rec.autos.simulators

Which racing game currently has the best gfx to show off?

MotoGP 2.

nah, toca racedriver

Nascar Racing 2003 with every possible graphical option maxed out, viewing a
replay of 43 cars at C***te (night race).  It's freakishly realist.

--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- http://www.racesimcentral.net/
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...

Gran Turismo 3. The replays are unbelievable.

What kind of machine can do that? (I've just bought a P4 2.6C & MSI
875P board and can only get all cars at 30+ FPS with the lighting
effects off - using GF4 Ti4200 as well. Haven't tweaked it yet...)

He never said anything about the screen refresh rate.....so it's probably a
freakishly realistic photograph....or series of them! :D

Bruce.

On Sat, 21 Jun 2003 14:27:56 +1000, "Bruce Kennewell"

 Well we now have Firingsquad.com using N2003 as a benchmarking tool
(they started with Daytnona night testing, but it looks like I was
able to pursade them to go with richmond night full field after just
one post.. I told them about the plummet you get from the glare with
everything on <G>)
 AMD 3200+/512DDR400/eVGA 5900 ultra
 16x12 109fps
 now the caveat which was added after I asked abut the setting...

, were now at the Richmond Raceway complex, the action-track as its
known in NASCAR circles. Instead of conducting a test session, the new
demo also is now a complete race with the full field. This is a little
more stressful than the previous demo, as it was conducted on an empty
Daytona track during sunset. We used the same settings as before,
namely all visual quality settings were set on "high" except for
mirror quality (medium) and pit crews (low). We used a drawing
distance of 70% while all options were checked except for specular
highlights

Obviously we need to nudge them to more "stressfull" setting but even
with that it look like the machines are here... cut it in half with
the other stuff checked and you still get around 50-60fps, no bad at
all

NOOOO!! I've bought the wrong chip & board.... (Looks like the video
card makes a big difference though.)

Thanks HEAPS for the info ssrat. Great to see someone using NR2003 as
a benchmark. NR2003 was the only reason I upgraded from an XP1600...

Are you racing or sightseeing?  If you're sightseeing, go buy a Mazda
Protege and drive real roads... can't get any better than that!

Your chip and board are fine. Your Graphics card is your bottleneck. Drop in
a Radeon 9800 pro 256 meg and all will be right with the world. :-)