supersampling which has a big performance hit.Turn things down and get some performance it's alot more enjoyable.with ss of 1.3 low msaa and everything else on low plus post processing off gives a solid 90fps on i5 6600k and gtx1070

But don't you think that with your hardware (and i see a lot of people with strong hardware here with VR problems) maybe someone could expect a little more possibility? I mean, in my case (and flashgod) with a 1080ti we can't set every parameter at "medium" (not high, or ultra, simply medium)...

With my CPU (i5 6XXX at 4,4ghz) i never hit 100% with CPU, but i hit 100% with GPU.

Johngrim
28-09-2017, 15:19
I agree we should be able to up the grafics a bit more but the fact is at the moment we can't. What I'm saying is don't complain about not hitting 90 if at first you have not lowered grafics settings.

CiccioFritz
28-09-2017, 15:31
I agree we should be able to up the grafics a bit more but the fact is at the moment we can't. What I'm saying is don't complain about not hitting 90 if at first you have not lowered grafics settings.

By my side, i changed my GPU exactly for PC2 (from 1070 to 1080ti), to obtain the best from PC2. So, at the moment, i'm a bit disappointed about the low performarce of the game in VR Mode (with monitor, i play 2k@144hz everything maxed out) . As i said, i use AWS and everything is good, but race with AWS is, in my opinion, a workaround.

beetes_juice
28-09-2017, 16:12
Think you guys are setting your marks high with 1080TI's and Ultra everything for VR. Have my settings nailed down with anywhere from high to low - only things I have set to high are car detail and track detail. No live grass and low particle effects. ASW here and there (starts) but that is expected. Took a while to nail down these settings (big help from a few WMD members) but overall don't have gripes with the VR performance in game - really the best VR experience I've had so far is with this game. Yeah I can max my settings out in AC for VR but that game also looks like a cardboard cut out box.

Its a massive task to run any game in VR and IMO current GPU's still are not powerful enough to max everything in VR. Throw in a cutting edge game with massive amounts of variables for each race - going to have to make some eye candy sacrifices. Anyway, play with settings and find a middle ground. I'm going to upload a video of my VR settings from development. (1080TI - 6700K)

CoolSpy
28-09-2017, 16:26
iRacing or Assetto Corsa are much more pleasing to the eye in VR and the performance are nothing alike! I can play at SS 3x with all maxed out in Assetto (except post processing) and I never drop under 90 fps and the sharpness is not comparable at all. Really, PC2 devs have alot of work to make it VR friendly, this is terrible :(

ecstaticbrick
28-09-2017, 19:23
beetes_juice, Would you mind sharing your settings. I am having a nightmare of a time getting a pleasing result. Everything I try has very little effect.

It's just a blurry mess, items at track side in in the distance become painful to look at. This is the only game I have had issues with that SS has not sorted out.

geubes
28-09-2017, 20:53
Could you tell me how you got the Geforce Experience to see PC2 VR and not just the PC2 version?

Cheers

Daz

I didn't do anything special, just loaded the game in VR, closed it, then run the Geforce Experience after. It then changed the settings to what Geforce set (confirmed by checking the pre-rendered frames getting bumped to 4). Though I haven't tried the game non-VR yet to see if that breaks the settings again.

Stocky
28-09-2017, 20:58
It's the trees that effect me most on tracks. I can run a solid 90 fps at 1.4 SS & med MSAA, but the more trees nearby on the track, the more FPS drop. I now run at 1.2 SS, to have the extra headroom for trees. I use the Oculus CV1.

Flashgod
29-09-2017, 08:14
Think you guys are setting your marks high with 1080TI's and Ultra everything for VR. Have my settings nailed down with anywhere from high to low - only things I have set to high are car detail and track detail. No live grass and low particle effects. ASW here and there (starts) but that is expected. Took a while to nail down these settings (big help from a few WMD members) but overall don't have gripes with the VR performance in game - really the best VR experience I've had so far is with this game. Yeah I can max my settings out in AC for VR but that game also looks like a cardboard cut out box.

Its a massive task to run any game in VR and IMO current GPU's still are not powerful enough to max everything in VR. Throw in a cutting edge game with massive amounts of variables for each race - going to have to make some eye candy sacrifices. Anyway, play with settings and find a middle ground. I'm going to upload a video of my VR settings from development. (1080TI - 6700K)

Not true, smart solutions are already provided:

check this: https://youtu.be/nlbNmts3iek?t=162

https://developer.nvidia.com/vrworks/graphics/lensmatchedshading
https://developer.nvidia.com/vrworks/graphics/multiresshading
https://developer.nvidia.com/vrworks/graphics/singlepassstereo

PCars2 right now is doing the brute force method, it just renders 2 complete frames for both eyes which is a total waste of gpu performance. Over one third of a frame can't be seen in a headset and it's still rendered. With these optimizations it could gain performance around 20-30% and we would be able to run at much higher SS settings to counter the low resolution of todays headsets.

donaldbond
29-09-2017, 11:37
done all the possible tests, trying to have 90 fps stable is impossible, i prefer to have 45 fps but have a great graphics. below are my settings, on the Adaptive Syncrver nvidia panel.
241267241265

Sorry, can anyone put you straight? I can not

Thanks @kofotsjanne

kofotsjanne
29-09-2017, 11:59
Sorry, can anyone put you straight? I can not
http://i67.tinypic.com/rsuf6t.png
http://i67.tinypic.com/1tkhf5.png

Flashgod
29-09-2017, 13:04
here are my settings, the SS setting is still not working ingame so i use Steam VR's instead (at 1.3). I also don't use AA because SS (sharpness) has a higher priority to me.

241276

beetes_juice
29-09-2017, 19:55
Not true, smart solutions are already provided:

check this: https://youtu.be/nlbNmts3iek?t=162

https://developer.nvidia.com/vrworks/graphics/lensmatchedshading
https://developer.nvidia.com/vrworks/graphics/multiresshading
https://developer.nvidia.com/vrworks/graphics/singlepassstereo

PCars2 right now is doing the brute force method, it just renders 2 complete frames for both eyes which is a total waste of gpu performance. Over one third of a frame can't be seen in a headset and it's still rendered. With these optimizations it could gain performance around 20-30% and we would be able to run at much higher SS settings to counter the low resolution of todays headsets.

Cards (hardware in general) are not there yet to be maxing out graphics settings in a bleeding edge simulator rendered in VR when frames need to be hit every (what is it?) 11ms. $1,000 card or not, we are not there yet. If we were, would we need ASW or SS settings? Both scapegoats to hardware limitations. Been watching the game developed for 2 or so years now. Putting my trust in SMS that they weighed all options for VR performance/optimization within said budget and time constraints. One thing I do not question about SMS is the dedication to VR. If you really do feel they are missing massive performance I highly recommend signing up for WMD3 (if there is one) and knocking heads with a few of the VR gurus over there.

90 fps is not some unreachable goal. You guys need to be nailing down settings prior to ramping up SS. Hit 90 FPS with SS @ 1.0 and work your way up from there. Crap shoot otherwise.

Not directed at you, the "buttttt I can max AC and run SS at 1,000 x" is not a comparable benchmark. This should be expected - AC is dated (+4 years) and has much less going on under the hood and graphically.

Lawndarts
29-09-2017, 20:05
Read first post, skipped here to the end to share that low (default) settings seem look better if you up super sampling in game (I run 1.4) Something about upping detail enhances the screendoor effect and seem to reduce ambient light a lot, like your looking out a tinted lense.

Give it a shot, don't get hung up on high vs low and run a couple laps.

Flashgod
29-09-2017, 20:38
@beetes_juice

Strange thing is, nailing down settings doesn't make a big difference.

However, there is no info why SMS decided not to implement Nvidia VRworks, an official explanation would be interesting. This stuff surely delivers better performance, just rendering 2 separate full frames on an AAA title intended for VR is tech from early 2016... There are so many 10XX VR users here, i hope we get some answers.

tennenbaum
29-09-2017, 20:58
here are my settings, the SS setting is still not working ingame so i use Steam VR's instead (at 1.3). I also don't use AA because SS (sharpness) has a higher priority to me.

241276

SS works ingame, as long as you don't overwrite it with another tool.

Flashgod
29-09-2017, 21:50
Nope, just tested it. For HTC Vive it's not working, setting has no effect.

ecstaticbrick
29-09-2017, 22:39
However, there is no info why SMS decided not to implement Nvidia VRworks, an official explanation would be interesting. This stuff surely delivers better performance, just rendering 2 separate full frames on an AAA title intended for VR is tech from early 2016... There are so many 10XX VR users here, i hope we get some answers.

Could it be added at a later point or is it too late to add to the game engine?

sherpa25
30-09-2017, 00:01
Cards (hardware in general) are not there yet to be maxing out graphics settings in a bleeding edge simulator rendered in VR when frames need to be hit every (what is it?) 11ms. $1,000 card or not, we are not there yet. If we were, would we need ASW or SS settings? Both scapegoats to hardware limitations. Been watching the game developed for 2 or so years now. Putting my trust in SMS that they weighed all options for VR performance/optimization within said budget and time constraints. One thing I do not question about SMS is the dedication to VR. If you really do feel they are missing massive performance I highly recommend signing up for WMD3 (if there is one) and knocking heads with a few of the VR gurus over there.

90 fps is not some unreachable goal. You guys need to be nailing down settings prior to ramping up SS. Hit 90 FPS with SS @ 1.0 and work your way up from there. Crap shoot otherwise.

Not directed at you, the "buttttt I can max AC and run SS at 1,000 x" is not a comparable benchmark. This should be expected - AC is dated (+4 years) and has much less going on under the hood and graphically.

Could be, but no matter the technology (age or kind) applied, it's still in the result, no matter 'what's going on under the hood'. In my case, AC with basic PP (just for brake lights) just looks so much better. I've been going back and forth for days, trying different settings and just can't get PC2 to look as good. Maybe because of the gBW PP in AC, but even w/ default PP, it still looks better (OTOH, rF2 doesn't look as good as well). Although quite fine when you're too engrossed with a race, it keeps coming back, as many would still look for quality graphics. However, you may also be right that PC2's applied technology is advanced, that even the current cards have to work at their peaks but still can't produce enough. :)

whip
03-10-2017, 15:47
this game was in no way built from the ground up for VR like they claimed

headlights or light sources in general are horribly optimised at night, day time performance is good but night time is really bad and blocky artifacts also come from headlight shadows

Aldo Zampatti
03-10-2017, 15:52
this game was in no way built from the ground up for VR like they claimed

headlights or light sources in general are horribly optimised at night, day time performance is good but night time is really bad and blocky artifacts also come from headlight shadows

I completely disagree on your statement.
Are there things to improve? YES! but your statement is far from correct. I'm not a VR user (now) but I've followed VR development since day one, so I can definitely relate on what SMS did from day 1

gs2004
03-10-2017, 16:15
There is an open door for SMS to implement VRWorks. Hope they take that opportunity and help make the most of the 10x0 hardware for their customers and get ahead of competitors.

ecstaticbrick
03-10-2017, 17:03
In my opinion, VR is the future of racing sims. The immersion is unbeatable!

Rodders
05-10-2017, 08:19
Running a 1080Ti along with a i5 4690K OC to 4.5GHz. To maintain a real 90 FPS in challenging conditions, some details have to go and even then really challenging conditions are seeing ASW kick in.

My GPU is breezing along while playing PCars2 at 20-30% utilisation and stacks of RAM left. Some monitoring shows that, roughly speaking, once the PCars 2 executable starts taking more than 60% CPU, ASW kicks in as it struggles to maintain 90FPS - it's clearly CPU bottlenecked. Wasn't PCars always harsh on the CPU?

daz1976
05-10-2017, 11:48
There's many opinions and statements on here of varying viewpoints but none of them change the fact that users of similar set ups are getting wildly inconsistent performance no matter what setting they run.

I honestly don't think this is an issue of the game being so incredibly demanding as is suggested, since there's too many people out there running it smooth on systems that are not power houses. It's actually something that's not working as it should and causing it to demand way more than it should for certain people. There's even quite wild inconsistencies for people running it in 2D. I just wish we could figure out what it was.

Daz

feher_90
05-10-2017, 14:10
There's many opinions and statements on here of varying viewpoints but none of them change the fact that users of similar set ups are getting wildly inconsistent performance no matter what setting they run.

I honestly don't think this is an issue of the game being so incredibly demanding as is suggested, since there's too many people out there running it smooth on systems that are not power houses. It's actually something that's not working as it should and causing it to demand way more than it should for certain people. There's even quite wild inconsistencies for people running it in 2D. I just wish we could figure out what it was.

Daz

we know if SMS knows the problem and will solve it with some patch?

Aldo Zampatti
05-10-2017, 15:39
Running a 1080Ti along with a i5 4690K OC to 4.5GHz. To maintain a real 90 FPS in challenging conditions, some details have to go and even then really challenging conditions are seeing ASW kick in.

My GPU is breezing along while playing PCars2 at 20-30% utilisation and stacks of RAM left. Some monitoring shows that, roughly speaking, once the PCars 2 executable starts taking more than 60% CPU, ASW kicks in as it struggles to maintain 90FPS - it's clearly CPU bottlenecked. Wasn't PCars always harsh on the CPU?

It is due to physics and dynamic conditions calculations.

gs2004
05-10-2017, 16:29
Here are my settings which give me close to 90 at all times, doesn't drop to ASW and go wobbly. Still get major pop-in on most tracks, i.e. bridges, etc.

241945

241946

241947

241948

241949

Qwaszx
05-10-2017, 16:34
I found a few nVidia control panel settings that impact performance quite a bit.
I am working on posting my VR guide here, so keep an eye for it.

Qwaszx
05-10-2017, 16:34
I found a few nVidia control panel settings that impact performance quite a bit.
I am working on posting my VR guide here, so keep an eye for it.

Aldo Zampatti
05-10-2017, 16:44
Here are my settings which give me close to 90 at all times, doesn't drop to ASW and go wobbly. Still get major pop-in on most tracks, i.e. bridges, etc.

241945

Lower your reflections to Med (or low) and EnvMap to LOW.
those two are very power hungry and it won't impact you as much while driving.

tennenbaum
05-10-2017, 19:54
Running a 1080Ti along with a i5 4690K OC to 4.5GHz. To maintain a real 90 FPS in challenging conditions, some details have to go and even then really challenging conditions are seeing ASW kick in.

My GPU is breezing along while playing PCars2 at 20-30% utilisation and stacks of RAM left. Some monitoring shows that, roughly speaking, once the PCars 2 executable starts taking more than 60% CPU, ASW kicks in as it struggles to maintain 90FPS - it's clearly CPU bottlenecked. Wasn't PCars always harsh on the CPU?

I also had the feeling that it's harsh on the CPU. Though turning of ASW gives the CPU some more breath.

daz1976
06-10-2017, 09:41
we know if SMS knows the problem and will solve it with some patch?

On another thread on here with a similar theme, Ian Bell noted "98% of the collated response we have is that pCARS2 looks (much) better in VR than 1, and it should as we know the effort we put in to make that so. So we must be looking at some edge case settings issue. We'll keep a close eye on this thread"

The worrying thing was his statement that from reports 99% of people were getting better VR performance than PC1 did worry me a little that the smaller percentage might just have to lump it. Time will tell. It's completely unplayable for me due to the frame skipping no matter what I do so it's shelved for now.

Daz

Rodders
06-10-2017, 13:23
It is due to physics and dynamic conditions calculations.

My point was more I think the game is very CPU bound. People with very beefy GPU's aren't seeing the gains they expect over someone with a lesser card due to this.