F1 2010 Do [RDDEV] visual mods have an impact on performance?

[Dash Kappei]

Hi, first, thanks for sharing and building all those incredible mods and sharing knowledge on pc sim-racing.
I've been wondering if using all the great visual mods you guys post might have a significal impact on performances (ie. framerate)?
It probably depends on what kind of mods, since I guess that for example increasing postprocessing does indeed mean a spike in CPU/GPU usage but on the other hand it doesn't have such impact if it is "just" a visual tune fix, am I right?
But what about all those amazing HQ re-texturing for the cars, specifically RDDEV R34p3r's?
If I swap the game textures with the HQ4096 and HQ2048, do I risk loosing in framerate's performances? That would mean I'd better chose only a few of the cars I really care about... if that's the case, using the 2048rez textures for cars detail on HIGH would still be better than the ones coming with game?

I have an AMD/Ati Radeon HD5850 1GB btw.

Thanks for clearing my doubts
Keep up the awesome work!

 

[squall0831]

I don't know which texture sizes F1 2010 uses but I think if you max it out in the graphics menu it will use 4k textures. If your performance is ok with these settings I see no problem with custom/updated textures since they use the same texture. You could paint the texture completely green and your performance would be the same as if you add millions of decals and colors because it's just the size that matters (and of course additional maps and shaders). This is a very cheap example because the filesize also matters but as far as I've seen there isn't too much difference between the vanilla textures and the modded ones in the filesize.

 

[Dash Kappei]

I don't know which texture sizes F1 2010 uses but I think if you max it out in the graphics menu it will use 4k textures. If your performance is ok with these settings I see no problem with custom/updated textures since they use the same texture. You could paint the texture completely green and your performance would be the same as if you add millions of decals and colors because it's just the size that matters (and of course additional maps and shaders). This is a very cheap example because the filesize also matters but as far as I've seen there isn't too much difference between the vanilla textures and the modded ones in the filesize.

F1 2010 only has [HIGH] settings at the most for textures.
4k is usually a [ULTRA-HIGH] setting, with 2K being [HIGH], and such UH setting is not there for textures even running the game under DX11.
As for the filesize, iirc (!) r343per's finals ULTRAHQ are definitely bigger the Codies'.
I agree about the quantity of decals not making a difference obviously, but I what I'm asking was about the resolution and more importantly if [RD DEV] r34p3r packs also have a modification in shaders and materials since that could lead to a bigger GPU's memory eat-up... I guess(?).

EDIT: R34p3r's TYRES UHQ textures are definitely bigger than Codies in rez and filesize.

 

[Armando Dominguez]

I have all texture cars atm on 4k and trackligth and perfomance are same here dont impact

 

[Jace11]

I wouldn't worry. Remember the game was designed for consoles too. Much less graphics power and mem than most semi-modern PCs. The texture sizes for all cars are maxed at 2048 on high setting. This is only used on the players car in car even when you pick the highest setting for cars, all AI drivers drive cars with 1024 textures.. and you can see this poor graphics quality in close ups and replays. F1 2010 uses textures smaller than a lot of flight sims etc.. I think the games graphics quality has been aimed slighlty lower than necessary by codemaster because of the console factor.

That is why using larger textures and mods is not having any significant impact for me, what does is AA, shadows and postprocess.