RDRC : BTB stages comments thread

[Senad Subasic]

Aw, that's a shame :frown:

Like Damien said, it's more likely because of your CPUs. Which ones do you have?

 

[Krzysztof Babij]

AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 3800+

 

[Eckhart von Glan]

will test tonight

edit: 4 hours later: did a run on Tervaniemi and never got to the end. Drives like slomotion though it is a real beauty. What irks me is the missing slides and contact to the gravel: it feels like going ona carpet and you have to start every action a second or two earler for it to take effect which is very annoying indeed. Pity, because the length and the visuals and some of the tasks / dangers are outstanding. But to me it feels like I have little control because the input is not relayed quickly enough.
Sweet Lamb on the other hand is just soooooo well done. You can actually go off the track and oodle around in the countryside (did that when I went off and actually found a little gravel track that led back to the original track: how real is that?).

second edit: after running the Welsh stage I went back to the 15k monster and bingo: it runs like a charm Not that I managed to finish, never got further than 8 mins, so about half the stage. It is just sooooo incredibly well done, it gives you an inkling of what the real drivers are up against. If possible we must keep it (though I will have a DNF) or two

third edit: having read the posts so far and being very bad at hardware issues I still suspect that this is neither the CPU nor the gfx card but more a problem of internal memory use. Running the stage for the first time, it felt as if data was brought to the game from a loooong way off, running it for the second time it seemed that data was picked up from just around the corner.

 

[Dariusz Swiderski]

I have tested Tervaniemi off line today and have to say this stage is superb but definitely memory hungry. Got 70-90fps on average dropping to as low as 50fps a few times. Usually i get an average of 120-150fps, never droping below 100fps so this stage is definitely much more demanding on a system.

Edit: I've just got my new GC with 1gb of ram today so will test it again after the event to see how much difference extra 500mb of memory will make ( atm i,m using 9800gt with 512mb ). Will post the results tomorrow.

 

[Łukasz Demolin]

Well, 50fps is not a terrible slowdown, if using a regular LCD monitor 60fps is already perfectly smooth .

But the sheer size of the stage might be the cause of the inferior performance for some. I myself have a mid-range card at best (and a CPU recently upgraded, but also non-top class "econo" triple-core unit) so I'm finding all these problems with seriously good graphic cards strange.

Hom much system memory do you have, guys having issues with Tervaniemi?

 

[Eckhart von Glan]

my system is pretty good as I only bought it this summer, i7 processor and a good gfx card. it still runs a bit slow as I pointed out in a post higher up, I suppose RBR does not realize how good the system is because back when it was written much iof the technology that makes my PC fast was not even dreamed of

 

[Dariusz Swiderski]

Thats strange Eckhart, my system is much much slower then yours ( 2 years old, phenom x3 8450 2.1 ghz per core, 4gb 800mhz ram, 9800gt 512mb, win xp ) but it runs RBR very very well. The only problem with fps i have in race series thats why i just bought HD 4870 1gb ram. Will see what diference this card make in RBR.

 

[Eckhart von Glan]

well rbr works like a charm, I have fps of above 100 but I mean this 15k Finnish stage is the first and only one that slows it down, but - and this is strange part - not if you load another stage in-between and then run the 15k stage again: then it is absolutely fluent

also: I run windows 7, 64bit version, maybe that is the problem?

 

[Rick Bamford]

well rbr works like a charm, I have fps of above 100 but I mean this 15k Finnish stage is the first and only one that slows it down, but - and this is strange part - not if you load another stage in-between and then run the 15k stage again: then it is absolutely fluent

also: I run windows 7, 64bit version, maybe that is the problem?

Ok, here is something interesting. Can anyone else try this and confirm it works for them or just Eckhart? i would like to get a responce from anyone that has already reported an issue mainly.

This could mean we make the stages 2&5 instead of 1&4.

Also, Eckhart and anyone else, have you driven it as an online stage yet? maybe someone can see if this changes anything. i unfortunately can't do this as the stage runs fine for me already.

 

[Eckhart von Glan]

nope, only offline, right now I ran it straight after the Monday night rally club and it was just fine.

 

[Warren Dawes]

Here are my findings in case it helps anyone.

My normal SimRacing rig is:
AMD Phenom 9350e quad core; 4 GB Ram; NV9600GT; Win XP.

Tervaniemi will run on this rig but is very stuttery, and difficult to drive cleanly. Not a pleasant experience.

I installed RBR to my new Flight Sim rig:
Intel I7 960; 6GB Ram; NV 480GTX 1GB; Win 7 64.

It runs fine on this rig. I don't have Eckharts experience with either rig.

I suspect that it is not the actual length of the Stage, we have other really long BTB Stages which are no problem on my older rig. It must be related to the content included (maybe the graphics sizes of objects ). The author himself advises that he did not "optomise" the Stage to run smoothly but has no intentions of improving it. Pity, it is a nice stage layout.

 

[Senad Subasic]

Here are my findings in case it helps anyone.

My normal SimRacing rig is:
AMD Phenom 9350e quad core; 4 GB Ram; NV9600GT; Win XP.

Tervaniemi will run on this rig but is very stuttery, and difficult to drive cleanly. Not a pleasant experience.

Bizarre. My computer is worse than yours, and I have no issues with the stage.

Athlon 64 x2 6000+
3GB DDR2
ATI HD4670 512MB
Win 7 64

 

[Warren Dawes]

Win 7 64

Maybe this is the difference??

 

[Łukasz Demolin]

Hum, Win7 here as well. Is everyone with Tervaniemi problems running XP? [this means 3GB normally addressed system memory max too]

 

[Damien Jones]

Yep XP here.

My rig is even worse though:

Athlon 64 x2 4200+
2Gb DDR2
nVidia 9600GT

so no surprise it runs like a slideshow at 1680x1050

 

[Ludovic Cogotti]

I have tested yesterday, and no problem for me in 1920x1080.
As usual, with BTB stage, my computer loads the special more than 60s.

I don't think my config will help you a lot, really closed to Senad's config.

Athlon 64 x2 6000+
4GB DDR2
ATI HD4870 1GB
Win 7 64

 

[Rick Bamford]

Hmmmm, could this be the problem. XP vs Win7. Good find guys. Now we just need to figure out the solution without just saying "Go buy Win7". I'd hate that that was the only fix to the issue.

 

[Łukasz Demolin]

First thing that comes to mind in terms of Win7 and XP differences is Directx (11 or 10 vs. 9) and more addressable memory on 64-bit systems (max 3GB on 32-bit). But none of those things should cause RBR to run slowly. Unless DX10/11 "compiles" better the BTB stages through RX plugin.

 

[Damien Jones]

Or it could be that having more memory to use helps stream in the longer stages more smoothly

 

[Senad Subasic]

Or it could be that having more memory to use helps stream in the longer stages more smoothly

4GB for Warren on XP, 3 for me on 7.