NoGripRacing.com

Go Back   NoGripRacing Forums > PC Racing > Slightly Mad Studios > SHIFT 2 Unleashed

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 16 April 11, 11:07   #1
lukilla
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Rate shift 2īs Pc performance

Poor, mediocre, good, or excellent...

Post your specs, game settings, screen size and general frame rates in a range:



Medium cars and tracks, low aa and low blur... everything else on max. @1280x1024

40-50fps daytime races, 16 cars.
25-40fps dusk autopolis-glendal/night races, 11 cars.

Q6600@3.5ghz/gtx260 675mhz.

Permormance seems really worst than average because generally this pc runs console ports solid 60fps on max or near max settings. So:

Mediocre
lukilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 April 11, 12:07   #2
smokinajayuk
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Default

Excellent
not having anyprobs bar the funny steering lol

in game i run all on high
i get 45 fps at start or race then its straight up to 60 fps

PC spec is
Windows 7 (32bit)
i5 CPU 750 @ 2.67GHz (4 CPUS), ~2.7GHz
Memory 4096MB RAM

Graffix
ATI 5800 series
2530MB
@1680x1050
smokinajayuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 April 11, 12:58   #3
lukilla
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default

Night races?, dusk race at autopolis or glendale full grid?


Btw.- 45-60fps on max settings day time doesnīt look great for that computer, used to get that on shift1 on a core 2 duo/9800gt max settings 4aa/16af

Last edited by lukilla; 16 April 11 at 13:15.
lukilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 April 11, 13:05   #4
Scorz
 
Scorz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: UK
Age: 35
Default

Excellent

1080P maxed in game

i7 920 @ 4GHz
GTX470 ( Overclocked )
6GB Dominator RAM
Asus Sabertooth

60fps day time races and 45ish start of certain night tracks then shoots upto 60fps once moving
Scorz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 April 11, 13:13   #5
lukilla
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default

sorry, double post...
lukilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 April 11, 14:02   #6
zaxxx
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Default

I7 Oc 3600
460gtx slightly oc
6 gb 1600 corsair
With 1680x1050 using NVinspector forcing AA i get constant 60 frames except in some places like Zolder when there are many trees and the framerate goes for a second to 55 and then back to 60 again.
AA in inspector 2x Multisampling and Transparency Multisampling
AA compatibility 0x004010C1 Clamp, High quality filtering, Vsync on.
All settings ingame max, 16x anisotropic, speed blur medium.
The forced multisampling AA is similar in quality with the normal ingame AA setting but i get almost 15 more frames.
zaxxx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 April 11, 14:38   #7
lukilla
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default

There are no night races at zolder, although night races are not the most demanding... dusk races at places like autopolis or glendal are the worst.
lukilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 April 11, 16:12   #8
Miths111
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Default

Pretty good.
35-50+ fps around 95% of the time, dips into the mid to high 20s at the start of some races.
1920x1200, vsync off, AA off, car and track details high, shadows low, rest medium.

Core 2 Quad Q9400, 8 GB RAM, Geforce GTX 260, Vista x64.

I should note that this might be the first game ever I've come across where a graphics card driver upgrade - from 260.89 to the official 266.58 (but that one gave me some desktop settings problems so I'm now running 270.51 instead) - has given me such an almost unbelievably massive framerate boost.
With the old driver the game was barely playable at ~20-35 fps - even if I lowered the resolution.
Miths111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 April 11, 16:26   #9
lukilla
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default

Stay away from drivers not provided by nvidia
lukilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 April 11, 16:29   #10
Kazumi
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Default

lukilla, the dusk races with lights are technically "night races", so...

basically you set in track files allow dusk for either day (normal) or night (with car/track lights and all).


edit: just seen your 2 earlier posts , sorry . line 2 still a good explanation imho
Kazumi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 April 11, 18:53   #11
helloworld
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Default

Disable in-game HUD completely!

This is not my discovery and sadly I can't recall who said it first, but doing so gave me insane boost (a good solid 15+ FPS). I don't think that overclocking graphics-card by 30MHz gave anything at all. Maybe 0.5 FPS.
For now I've overclocked it way further, but at the time when I was trying I only had like 30MHz OC, just starting and already I noticed incredible boost. I thought somethings wrong here...

One day before I quit game I remember that someone mentioned HUD. I disabled it and closed the game, not even giving it a bash, because I didn't expect any difference. For a day or two I didn't play a game and after reading around the forum, etc I wanted to try more. So, I started playing with OC and doing some initial temperature test to see if I can push anything at all.
I OCed first 30MHz with a benchmark tool, but then I thought this is not the right thing nor does it give me the correct temperature (it's a stress test and such conditions are generally not met in most games which means you can push the card much, much further). So, I booted up Shift, loaded a quick race (solo) and did a run to get initial framerate and temps. It was solid 50+ FPS (no HUD). Now that I was happy with it, I booted up another quick race, but a night one expecting a significant drop, but what I got was almost exactly the same result. Solid 50+ FPS. At this point I was a bit confused. Thinking that it's a solo race I went on to career and loaded up night race with full on 16 cars and guess what? Again, solid 45-50 FPS, the game was so smooth. I could feel the difference and see it in numbers.

It's possible that the rear-view mirror has some significant effect on performance when using the HUD. Nothing was changed on my computer turning those days and 30MHz OC didn't show any increase in framerate (benchmark). So, give it bash. Don't get overly excited, but just try it, you never know.

Also, framerate does seem to have a significant effect on handling and the way you perceive it. For some reason I won all races I did (about 5-6) with a huge lead on medium difficulty. Before that when running around 30-40 FPS it was very...difficult and I constantly battled for my position. Very weird...
helloworld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 April 11, 18:59   #12
_machine
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Default

Pretty stable 60fps with maxed with normal AA settings and 16AF at 1920x1080 regardless of the time of day so I'd say pretty good.

-HD5850 (11.3) w/ i920
_machine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 April 11, 19:45   #13
lukilla
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by _machine View Post
Pretty stable 60fps with maxed with normal AA settings and 16AF at 1920x1080 regardless of the time of day so I'd say pretty good.

-HD5850 (11.3) w/ i920
Post the clocks of your hardware please.
lukilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 April 11, 22:31   #14
McClusky
Donated
 
McClusky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: USA
Default

Poor
McClusky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 April 11, 23:46   #15
lukilla
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by helloworld View Post
Disable in-game HUD completely!
Zero improvement for me but thanks...
lukilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 April 11, 23:55   #16
bozont
 
bozont's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: mokrance, slovakia
Age: 34
Default

lol why do i had to start fraps lol . it looked so good till that moment... between 70-50 on some track falls to 25.

e8400 at 3GHz , ati 5770, 8Gb Ram , with a barely functional xp64 ( its 2 years old now, ready for a fresh instal )

1600x1200, no AA, no motion blur, no vert synch. textures on high everything else on medium.

tried to lower the resolution, no improvement.
bozont is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 April 11, 00:52   #17
Reef Budseed
 
Reef Budseed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Burlington, ON Canada
Default

Noticed a drop in FPS on the Miami circuits only (so far) must be the city scenes in background.

i7 OC'd @ 4.3
6GB RAM
GTX 480 running 1080p on 46" TV/Monitor
Reef Budseed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 April 11, 01:24   #18
1foggy
 
1foggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Central California
Default

GTX 295 Superclocked (Co-op/dual GPU)
6Gb RAM
i7 920 @ 4.3GHz

1920x1080
All in-game settings maxxed, except Blur (no blur)

nVidia control panel:
16x AF
2x AA
Supersampling
Pre-rendered frames - 0
Vsync Off

Average FPS on Suzuka with full field (the track that had given me worst performance) - 29fps (ranging from 24-33 fps during test)
1foggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 April 11, 06:16   #19
Shinzah
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Default

Kuma 7750 Black Edition @3.1ghz
G.Skill Eco, 4gb of it, @920mhz
EVGA Nvidia 9800GTX+ 512mb with onboard Geforce 8200 for Physx which doesn't seem to get used. is overclocked to 800/2200/1400
1080p, 16xAF, no AA, No pre rendered, no Vsync

Shadows Medium
Blur Low
Cars High
Tracks Low (Didn't notice hardly ANY difference from low to medium and very little difference still up to high.)
Reflections High


Get between 30-45fps with a very rare drop into the 25 range on race starts.
Shinzah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 April 11, 06:50   #20
helloworld
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lukilla View Post
Zero improvement for me but thanks...
I was afraid of this. This is so odd.

Funnily enough my GPU is almost never begin used 100% as I've monitored. Even at night races it often lingers around 74% while the FPS stays at 47-50. Occasionally there are also 1 second dips to 20 FPS. It's very random. They have no impact in game (such a sudden freeze), but I find it odd that it happens. I believe it has something to do with loading in new textures and stuff.
It's possible that due to low memory clock there's no data to work with and that's why GPU semi-idles. As it has been stated 512MB is kinda the minimal amount for smooth play. Or perhaps it's the capacity instead. For example, 512MB contains all of the data necessary for rendering the scene around you. However, if you'd have 1GB of memory it would render things that are further ahead thus using the "left-over" processing power.
If it is what I think it is then it has been programmed very cleverly and it means I may turn on higher settings. I wont gain nor lose anything. I'm merely tightening the "barrier" so that less is being rendered "ahead" thus forcing the GPU to do more work, more often.
I think that regardless of the amount of processing power you have, the actual use of it is being limited by the memory. If that's the case then it's very clever, because you can tweak the settings until you hit the zone where GPU usage averages around 90%. This leaves some room for play in more intense situations where that 10% might help to keep the FPS smooth. Think of it as a nitro. Extra boost just in case you need it.
Very interesting indeed...I need to do more testing.

Edit : Very intriguing. Monitoring CPU usage, it stays around 50%. Funnily enough, CPU usage dropped by 20% when turning on AA. However, GPU usage went up to 99-100% all the time. That is AA on normal. Without AA GPU averages around 70%. Considering the fact that FPS drops by about ~17 FPS means that AA eats up more than 30%.
If they will move AA over to CPU it will fix many problems!
Setting affinity to only two cores brings up the CPU usage to around 90%. With 16 cars, lots of collision, etc two cores may stay a bit weak, but generally three cores should be enough to run this game just fine. One core is pretty much free and can easily be used for AA.
No, wait, I could be wrong. The moment you turn the wheel CPU usage jumps by 30-50% or even more. Basically all the physics and stuff come into play. Funnily enough when just applying acceleration, going straight and not using the wheel, CPU averages around 40%, touch the wheel and it jumps to 70-85%. Fascinating stuff.

Edit 2 : More interesting stuff! I found the zone by lowering track detail to low and increasing shadows to high. This kept the GPU at ~98%. This is not exactly what I'd call ideal, but according to my discoveries I'm about to tell you now it's irrelevant anyway.
Well, it really does look as if the limit is caused by the capacity of the memory or the clock. What I found out that while driving solo is that I got solid 60 FPS with GPU usage averaging around 98%. I expected a chaos in an actual race. So, I booted up a race and what comes out is that GPU usage averages around 60-75%(!) while keeping the FPS around 30. CPU idles around 40%, lol.
Anyways, this tells me few things. Either it's the HDD (unlikely as I've monitored the usage and it's stable since most of the necessary stuff has already been loaded on the RAM), RAM (unlikely, because RAM usage stays stable turning the race) or the actual graphics card VRAM and/or memory clock speed. The limit is thus caused by the VRAM not being able to keep up the constant requests. Keep in mind that higher resolution shadow maps require more space which in turn leaves less space for textures and all the rest. So, what I'm going to now is concentrate on overclocking the VRAM only and see if there's any change whatsoever.
In theory this should help the game adjust faster to rapid changes thus providing more data to the GPU to work with, but if the process is heavily prioritized by programmers then nothing is being dumped until they're no longer needed. This means that overclocking won't do a thing or has very, very insignificant change. The only thing that would help in this case would be increasing VRAM (getting a new card).

This is obviously all just a theory...

Last edited by helloworld; 17 April 11 at 07:43.
helloworld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 April 11, 08:08   #21
_machine
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lukilla View Post
Post the clocks of your hardware please.
i920 is at stock 2.66 because I haven't got money for a new cooler and the temps already a bit too high for my taste but the 5850 is factory clocked at 760/1050 vs the reference 725/1000. My games and system are on different HDDs which might or might not have an effect on the loading times or performance.
_machine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 April 11, 08:44   #22
helloworld
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Default

So far 130MHz clock on memory and what I've noticed is that micro-stuttering at high FPS (60+) has been significantly reduced. High shadows absolutely decimate VRAM.

Edit : I got the data I was a looking for. After 200MHz clock I'm confident that regardless of the memory clock, the game will not load or use more data than the memory capacity allows even if that means idling GPU.
It's very possible that game adjusts according to available VRAM. So, it may for example use lower textures in places you probably won't even notice to save space.
I was able to recreate stuttering in some very heavy scenes with tons of shadows, but even then it was for the most part still smooth. Each and every track has probably been built specifically for different possibilities.

Let's compare it to a game that allows you to go way beyond your memory capacity. One of such games is Wings of Prey. There's a very high setting that when turned on notifies you that if you have less than 512MB it may get troublesome. You can ignore the message easily and play the game. Well, I've done a bit testing and indeed if you lower your memory clock enough, things start to stutter badly, but if you keep it at decent speed then rapid loading is not a problem thus there's no stuttering and the game looks great!
The very same thing could be done with GTA IV. However, GTA IV didn't let you go beyond your limit without altering the game. If you did modify a bit and forced higher settings, game become rather unplayable unless you were running high memory clocks. This removed glitches such as long texture loading times (driving on a really low-texture road, etc).

In this sense Shift 2 is very strict and doesn't seem to go beyond what buffer can hold. This is quite weird, because even if your FPS is low, it's smooth. It could be much higher, but you may get significant dips what causes annoying stuttering. I guess this is what they wanted to avoid.
So, if you have 512MB you need to deal with medium/high settings. If you have more you should be able to max all settings that use VRAM and get solid FPS.

I'm a bit disappointed by this, because I know if the game wouldn't be so strict I'd be able to set settings much higher, OC a little bit more and gain rock solid FPS without any problems.
At the moment I can't even think of any way to force the game behave differently, behave as if I'd have 1GB or more. A lot of this has probably been hard-coded into many parts of the game and changing anything at all is not possible. Oh well...

Last edited by helloworld; 17 April 11 at 09:57.
helloworld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 April 11, 09:38   #23
KingLeo
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Default

Good;

Intel 2600k @ 4.8ghz
2 EVGA 570's @800/1950 driver: 270.51
16gb cas8 corsair vengeance @ 1600
win7
all settings Maxed except for blur (low)
3 monitors (5930x1080)

Mid 30's most of the time with a high low of 45-29
KingLeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 April 11, 12:30   #24
logikwolf
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Default

i7 950 3,2ghz, 460 gtx sli, corsair dominator 3x2gb 1600
Shadows off, blur low, ingame AA off, forced with nvidiainspector, details and reflecions on high.

Game runs excellent at 1920x1080, 58-60fps during the day races. A little less during the night races.
logikwolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 April 11, 12:52   #25
craigstys
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Milwaukee, WI USA
Age: 53
Default EA creates software to upgrade hardware

This has been going on for over 10 years now and I'm onto it. I still have Superbike 2001 installed. The demo function on that game is such a CPU hog that I would go to PC shows and crush Alienware display rigs with it to watch a quiet salesman.

The "recommended" system requirements for this are a total joke:

300mhz Pentium 2 or higher
64mb RAM and a 16MB video gard or greater.
8X CD-ROM and Win XP/Win95-98/Me

No P3 or P4 could run it, not even the early Pent D dual cores. Finally took six years of CPU tech and a quantum leap in tech to a C2D at over 2.0 ghz to finally run it over at 60fps steady vsynched. and a 128mb graphics card or was needed for full detail as the demo used over 70mb vid memory on MSI Afterburner.

Every Madden PC release each year piled on shaders and shadows beyond the norm making you upgrade video cards. ATI TruForm anyone? Enjoy 6FPS.
And then they pulled the plug on Madden PC.

Shift does this again. Shift1 uses way too much GPU and requied a video card upgrade for all the shadows and reflections plied on. Overdone shadows wreck the track surface and look terrible. Post processing blur will eat frames from your CPU and it's everywhere.

Shift 2 does it again! You just got a new video card? They will make even more individual tree shadows on these bland, brown and lifeless tracks (Laguna Seca) and make sure they look like trees rendered on a Sega Genesis. We will plie on even more greasy reflections on vehicles so your new card will croak.

I dont think that it is "excellent" that you have a rig with a i7@3.2ghz, 2 460 cards in SLI and 6gb RAM and need to turn off shadows and turn down other details and still cant peg 60FPS vsynched in HD res. Your rig should murder this. This software design needs a 4.0ghz C2D or better, 2 560 SLI cards or better and 4GB RAM or more to do max detail in HD res at 60FPS vsynched. And a beefier PSU to handle all the hardware upgrades. A total joke.

Good news for the modders who saved Shift1, EA told you before you bought this that it was mod-friendly. But they locked you out.

There is no way this title should demand a GPU upgrade when looking and runniung worse than the first one. It was designed that way.


Extermely Poor. EA makes software designed to upgrade hardware.

Last edited by craigstys; 17 April 11 at 13:08.
craigstys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 April 11, 13:36   #26
doggod
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Default

I did some testing last night and to my surprise reducing the res and keeping every other setting the same reduces gpu usage but doesn't increase fps
rarely getting more than 80% gpu usage and rarely getting more than 75 % cpu overall usage with everything on max at 1900x1200

looking forward to seeing what this patch will do
CPU usage is never spread evenly across the 4 cores
doggod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 April 11, 13:42   #27
DurgeDriven
 
DurgeDriven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by logikwolf View Post
i7 950 3,2ghz, 460 gtx sli, corsair dominator 3x2gb 1600
Shadows off, blur low, ingame AA off, forced with nvidiainspector, details and reflecions on high.

Game runs excellent at 1920x1080, 58-60fps during the day races. A little less during the night races.

I get the same now with excellent visuals ( as good as anything) , no sparkly and better fps.

Wierd settings in Inspector 16x / 4x multisampling / 0x000010C1
In NVidia SLI 8x /Quality / Triple Buffer//Clamp//VSync

1920 all max blur off 16 cars

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
11920, 200000, 51, 62, 59.600

2500K@4.8GHz
GTX460 Sli@815/4000

If I try to set others sli / GTX460 / fast Processor settings I get lag and
sparkling bad visual quality
DurgeDriven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 April 11, 15:27   #28
Kazumi
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by craigstys View Post
Shift 2 does it again! You just got a new video card? They will make even more individual tree shadows on these bland, brown and lifeless tracks (Laguna Seca) and make sure they look like trees rendered on a Sega Genesis. We will plie on even more greasy reflections on vehicles so your new card will croak.
adjust your display? laguna seca is one of the tracks that look the most life-like (no idea about accuracy and some objects are not supposed to see in details like the sea in the middle of the track )

laguna seca isn't brown at all...


edit: the reflection details changing doesn't really change my fps compared to anything else so it seems kinda efficient.

Last edited by Kazumi; 17 April 11 at 19:31.
Kazumi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 April 11, 18:24   #29
BernL
 
BernL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ottawa
Default

Under windows xp, wouldn't run worth the beans....windows 7 upgrade and brought my system to 8 gigs (6 gig's would have probably been just fine) and voila, the game runs great, well good enough to have everything maxed,and get frame rates that i"m ok with

dual core 2 3.16 and ATI 5870 1 gig vid ram, 8 gig's memory on a P5Q-se motherboard

say a huge improvement with windows 7 (Ultimate)

I dont run V synk or whatever its called.....
BernL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 April 11, 00:34   #30
edubz123
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Chicago USA
Default

@BernL : amazing, please check your PM.

@craigstys : Yeah man. I hear ya. i7 guys with SLI setups cheering about 60fps in day races w/ basically all the real juice turned off, what a joke. I'd be super-pissed.

MEDIOCRE (where's that patch 1?)

Last edited by edubz123; 18 April 11 at 01:04.
edubz123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 April 11, 00:54   #31
craigstys
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Milwaukee, WI USA
Age: 53
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kazumi View Post
adjust your display? laguna seca is one of the tracks that look the most life-like (no idea about accuracy and some objects are not supposed to see in details like the sea in the middle of the track )

laguna seca isn't brown at all...


edit: the reflection details changing doesn't really change my fps compared to anything else so it seems kinda efficient.

I do have the no blng mod installed, I compared this to the Shift1 track with the Better Shift visuals mod.
craigstys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 April 11, 01:23   #32
edubz123
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Chicago USA
Default

FYI, here's the Laguna Seca from Shift1 unmodded (brown as hell I'd say especially going up Rahal Straight up to Corkscrew and all the way to front straight). IMO, Shift2 Laguna Seca is a step back from this.



Also FYI, "Laguna Seca" is Spanish for "Dry Lake" so it should be brown as hell! If it's not, then you should check your display.
edubz123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 April 11, 02:43   #33
DurgeDriven
 
DurgeDriven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default

It depends Laguna with a good watering can go from dusty desert brown to a green tinge of green, much like Bathurst in drought.






......not that I know what any of it has to do with personal PC performance.
DurgeDriven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 April 11, 03:58   #34
lukilla
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BernL View Post
Under windows xp, wouldn't run worth the beans....windows 7 upgrade and brought my system to 8 gigs (6 gig's would have probably been just fine) and voila, the game runs great, well good enough to have everything maxed,and get frame rates that i"m ok with

dual core 2 3.16 and ATI 5870 1 gig vid ram, 8 gig's memory on a P5Q-se motherboard

say a huge improvement with windows 7 (Ultimate)

I dont run V synk or whatever its called.....
Maybe it is an ati driver thing, on nvidia here it runs exactly the same wheter xp 32bit or seven 64bit.
lukilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 May 11, 19:48   #35
JIMP
 
JIMP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by craigstys View Post
I do have the no blng mod installed, I compared this to the Shift1 track with the Better Shift visuals mod.

Is there a no bling mod for shift2? Where can I find it? I used the search but it only pointed me back to this post.

Also, my my shift2 performance is poor. With all in game settings dropped to minimum, it's a slideshow even at 1024x768. ......


I'm not overly disappointed, though due to my pc specs.
Intel pentium4 socked 478 3.2Ghz
2 Gb ddr cas2
WindowsXP

Shift1 was workable and I was hoping Shift2 would be, but it looks like I might have to wait until I can afford a major upgrade
JIMP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 May 11, 19:52   #36
Griff
PC Lead
Slightly Mad Studios
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JIMP View Post
Is there a no bling mod for shift2? Where can I find it? I used the search but it only pointed me back to this post.

Also, my my shift2 performance is poor. With all in game settings dropped to minimum, it's a slideshow even at 1024x768. ......


I'm not overly disappointed, though due to my pc specs.
Intel pentium4 socked 478 3.2Ghz
2 Gb ddr cas2
WindowsXP

Shift1 was workable and I was hoping Shift2 would be, but it looks like I might have to wait until I can afford a major upgrade
>>Intel pentium4 socked 478 3.2Ghz

Below the min-spec...
Griff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 May 11, 19:55   #37
scca1981
 
scca1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Age: 33
Default

There's a nobling mod @ RaceDepartment. However, I don't think it will help you much as your specs are quite low and don't even meet the minimum.
scca1981 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 May 11, 19:58   #38
Kazumi
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by edubz123 View Post
FYI, here's the Laguna Seca from Shift1 unmodded (brown as hell I'd say especially going up Rahal Straight up to Corkscrew and all the way to front straight). IMO, Shift2 Laguna Seca is a step back from this.

(...)

Also FYI, "Laguna Seca" is Spanish for "Dry Lake" so it should be brown as hell! If it's not, then you should check your display.
hell isn't brown at all

i guess yeah, it's more that desert type of brown.
Kazumi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 May 11, 13:10   #39
JIMP
 
JIMP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Default

">>Intel pentium4 socked 478 3.2Ghz

Below the min-spec..."

Yeah, I know it's way below the minimum spec.
I was just hoping to squeak by like I did with the 1st Shift.
That's why I'm not really disappointed.
It's nice to see all the support here from SMS. I know there's always
someone willing to help on this forum but it's rare from an actual game
developer. That's very much appreciated.
Hopefully, I'll be able to upgrade soon and get in on the fun


and thanks SCCA, I'll check out racedepartment
JIMP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 May 11, 15:19   #40
McClusky
Donated
 
McClusky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: USA
Default

After the patch I still say poor, although I did see minor visual improvements. Once the FPS dip below 60 it stutters which happens at most tracks (don't even mention night racing). *If I run alone it stays steady at 60 but add a car or 2 and it will dip below 60.

I cannot believe my system would have a problem running this game (Win 7 Pro, i5 2500K, 4GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 560Ti - 270.51 beta drivers)

Below are the best settings I've come up with to have it look "OK" after HOURS of testing (but a modded Shift 1 still looks/works MUCH better). Night racing looks awful unless I use supersampling but then I take a hit in FPS.


Antialiasing compatibility: 0x000010C1
Antialiasing-gamma correction: On
Antialiasing-Mode: Override any application setting
Antialiasing-Setting: 1x2 1x2 Supersampling (D3D only)
Antialiasing-Transparency Multisampling: Enabled
Antialiasing-Transparency Supersampling: Off/Multisampling

Anisotropic filtering mode: User-defined/Off
Anisotropic filtering setting: 16x (or 8x)
Texture filtering-Negative LOD bias: Clamp
Texture filtering-Quality: High Quality (or Quality)

Edit - I have to force v-sync on, if I don't it looks like a slide show when going in and around all turns although the FPS are between 70-80

Last edited by McClusky; 2 May 11 at 15:37.
McClusky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 May 11, 18:18   #41
flymar
 
flymar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Default

Q9650, GTX560Ti, WinXP 32, 3GB RAM,
1920x1080, all options max, V-Sync ON
Toyota Corolla. Inside (not helmet) camera.
Nurburgring Mullenbach. 7 opponents, day

Min, Max, Avg
36, 63, 49.928

The performance is nice but if fails when comparing to supersmooth Dirt2 or F1 2010. Frameskips at collisions and bad looking AA.
flymar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 11, 03:24   #42
Mikal
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Leicester
Age: 39
Default

Asus m4a77td pro
AMD Athlon II 630 x4 2.8
Kingston DDR3 1333 2gbx2
Asus 5870 1gb Black Edition

1980x1080 60hz max settings vsync off

Full grid day 30 fps, 70 fps after first corner
Full grid Night 25 fps, 55-60 fps after first corner

Patch improved my fps a lot
Mikal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 11, 06:43   #43
arknor1050
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Default

1055t @ stock
4GB DDR 1600
GTX 460 1GB @ 775mhz

4x multisample AA
2x transparency grid AA
16x AF
1920x1080
50-60 fps in regular races
30-45 FPS in nightraces

oddly enough i dropped 5-10 fps with the patch
arknor1050 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 11, 08:44   #44
matt2380
 
matt2380's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by McClusky View Post
Edit - I have to force v-sync on, if I don't it looks like a slide show when going in and around all turns although the FPS are between 70-80
Sad to hear this McClusky!

I was a bit disappointed until I turned v-sync off... now I am really loving this game!

I'd always been a v-sync/triple-buffering junkie, but noticed during fps testing that if I disabled v-sync I then had ZERO lag on my G27 (which is simply fantastic and what I always dreamed of with Shift1).

Prior to that I had graphics settings quite low to keep above 60fps, but once I disabled v-sync it freed me to crank up the graphics settings to max and was shocked that the game still feels completely playable even though the fps dip down to 40ish at the start of races.

I thought that v-sync/triple-buffering was giving me silky smooth graphics, however in reality it:
- forced me to use low image quality
- made me obsess over stutter whenever I went below 60fps
- added input/animation/ffb lag
- made me focus on negatives

With v-sync off:
- the graphics look amazing!
- I've stopped obsessing over stutter and paradoxically it feels smoother!
- ZERO input/animation/ffb lag
- I'm having an incredible time

I strong encourage other v-sync/triple-buffering junkies to join me in rehab - it's great in here!

matt2380 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 11, 10:15   #45
redi
Superator
 
redi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: On a thin crust covering a huge ball of hot molten stone whizzing through space
Age: 41
Default

I agree with matt, I have tried both vsync on and off (any game I run with vsync if possible), but I found slightly more input lag with it so I switched it off. Visuals are slightly less smooth, but I hardly notice any tearing and input lag is minimal. What's more, FFB is crisper with vsync disabled as the FFB isn't averaged out (or something like that ).
redi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 11, 10:20   #46
Djinn
 
Djinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Vienna, Austria
Age: 38
Default

CPU: Intel Core i7-920 @ 4.0 GHz
MB: ASUS P6T Deluxe V2
RAM: 6 GB DDR3-1600 Corsair Dominator
GPU: ZOTAC GeForce GTX 480 AMP!

1920x1080, all settings maxed, AA high, no motion blur, VSync on

Day races: constantly 60 fps
Night races: 45-50 fps at start, then 60 fps


Yesterday I checked CPU and GPU usage while playing (with VSync off). CPU usage always stayed below 30%, no matter how many cars there are on the screen. GPU usage goes down when there are many cars, for example at the beginning of night races when I am in the back of the grid with many cars in front, I have a GPU usage of ~65% with 45-50 fps. If I let all the other cars drive away, GPU usage rises until 100% and fps go up to 80-100. If I would have 100% GPU usage all the time I think it would never dip below 60 fps. In day races I always have 60+ fps, because 65% GPU usage here is enough for holding the fps high enough.

My conclusion: for me it looks like Shift 2 only uses max. 2 cores of the CPU and the opponent cars are calculated by the CPU. If it would fully utilize a quad core, I bet there wouldn't be any performance issues at day or night races and we would see 60+ fps constantly.
Djinn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 11, 10:51   #47
Pel8
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Default

Mediocre

You can tell me that shift2 is not a "cutre-port" but is quite near to useless in that aspect, compared to shift1 or shift2 console verson there is not a huge advance on the graphics, for the pc version of shift 2 at 720p you still need a pretty decent pc for run it at 30-40 fps stapble, if you want to add aa and play at 1080p even ppl with gpu`s worth 200e and quad core cpu over 3ghz are having problems for get some decent fps.

I`d racer get a cutre port that will run at 60 fps than this.
Pel8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 11, 10:54   #48
redi
Superator
 
redi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: On a thin crust covering a huge ball of hot molten stone whizzing through space
Age: 41
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pel8 View Post
Mediocre

You can tell me that shift2 is not a "cutre-port" but is quite near to useless in that aspect, compared to shift1 or shift2 console verson there is not a huge advance on the graphics, for the pc version of shift 2 at 720p you still need a pretty decent pc for run it at 30-40 fps stapble, if you want to add aa and play at 1080p even ppl with gpu`s worth 200e and quad core cpu over 3ghz are having problems for get some decent fps.

I`d racer get a cutre port that will run at 60 fps than this.
There are plenty of games that require a well-equipped PC to run it with all bells and whistles, so what's the issue with S2U being similar? If you want 60+ FPS, you need to turn the graphics down, or buy a better PC. Happens with many more games...
redi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 11, 11:18   #49
davew_uk
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Default

I'd actually rate the performance as adequate or good, after the patch.

I've been quite obsessive-compulsive about getting playable FPS with Shift 2 *and* good image quality. It's been quite a challenge on my low-end PC, but here goes:-

PC specs:

Dell XPS420 (Q6600@2.4, Radeon HD 3870X2, 4gb ram)

Drivers:

Catalyst 11.4 and 11.4CAP1

Ingame settings:

1680x1050
texture resolution - high
texture filtering - 16xAF
vsync - on
AA - high
motion blur - low
reflection quality - high
car detail - medium
track detail - high
shadows - off

Radeon Pro settings:

Catalyst AI on standard
AFR-friendly-D3D crossfire profile forced
all other settings application controlled or default

With these settings I never drop below a playable frame rate (25fps) even at night on a packed starting grid with 15 AI. My average FPS is more like 35fps which to me is perfectly fine.

What's interesting though is how the performance scales with different settings. I found that out of all the settings, shadows are the biggest performance killer. If you have a low-end PC, turn 'em off!

The other biggest performance killer are the AI cars. I get my lowest FPS on the grid of a night race with 15 AI cars. I've turned car detail down to medium as someone else here suggested and its a good tradeoff, but I'm starting to think I'm more CPU bound than GPU bound in this game. Time to start looking around at Sandy Bridge methinks
davew_uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 11, 11:47   #50
Djinn
 
Djinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Vienna, Austria
Age: 38
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redi View Post
There are plenty of games that require a well-equipped PC to run it with all bells and whistles, so what's the issue with S2U being similar? If you want 60+ FPS, you need to turn the graphics down, or buy a better PC. Happens with many more games...
And what should I upgrade to get 60+ fps at the start of night races, when GPU usage is 65% and CPU usage 30%? Ah yes, I should upgrade to Shift 3 Unleashed.
Djinn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 20:04.


Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

www.nogripracing.com 2003 - 2014
Page generated in 0.43409 seconds with 11 queries