Comments on: FPS is Still King

By: landscaping

landscaping — Mon, 15 Nov 2010 02:28:15 +0000

This website is really cool! How did you make it ?

By: Masako Thrope

Masako Thrope — Sat, 13 Nov 2010 12:06:07 +0000

We have scotch taste on a beer salary.

By: Antionette Bandy

Antionette Bandy — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 19:54:17 +0000

I’d come to acquiesce with you one this subject. Which is not something I usually do! I enjoy reading a post that will make people think. Also, thanks for allowing me to comment!

By: Dan

Dan — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 07:25:32 +0000

I’ve been through the same as you, went Eyefinity 5850 & 3×1920*1080 screens on an Athlon 5200 with 4 Gb ddr2.
Got working FPS, but not great, dipped into the 30′s at Daytona Infield with full set of cars and got around 90′ish on the banking.

Swapped the motherboard to Asus M4A785TD-V EVO with AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition 3,2GHz and got 4Gb DDR3 PC3-10666 1333MHz.

It made a world of difference, Last race at Homestead with 30 cars I never went under 100 FPS, I’m running Catalyst 10.3 and set it up after a benchmark setup I found on the iRacing forums. I don’t run shadows other than in replays + virtual mirror.

Other than that I’ve got most of the stuff on full.
I believe the faster RAM makes a difference in performace.
/Dan

By: Ben Styles

Ben Styles — Sun, 25 Apr 2010 00:49:33 +0000

Ray if you can set your screens in CCC to 3 x 1680×1050 (5040×1050) you will get a massive gain in FPS, and will be able to run much higher quality and detail settings.

1680 x 1050 is a great resolution compromise, and I think you will find that the nicer graphics settings will far outweigh the drop in resolution (I actually doubt many would notice), whilst giving excellent FPS boost.

Hope it all goes well. (BTW my 3 screen setup arrived last week, so I’ll relay any findings from my install.