Very disappointed, even for a Beta.......

[jtbo]

from what it looks to me your 800mhz ram can not eat down all the data as fast as it is feeded to ram, also probably buses on comparable old mainboard will be filled to the brim.

so go fix your ancient ram and you may get some fluid expirience, the card should work and everything but just the loading of textures/data is a problem.
you tried setting textures and stuff that needs to be loaded while driving to minimum?

I'm wondering here, if his ancient memory is DDR3 with 1600MB/s transfer rate as that is one with 800Mhz IO bus clock?

According to Wikipedia, there is no such thing as DDR2 800Mhz, fastest is 533 1/3Mhz when looked by IO bus clock, so 800Mhz should be DDR3.

Now of course it is possible that memory in question is DDR2-800 which is 400Mhz and data rate of 800MB/s

Then there is of course memory clock, which can perfectly well be 200Mhz for DDR, DDR2 and for DDR3.

I'm not all that sure that everyone here is talking from same thing at all, but it is true that at some situations memory can be a bottleneck, however I think that textures are at videocards memory when they are loaded, unless display adapter is some kind of turbo cache model that has not own memory or at least not much, but those are usually horrible slow I believe.

So with small amount of graphic card memory it is better to limit texture settings, when all textures fit to cards memory performance is lot faster than when system memory is used as extension of cards memory, I don't think there is such fast system memory that would not kill the performance.

For example I have only 512MB of video card memory, so I cut down shadows and texture quality so that textures would fit to card's memory.

I have seen posts were people are complaining their cpu or graphics card is not used to fullest, what if they have run out of graphic card's memory and system memory is used, it would slow down performance really a lot and GPU + CPU wait for memory transfers.

There is at least something to think about.

At old days there was agp aperture setting in bios, when that was set to smallest possible setting performance of games usually got better, I have been away from computer tech world too long to know if there is equivalent today, but I know there is usually reason why computer is not under full load, something is causing waiting.

[ROEDxTzaca]

I think you are being a bit unfair needlessly rude.................
Just saying it's sh** and insulting the Devs doesn't help anything or anyone and just makes you look childish.

Well , that's your own opinion. They asked for my money before I get to try it, yes or no ? They published those game requirements for what ? And but the way, where did you saw that I said rF2 is s*** ? How about not shove in my mouth your own words ? Fan-boy and troll, it is what you are, mister.

Satire mode off.....

YAWN , another fan-boy and troll , jeez , to even compare NFS series with rF ? Oh, I get it , so we have to buy a new rig every six months, for dx9 games ?

[buddhatree]

And but the way, where did you saw that I said rF2 is s*** ? How about not shove in my mouth your own words ?

Where? On page 1 of this thread. I'm not shoving words in your mouth. Your exact words below

This is a big pile of S**T , graphics are looking worst than a 10 years old game(on lowest settings), and still is running like crap.

http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.ph...ll=1#post33582

[Foxtrot]

I feel for people with extreme performance issues. While rF2 framerates arent any where near rF1 for me, the game seems to run fine at 1920x1080 with all settings on full except shadows on high, 4X AF and wind effects turned off. No stuttering, frames tend to drop a lil too low with 14 cars in view, but still stays smooth enough for me to drive.
My system is far from optimal, dunno why so many people with more modern setups are having so much trouble.

[ROEDxTzaca]

ahahah , my apologies, it's look like my memory is as good as rf2 beta . I really hope that both will improve drastically in next 4 months. I will check when the rf2 gold come out, till then I won't bother again. Sorry for crying out loud, and wasting your time.

[CraigT]

ahahah , my apologies, it's look like my memory is as good as rf2 beta . I really hope that both will improve drastically in next 4 months. I will check when the rf2 gold come out, till then I won't bother again. Sorry for crying out loud, and wasting your time.

Bye

[coops]

ahahah , my apologies, it's look like my memory is as good as rf2 beta . I really hope that both will improve drastically in next 4 months. I will check when the rf2 gold come out, till then I won't bother again. Sorry for crying out loud, and wasting your time.

maybe leave feedback.......... instead of your disgust in the beta.. that would most certainly be more favorable to ISI and the ppl willing to play it now...

[Gary Corby]

Suppose an author has 6 months to write a book. Then he shows you the first chapter and you say "This is shi**! I expect a book to have a plot, story line, and ending. Do your job properly!"...You can't just look at the first chapter.

I can't resist commenting on this lovely analogy because as it happens, I am an author. A beta's very similar to the first draft of an entire book. Most books go through two or three drafts. Important scenes could be rewritten 20 or 30 times before they'e considered good enough. (And believe me, my first drafts look somewhat like build 60.)

Most authors have two or three early-draft test readers who they can trust to give them useful feedback, and in publishing jargon, these people are called, believe it or not...beta readers.

Good beta readers are very hard to find! They ignore the stuff that the copyeditor will pick up, such as spelling and minor grammar issues. A good beta reader concentrates on the characters, the plot and the book's voice. I suppose the equivalent with a game would be the features, the game flow, and the look and feel.

[SCampbell]

This most recent update boosted frame rate about 10-20fps for me with the same settings. I have high hopes that many of these frame rate issues will work themselves out as ISI optimises their engine. Somewhere after the 1050 version of Rfactor, I recall getting a big boost in frame rate once they released the 1100 and now 1255 (can't remember the exact version numbers in between). And, this was for the 1.0 version, far after any betas were finished. ISI will have competition from games in the near future and I have faith this will mean it will be worked on with the utmost effort.

[PLAYLIFE]

B60 was an improvement from B49 on my system. Currently, I'm happy with the state the beta is in and if the improvements made from 49-->60 are an indicator, then I'm confident we will have a solid sim with some fascinating features creating 'live and dynamic' racing that we haven't seen the likes of before.

I'm currently really enjoying racing at Spa in the F2s with changeable weather transitioning from early afternoon to dusk (accelerated time). Can't wait to get my hands on the build that has random weather, spray and aquaplaning implemented. I relish driving in changeable conditions where you need to drive by the seat of your pants rather than driving from having completed 4039 laps of the same conditioned circuit.