The ACC Benchmark Thread

Good results from the different RAM speeds.

Indeed, even some documentation states certain CPU handles some specific speeds (2400mhz, 2600mhz), it looks like speeds above the specs makes a difference on the results. I see a considerable difference from the 2400mhz my i3-8350k is suppose to use compared to the 3000mhz speed I currently have.

 

Yep. I ordered new RAM with 2400 but after finding out those huge differences I ordered 8 more GB of the 3600 RAM I already have. It seems that you can run RAM speeds way above spec without any issues.

 

https://www.assettocorsa.net/forum/...ze-on-acc-fps-performance.54456/#post-1018869

 

Do we expect framerates to improve at all as development continues? I keep turning my settings down to try to get a decent framerate, but it's still struggling, especially at night racing. I get fine frames in other games like PC2 or F12018. Obviously we're still in early access, im just wondering if performance is expected to improve noticeably? Otherwise I may need to look at new GPU

 

Unfortunately, so far in EA nothing changed. Maybe a miracle will happen when the game releases and it's gonna be optimized, but yea, performance is pretty bad at the moment, nothing you can do but wait, don't buy hardware because of one game that is not even close to optimized before it releases.

 

Thanks. I'm hoping they make significant progress here... I don't have the strongest PC out there, but it should be able to run reasonably smooth with an i5 / 970.

 

I'm pretty sure that the FPS will improve. Kunos will want to target a wide user base including mid-range PCs and AMD GPUs. Should it remain so that you need the best HW available to get decent FPS, this will surely hurt their sales.

Furthermore, given that many of the graphics settings don't do anything right now, I'm pretty sure there's still a lot of work to do. I just found out that even textures between low and epic makes 0 FPS difference (and I couldn't spot visual difference, either). So right now, if you run medium settings everywhere, chances are high that without knowing you actually run high and epic settings everywhere.

My findings so far:

Foliage: all the same from low to epic
PP: all the same from low to epic
Mirror quality: the same from low to high
Texture: all the same from low to epic

So you can imagine that when proper options for "high" will be added for foliage, PP and texture this should unleash quite a lot of FPS performance. Right now even if you set "low", you actually run "epic".

Feel free to check if what I write here is true - it's my findings from this benchmark.

 

Hi fellow racers/optimization enthusiasts

IMO 0.6 is a leap forwards regarding performance and visual quality. Given the various additional video options we have now, it seems unreasonable to try and match the settings prior to 0.6. However, I chose settings that look equal or better to what I had before, in a subjective way. I ended up with this (attention: frame limit was off for the test run):





The result is:

2019-03-04 22:20:37 - AC2-Win64-Shipping
Frames: 4063 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 67.717 - Min: 59 - Max: 81

This is ~10 FPS more than what I had before with settings that looked worse. Congratulations to Kunos for this good optimization job!

Edit: @pankykapus, @AC Support, @Minolin, @Lord Kunos

 

Thanks. So how to set Foliage LOD and to where it was before 0.6?

 

Ok, to my current best knowledge, this config is equal to what I had prior to 0.6. Actually, the basic settings are probably even higher now than what I had before - I remember turning view distance and Foliage to high instead of epic at some point. Now I set them back to Epic.

@pankykapus please check the Advanced settings - is this how the default was before 0.6?



And the result is really good:

2019-03-05 18:07:05 - AC2-Win64-Shipping
Frames: 4002 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 66.700 - Min: 56 - Max: 75 (delta 19)

For comparison purpose, here's the last result from before 0.6 on the 19th of January:

2019-01-10 14:27:51 - AC2-Win64-Shipping
Frames: 3609 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 60.150 - Min: 47 - Max: 88 (delta 41)

That's a FPS increase of roughly 11 % and also a significant improvement of FPS stability (look at the delta numbers between max and min).

So unless Panky tells me that my settings are all wrong, I would like to confirm the CPU-bound perfomance improvement. The image seems a lot more fluid now and also, the dry daytime visuals - at least at Monza - look very nice, crisp and atmospheric. I'm really happy with this update.

 

You said earlier that mirror res was hardcoded LOW. Please confirm correct version.

 

I can imagine and I don't envy you ;-) Hope you get some well-deserved rest soon.

Will update result ASAP.

 

Ok so I changed that and this is what I got:

2019-03-05 20:47:06 - AC2-Win64-Shipping
Frames: 3874 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 64.567 - Min: 54 - Max: 73

That would be a 7 % FPS improvement. However, I believe that I didn't run View Distance, Foliage and PP at Epic before...I think I ran it at high. Result looks like this:

2019-03-05 20:52:46 - AC2-Win64-Shipping
Frames: 4054 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 67.567 - Min: 56 - Max: 78

So IMO there's a FPS increase between 7 % and 10 % and also, the FPS are a lot more stable.

On top of that, by tweaking some of the additional settings, everyone can now gain more FPS without losing too much visual quality. I like it.

Now I'm interested in the other guys' results here.

 

i have a 6700k and a ryzen 2600 at home, i was wondering if ACC would take advantage of the extra cores on the ryzen or whether it wouldn't matter

thanks

 

2019-03-06 14:11:42 - AC2-Win64-Shipping
Frames: 3144 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 52.400 - Min: 46 - Max: 61

EDIT - specs in sig

 

Use 10 threads in my i7 5820k but i dont know if more cores will be faster

 

This is the thread that can deliver the answer:

https://www.assettocorsa.net/forum/index.php?threads/the-acc-cpu-benchmark-thread.53720/

You can browse the old results in the table in post 1 but you'll be better off waiting for fresh results given the recent CPU optimizations.