which GPU is best for AC?

[Tim Meuris]

nvidea or ati?

 

[bazingaracer]

Actually I have a decent cooling system, a case with a good air flow and graphics is cooled with DirectCU II from ASUS which is also a decent cooling system (for air) and I am sure it can do the job until I get it on water.
I use MSI afterburner since long time, in fact is how I check gpu and cpu cores temperature, video memory usage, ram usage and fps.
Full screen rendering, setting the details, smoke and mirrors to maximum (with reflections and PP disabled) gpu temps are about 65 degrees celsius. Enabling also reflections with max settings gpu temp jumps to near 75/80 degrees. Enabling also PP with max settings gpu temp jump to 90.
This means that with all graphic settings at maximum graphics card is being pushed to insane llimits in a constant way.
The only application that I know that push so much for a graphics card is FurMark which is basically a burning tool.
Also with my old GTX780 which was water cooled the situation is basically the same.
Just as a matter of example, with Arma 3 (which is also a demanding game in matters of graphics) with all graphic setiings pushed to max, 4x antialiasing also set to max quality and VD at 5000, gpu temperature never exceeds 75 degrees celsiius.
AC requirements, in particular reflections, are insanely demanding for the quality provided, I am quite sure that some optimization is needed on these matters, otherwise some graphics card will burn.

 

[Gary Horneck]

I've given up trying to make AC useable. My new rig is a i7 5820k 6-core, GTX 980 4G, running off a 512GB SSD, with 16GB RAM. Still looks crappy. I can get high frame rates, as I'm running 144 hz monitors, but I'm done messing with it to make it visually acceptable. GSCE all the way for me.

 

[Tim Meuris]

darn,
I have more or less a similar system
only lower herz monitors
could it be because of those monitors maybe?

 

[Rui Santos]

Actually I have a decent cooling system, a case with a good air flow and graphics is cooled with DirectCU II from ASUS which is also a decent cooling system (for air) and I am sure it can do the job until I get it on water.
I use MSI afterburner since long time, in fact is how I check gpu and cpu cores temperature, video memory usage, ram usage and fps.
Full screen rendering, setting the details, smoke and mirrors to maximum (with reflections and PP disabled) gpu temps are about 65 degrees celsius. Enabling also reflections with max settings gpu temp jumps to near 75/80 degrees. Enabling also PP with max settings gpu temp jump to 90.
This means that with all graphic settings at maximum graphics card is being pushed to insane llimits in a constant way.
The only application that I know that push so much for a graphics card is FurMark which is basically a burning tool.
Also with my old GTX780 which was water cooled the situation is basically the same.
Just as a matter of example, with Arma 3 (which is also a demanding game in matters of graphics) with all graphic setiings pushed to max, 4x antialiasing also set to max quality and VD at 5000, gpu temperature never exceeds 75 degrees celsiius.
AC requirements, in particular reflections, are insanely demanding for the quality provided, I am quite sure that some optimization is needed on these matters, otherwise some graphics card will burn.

You should post this at AC forum...

 

[Gary Horneck]

I have 60hz monitors on the second gaming rig. Neither the new rig, or the Alienware Aurora R4, with twin 780's look decent enough for me. There's this thing that happens with the shading of guardrails, marching alongside the car. Very distracting.

 

[Remik]

Even with a GTX980, with everything maxed in game after 30 minutes you will have one of 2 options.
Graphics card will throttle lowering the speed in an attempt to cool down and you will get lower fps and some lag, or simply it i'll burn.
AC is the first game where I can't have everything maxed as default for a regular gameplay.

I don't have problem with temp. GTX 980 G1 http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/75153-gigabyte-geforce-gtx-980-g1-gaming/?page=9

Ultra game settings - http://www.racedepartment.com/threads/game-performance-hardware-specs.85461/page-11

GPU max temp 65 with manual speed 64

 

[bazingaracer]

I've given up trying to make AC useable. My new rig is a i7 5820k 6-core, GTX 980 4G, running off a 512GB SSD, with 16GB RAM. Still looks crappy. I can get high frame rates, as I'm running 144 hz monitors, but I'm done messing with it to make it visually acceptable. GSCE all the way for me.

Actually a valid point.
While in matters of detail level in some aspects such as cars interior or engines (the ones we can see) Assetto Corsa is awesomely detailed with high quality, in some other aspects is quite poor, for instance the brake disks are very low detailed (not really important, but should match with overall quality).
To me the weak points are basically related with shadows, reflections and now after RC1.0 also the antialiasing.
Shadowing is quite poor in AC, does not work properly according to distances and/or lighting angle.
Reflections are also kinda of weird, requiring a high gpu usage and giving a output bellow average with some visible flaws.
So, if I was to buy a graphics card only because AC I would wait for the final product before making my decision, at this stage probably I would be disappointed no matter what I could chose..
@Remik
Try the same settings in a grid where you have 24 cars.

 

[Connor Caple]

Try the same settings in a grid where you have 24 cars.

Experienced that the other night. RD race, 28 GT cars with custom liveries and I had to reduce my AA and AF settings to get a playable framerate @ Algarve.

No idea what they need to do to improve this, but it needs some kind of optimisation.

 

[Remik]

@Remik
Try the same settings in a grid where you have 24 cars.

Yep this is with full grid 24 cars
http://www.racedepartment.com/threads/game-performance-hardware-specs.85461/page-11

 

[Pedro Cunha]

I don't know why are people complaining about the game visual quality....my system handles mixed brands fullgrid 4K maxed out above 60fps.
Here and there the game is close to Project Cars graphic quality, with the car visual behaviour being much more real...so i'm very pleased at the moment with assetto look.

...thanks to Titan sli - i7 4790K

LOOKS PERFECT TO ME..even at 1080p60f
...it's just a shame youtube cuts down most of the game visual experience.
Compared to youtube the game is much more detailed and seems like runing at twice the frames per second.

mod-edit: don't double post please

 

[Blkout]

Actually a valid point.
While in matters of detail level in some aspects such as cars interior or engines (the ones we can see) Assetto Corsa is awesomely detailed with high quality, in some other aspects is quite poor, for instance the brake disks are very low detailed (not really important, but should match with overall quality).
To me the weak points are basically related with shadows, reflections and now after RC1.0 also the antialiasing.
Shadowing is quite poor in AC, does not work properly according to distances and/or lighting angle.
Reflections are also kinda of weird, requiring a high gpu usage and giving a output bellow average with some visible flaws.
So, if I was to buy a graphics card only because AC I would wait for the final product before making my decision, at this stage probably I would be disappointed no matter what I could chose..
@Remik
Try the same settings in a grid where you have 24 cars.

That would be a HUGE CPU load. What purpose would it serve other than to give you a warning message about 95% usage. No one shouldbe running 24 car fields in AC, it just struggles with CPU usage with that many cars.

 

[Jan-Olov Johansson]

Well, I have only tested this once (after the RC came out) but running a full 24 car LaFerrari grid at Spa did not give me a cpu usage warning.

 

[Sparx1981]

That would be a HUGE CPU load. What purpose would it serve other than to give you a warning message about 95% usage. No one shouldbe running 24 car fields in AC, it just struggles with CPU usage with that many cars.

I disagree. Surely if no-one should be running a 24 car field, then why would AC include it? It's like having a Fifa game and saying, ok the game looks nice but to play at a reasonable perfomance you can only play five a side.... ( I hate football so wouldn't care anyway, but you get my point)

 

[Blkout]

I disagree. Surely if no-one should be running a 24 car field, then why would AC include it? It's like having a Fifa game and saying, ok the game looks nice but to play at a reasonable perfomance you can only play five a side.... ( I hate football so wouldn't care anyway, but you get my point)

That's like saying, why was a game released with bugs? Certainly the developers would like to give you that option, unfortunately it just doesn't work correctly at the moment.

Well, I have only tested this once (after the RC came out) but running a full 24 car LaFerrari grid at Spa did not give me a cpu usage warning.

Good, maybe its been fixed or maybe it just didn't happen in that instance. I've had it happen on fields as small as 16 before but it I don't know the cause, could be a select mix of vehicles or a certain track. This is with a 4.2GHz i5 2500k so its not as if my CPU is slow.

 

[Martin Walker]

I run a gtx 770 and have no issues running the game maxxed out on 1080p screen ,,on a side note another good little gain if your not doing so is use solidstate harddrives

 

[Remik]

@Blkout
If U have good coolers and motherboard... i5 2500k will be stable 4.8 - 5 GHz all the time
... running 2 years with that clock ( using only air )

 

[Georg Siebert]

I run a gtx 770 and have no issues running the game maxxed out on 1080p screen ,,on a side note another good little gain if your not doing so is use solidstate harddrives

In order to run AC off of an SSD, you'd have to get the entire valve directory on it, right?

 

[Blkout]

@Blkout
If U have good coolers and motherboard... i5 2500k will be stable 4.8 - 5 GHz all the time
... running 2 years with that clock ( using only air )

Yea I know, lots of people run theirs at 4.6GHz+. I've had mine prime95 stable on air at 4.6GHz but I just don't care for the voltage it takes to get there. I'm not worried about the CPU's life but when you increase the voltage a lot more heat has to be dissipated and I can feel it in my office. Its just not really worth for games since I'm not CPU bound at 2560x1600 resolution, its all about the GPU's and I have two 980's for that.

 

[Joao Alves]

In order to run AC off of an SSD, you'd have to get the entire valve directory on it, right?

Nope. I have Steam on my SSD and my entire library is on a 2TB drive. When you go to install a game, you have the option to change the install location, and you can create a custom directory on a different drive. So you can keep Steam on drive X and install any games on drive Y.

 

[bazingaracer]

That would be a HUGE CPU load. What purpose would it serve other than to give you a warning message about 95% usage. No one shouldbe running 24 car fields in AC, it just struggles with CPU usage with that many cars.

Never had that 95% cpu warning, In fact with all game graphic settings maxed/ultra but having reflections and PP disabled, a 24 car grid runs smoothly at 60 fps as if were only 1 car, do not see difference.
That's exactly my point, the massive impact that reflections and PP have in game performance is not coincident with the quality provided by these features.
Shadows do not have really a noticeable impact in performance, I made mention to it because I believe it can be improved, just use slow motion to have a better perspective of how the shadows transition is completely flawed.

Now back on topic, whats is best GPU for Assetto Corsa.
First I would like to point that Assetto Corsa needs to have Vsync enabled, otherwise even having the FPS limited, the CPU operation will have tremendous oscillations (with FPS remaining unchanged) causing a negative impact in game and in the user computer operation.
Said that, I have a 60hz screen and with Vsync enabled I need to have a stable 60 fps in order to achieve a smooth experience, so I am going to speak about my experience based on my needs.

I have tested the game with 3 different GPUs, GTX 580, GTX 780 and GTX 980 using the Static 2 and Tv 2 cams, in Monza, full screen rendering. Due to different characteristics of these GPUs the experience can be extrapolated to several current GPUs.
With all 3 GPUs having the game graphic settings fully maxed/ultra but with reflections and PP disabled, under every circumstance Frames Per Second remained completely stable and smooth, never dropped below 60.
With all game graphic settings fully maxed/ultra and also reflections and PP fully maxed, the GTX580 was able to achieve a maximum of 50 FPS, during the race and a minimum of 20, when the grid was full at start.
With GTX780 the max FPS were basically the same but the minimum FPS had a slight increase, around 30.
GTX 980 had a minimum of 35 FPS at start with full grid and, was able to achieve 60 FPS soon the cars started to spread with race progress but was not able to have steady 60 FPS even after cars spread, several times dropped bellow causing some lag.

At this stage there is no GPU able to provide a stable and smooth gameplay with all game graphic settings maxed in a 1920x1080, 60Hz screen.
Still is not a big deal, In my opinion the reasons (reflections and PP) for the massive impact in performance do not worth and are not a reason for GPU choice.
About reflections, while some colors and cars (for instance, red and Ferrari) look better with it enabled, some other colors and cars in fact look worse, like an opaque sheen.
About PP, I not do see a single reason for having it enabled. The Effect preset, we can achieve better effects "messing" with lighting angle in tracks. The Overall effect quality, Glare and Heat Shimmering, well we just need to look at exhaust flames to wish have it disabled. Motion Blur is not working properly, the same for Depth of Field. Crepuscular rays, let me know when you find it, the same for FXAA.

In conclusion, to achieve a decent performance and an appealing visual, a mid range graphics card will do the job with Assetto Corsa, even for those cars that need some glow in its paint (ie, Ferrari) the lowest settings in reflections quality/reflections rendering frequency will do it.
Any GTX 760 or R9 270X will be perfectly fine. Above this is just waste of money and the feeling that the investment is not being properly compensated by AC will be a reality.

Note that the above is just ONE opinion based on a personal experience under (and for) determined circumstances.