Graphics

I have a couple of questions regarding graphics it would be good to get opinions on.

Is there a trick to producing the stunning graphics in the trailer (the one with the sparks) which means we won't see that level of fidelity in real-time whilst playing the game regardless of machine spec. Some rendering process for instance?

Also would it be useful for Kunos to publish (on release) some reference graphic settings for the best possible image quality? I'm thinking of monitor output rather than VR as VR is very user preference/hardware dependent although any VR suggestions would be welcome. Also I'm referring to video control panel settings as I guess the in game settings answer is to 'max everything out'.

 

There is one video of Spa where Aris is driving ACC and you can see the cars in front of him "sparking around". Definitely no video post processing for the trailer this time (unlike that one AC trailer).

 

I guess predefined presets Low, Medium, High, Ultra would help.
Also something similar to what you can see in CM when clicking i button next to graphics setting. It explains what it is and impact on performance for different settings. Some additional info on whether it's CPU or GPU based would help to tune individual system, VR especially, even more.

 

Why do you think that would be the case? The only "trick" will be downsampling for a 1080p Youtube trailer, which basically everyone does. Everything else in terms of graphics seems plausible to me, they're good but not anything "next-gen". You can even see some rendering issues like the running shadows, some flickering LoDs and some reflections stuff (it's still WIP after all). If you don't want to believe the trailer check out the gameplay footage they put out.

 

I agree that this would be easy to do, also for VR. It is basically a simple table with maybe 5-7 relevant settings against minimum CPU, average CPU and top notch CPU on the one side and the same for GPUs. Minimum CPU combined with minimum GPU will turn out as minimum settings for most in order to get reasonable framerates with monitors or HMDs.

There is actually now way other than FPS to tell if your getting the best image quality possible. I personally run Vive, 1080ti@2.0 Ghz and 7700k@4,9Ghz and there are several possible setups that give me 90 FPS but I am still not sure if I get the best image quality.

Also, strange enough and also reported by others, the more I challenge the GPU the better the FPS to a certain extend. On low settings the GPU seems to be waiting for the CPU and reduces FPS, on high settings the GPU becomes the bottleneck (i.e. with PP filter, high settings and Supersampling high).

I would also like to know how Kunos people setup low, mid and highend PCs up for best visual quality and it should not be a big deal to post some suggestions.

Chris

 

this was an interesting vid to watch about bottlenecks between CPU and GPU which refers to your statement "the more I challenge the GPU the better the FPS to a certain extend. On low settings the GPU seems to be waiting for the CPU and reduces FPS, on high settings the GPU becomes the bottleneck"

 

There you go. Good video.

I can drive SS up until my 1080ti starts stuttering, but CPU utilization stays pretty much the same with a 7700k OC. I wasn't able to do the same with a standard 7700@4,2 as it bootlenecked the GPU right from the start due what the application is wanting it to do.

But when I keep SS low on my current machine (which is nothing but low resolution on a standard monitor), the CPU already gets pretty much utilized by number of opponents (race driving) with the GPU more or less rolling her thumbs.

Bottom line - and as the guy says - it has to do with your application. In Assetto Corsa or Project Cars I want to have a minimum of 15 opponents and still get 90 FPS regardless the SS setting. So you need a strong CPU to begin with. But then if you want to improve image quality it is all down to the GPU to render fast enough at higher resolutions in order to get 90 FPS.

If CPU and GPU don't match then there is not much you can do, the slower will set the limits in pretty much all 3D applications and in AC for sure.

 

We had discussion on that in VR thread. This article pretty much sums up the problem with AC and it's single rendering thread. https://medium.com/@toncijukic/draw-calls-in-a-nutshell-597330a85381
Hopefully UE4 can do multithreaded draw calls or we still get tanked by CPU single thread performance.

 

That is very interesting, thanks for sharing. Since I have become more aware of this issue I see other things happening in parallel: GPU calculates physics as she is the more powerful processor in my Computer and it is also advised to set it up like that on the Nvidia control panel. But anyway, I have tried both ways and the chances are much higher that I get FFB lagging or clipping with the CPU doing the math rather than the GPU.

Now being on the edge of my hardware really driving it to the max possible performance, I can literally feel slightest differences in the FFB details between first lap and first corners , continuing to improve the more the cars separate and then soon becoming perfect. The GPU is so busy in the beginning that the FFB calls seem to get slightly delayed, somewhat reduced or even given up on (i.e. shakes, rumbles), not even close to unacceptable (because then I would reduce the GPU toll) but the wheel and the shock are significantly more detailed and responsive as soon as I have reached 90 FPS constantly.

It doesn't need to be the case for everyone, but I do understand a lot better earlier comments and complaints on forums about FFB issues in VR because I would expect everyone coming from 4K trying to max out the VR image quality for more immersion. OC the GPU is another factor in this. If she is running on the absolute maximum possible and we optimize graphics and number of cars against it, then there is no headroom left for anything else. I can see that in short 1-2sec framedrops (2 or 3 frames, no big deal) when something on Steam or more potentially Windows happens in the background or maybe when Afterburner is stabilizing the voltage and what not...

Solution is simple: Max out everything for the default track, grid and required settings including SS and make it work at target FPS through overclocking but then reduce the GPU toll by 5-10% (i.e. reducing some of the SS or some of the GPU heavy graphic settings) to reserve some headroom.

 

Your GPU has nothing to do with physics in AC... lol. A GPU can do physics (very well) if the software is written to use it or Nvidia physics X is used by the software dev.

 

On the subject of graphics, this is cool:
https://thenextweb.com/creative/201...-off-new-lighting-features-for-unreal-engine/

And no, it won’t run on a mid range cpu with a 1050ti...

 

Here's an idea of the price.

Pricing
Quadro RTX 8000 with 48GB memory: $10,000 estimated street price
Quadro RTX 6000 with 24GB memory: $6,300 ESP
Quadro RTX 5000 with 16GB memory: $2,300 ESP

Availability
Quadro RTX GPUs will be available starting in the fourth quarter on nvidia.com

 

Hi Serge, my bad as my hypothesis sounds like a scientific fact which it isn't and it is also wrong. But let me explain: I don't know too much about the programming and the technical details and a quick research proves you right, AC does not seem use the nvidia physics engine. Ok. I deserved your LOL.

I am playing VR since April, so I am a late mover I guess. My subjective impressions are based on hours and hours of testing, lots of research and reading and observations as to how my system reacts to certain settings, not more and not less.

Because of your appreciated response, I have just tested the PhysX setting again and now I have to say I don't know why but here are the results for my reference race (Spa, 15 cars on the grid) at the settings in my signature:

PhysX tied to CPU: 77 FPS at the start of the race and never reaching 90 FPS through the first lap, in fact still stuttering throughout following laps close to 90.
PhysX tied to GPU: 86 FPS at the start of the race and already reaching 90 FPS on the straight towards Eau Rouge.

If it's true that PhysX are being calculated by the CPU either way (I don't doubt that), where else does this significant difference come from as I am only changing one particular setting? I am not trying to say I am right though a backdoor, I would just like to understand cause and effect as my observation is correct for whatever reason.

Your thoughts on this?

Thanks,
Chris

 

AC doesn't use PhysX, let alone GPU accerlated PhysX as far as I know.

 

Yes, we have been there already.