rec.autos.simulators

NR2003 Demo--effect of DX9 on graphics performance?

Marc Collin

NR2003 Demo--effect of DX9 on graphics performance?

by Marc Collin » Thu, 23 Jan 2003 00:11:49

Turning off shadows returns me to 2002 fps levels.  Now about those bumps in
the road...?

Marc


> Agree generally with what you have said.

> Someone else suggested shadows as well for the fps hit and I realise now
> that I had some of them on...which wouldn't be a fair comparison to
NR2002.
> I'll re-try it with them off and see what the results are...  May be that
we
> can't use shadows for a year or so...  Not the end of the world for me if
> the rest of the stuff is improved.

> Did you feel any "bumps" on the tracks (like you can in F12002/GTR2002 so
> easily)?  That's the one and only item I was really looking forward to.

> Marc



> > For the first time I find Dx to be faster than OpenGL in a Papy sim (Dx9
> > here) and also to look better.

> > I actually think the main fps killers are the three 'On Cars' shadow
> > settings and 'Track Lighting and Shading' - I've disabled these four
> > settings as they visually don't make much of a difference, but cause a
> > severe fps hit. All other settings I've enabled and to highest quality.

> > All the other settings which can be disabled without drastically
changing
> > the image quality didn't cause much of an fps hit for me, including
> > Reflections etc.

> > I'm getting between 35 and 48 fps (these two being the min/max numbers
> > appearing briefly once or twice, usually it's somewhere in-between these
> two
> > extremes) at 1280x960x32, with 2xFSAA and 4xAniso enabled and the
graphics
> > options of the Nvidia drivers optimised for quality. There is btw a
'fog'
> > setting in the player.ini, I've enabled it without seeing an fps hit -
but
> > also without seeing much of an effect yet.

> > As for the FF, it's IMHO more detailed than before. I have created a
> > symetric setup to be able to judge this fairly, because when you're
using
> > someone elses setup you can't really tell in the first hours what the
car
> > should feel like and whether the FF transports the car's reactions well.
> I,
> > for one, think the FF has improved.

> > I don't know whether the physics have been improved or not, but the car
> > feels more like what I'd expect such a Nascar to drive like. I like it
how
> > the steering feels now, this is definitely different from before. I am
> under
> > the impression that the snappiness of the car is more within realistic
> > boundaries now, and I seem to feel the car and the track more directly.
A
> > few little exaggerations have also been removed (like the rev drop when
> > putting a wheel underneath the line). The car's engine power and
> revvability
> > feels perfectly right, exactly like what I'd expect from such a car,
more
> so
> > than it did in N2002 for example.

> > The laptimes are indeed pretty low, maybe this demo has a tad too much
> > horsepower? Perhaps to make it more fun for the reviewers? This wouldn't
> > look like the Papyrus I know at all, but the laptimes are indeed pretty
> low
> > as compared to N2002.

> > Since I'm not a Nascar fan, could anyone comment on what the real life
> > laptimes are like?

> > My one sad point is the in-car engine sound, and also sometimes the
> external
> > sound from the other cars. It still doesn't give me the belly feeling I
> > think it should give me, going by what Nascars sound like on TV. Another
> > issue is, when you disable the menu click-plonk-boing sounds <g> (thanks
> > Papy for letting us disable it) you still get Garage sounds when
tweaking
> > the setup. I find that unnecessary as well, since they're pretty
> repetitive.
> > And where are those 'hey who took my allen wrench' and 'oh shut up and
> look
> > in your own pocket' and 'hurry up guys it's time, we're behind schedule
> > already' and all the other sentences you'd definitely hear in a garage
at
> a
> > racetrack? _That_ would have been something to listen to while tweaking
> the
> > setup :-)

> > One thing I miss are the Credits - I'd really like to know who's been
> > working on this one. Has anyone found those Credits screens?

> > Anyway, it appears to be a high price for an improved N2002, but after
> > having played with the demo for an hour, I've found so much detail
'under
> > the hood' that I think the price is justified. It's not the graphics
that
> > I'll be paying for, it's a lot of detail and expertise that has gone
into
> > the core features of a racing sim.

> > Achim

Steve Blankenshi

NR2003 Demo--effect of DX9 on graphics performance?

by Steve Blankenshi » Thu, 23 Jan 2003 00:57:31

1280X960, the only resolution I'm aware of that begins with 12 and 9.
Assumed it would be obvious... ;-)


> What is "12x9"?  Is it possible to get 16 bit resolution in the "12" and
> something else in the "9"?

> I was expecting something like 1024x768x16 for an answer (the last number
> being the bit color).

> By 12x9 do you mean 1200x900?  Never saw that kind of resolution before.

> I'm just curious.

> Alanb



> > 12X9, 16 bit color in both.



> > > What resolution?

> > > TK

Alan Bernard

NR2003 Demo--effect of DX9 on graphics performance?

by Alan Bernard » Thu, 23 Jan 2003 01:26:46

Steve,

Got it.  Wasn't sure what you meant.

Sorry for the confusion,

Alanb


> 1280X960, the only resolution I'm aware of that begins with 12 and 9.
> Assumed it would be obvious... ;-)



> > What is "12x9"?  Is it possible to get 16 bit resolution in the "12" and
> > something else in the "9"?

> > I was expecting something like 1024x768x16 for an answer (the last
number
> > being the bit color).

> > By 12x9 do you mean 1200x900?  Never saw that kind of resolution before.

> > I'm just curious.

> > Alanb


message

> > > 12X9, 16 bit color in both.



> > > > What resolution?

> > > > TK

Joachim Trens

NR2003 Demo--effect of DX9 on graphics performance?

by Joachim Trens » Thu, 23 Jan 2003 01:29:17

At Michigan they're really humble, you'd need to crank the FF up a lot to
notice anything, but at Dega they're quite noticeable. I had to crank my FF
up quite a bit from N2k2 though, it's more refined in N2k3.

Also, when exiting from T2 and T4, there IMHO never was such a realistic
feeling of how the front end becomes light as the compression of the
suspension changes and the weight gets transferred as a consquence of the
camber change in the road - an absolute kick IMHO.

I just wish Papy would at least this time have included a road track into
the demo so guys like myself can really judge the physics on terrain they
know and understand. With ovals my experience is limited, and I probably
don't fully understand and savour everything I'm experiencing, or even
overlook details in the car's behaviour.

Achim


Marc Collin

NR2003 Demo--effect of DX9 on graphics performance?

by Marc Collin » Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:16:24

You mean with the wheel still turned to the right even in middle of the left
hand banked turn you find it hard to get a feel for the car?  Welcome to
oval racing...  CART sim or Touring car sim or GT car sim
PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Marc


> At Michigan they're really humble, you'd need to crank the FF up a lot to
> notice anything, but at Dega they're quite noticeable. I had to crank my
FF
> up quite a bit from N2k2 though, it's more refined in N2k3.

> Also, when exiting from T2 and T4, there IMHO never was such a realistic
> feeling of how the front end becomes light as the compression of the
> suspension changes and the weight gets transferred as a consquence of the
> camber change in the road - an absolute kick IMHO.

> I just wish Papy would at least this time have included a road track into
> the demo so guys like myself can really judge the physics on terrain they
> know and understand. With ovals my experience is limited, and I probably
> don't fully understand and savour everything I'm experiencing, or even
> overlook details in the car's behaviour.

> Achim



> > Now about those bumps in the road...?

Joachim Trens

NR2003 Demo--effect of DX9 on graphics performance?

by Joachim Trens » Thu, 23 Jan 2003 20:45:29

<g>

Achim


> You mean with the wheel still turned to the right even in middle of the
left
> hand banked turn you find it hard to get a feel for the car?  Welcome to
> oval racing...  CART sim or Touring car sim or GT car sim
> PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

> Marc



> > At Michigan they're really humble, you'd need to crank the FF up a lot
to
> > notice anything, but at Dega they're quite noticeable. I had to crank my
> FF
> > up quite a bit from N2k2 though, it's more refined in N2k3.

> > Also, when exiting from T2 and T4, there IMHO never was such a realistic
> > feeling of how the front end becomes light as the compression of the
> > suspension changes and the weight gets transferred as a consquence of
the
> > camber change in the road - an absolute kick IMHO.

> > I just wish Papy would at least this time have included a road track
into
> > the demo so guys like myself can really judge the physics on terrain
they
> > know and understand. With ovals my experience is limited, and I probably
> > don't fully understand and savour everything I'm experiencing, or even
> > overlook details in the car's behaviour.


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.