GTX970 optimum settings

Textures and Antialiasing to EPIC, everything else MID, turning off Volumetric fog completely and/or mirrors gives a big boost, I never drop below about 85fps in Multiplayer with these settings and honestly, I can't tell a difference between Med/High/Ultra with games anymore, if there's a difference its so subtle you don't even notice it unless pixel peeping through screenshots. As long as the main stuff is on High like textures/car/track models, the other craps not worth it.

Is anyone really going to notice that there's a few more blades of grass in the distance or a model has a higher quality LOD when it's 10 cars lengths away for like 20-40% reduction in FPS? no thanks lol
 
Difficult to answer but since I'm on 1440p but still used to my older 1080p monitor I have some buffer available with the "resolution scale".
Therefore I've searched for the best compromise between looks and performance and then adjusted the fps to my liking (to match the cpu limit basically) with the resolution scale.
I'm with a gtx 1070 in 3440x1440.
Had a 970 before this.

What resolution is your monitor? It depends a lot on this what you can run. :)

Anyway, I'll upload my exact settings and edit this post when I'm at the pc. In about an hour from now.

EDIT: my settings

ACC_Graphics_Settings_1.JPG

ACC_Graphics_Settings_2.JPG

ACC_Graphics_Settings_3.JPG
 
Last edited:
I don't think there's much you can do with the 970, tbh. The in-game settings don't really seem to be doing much in regards of gaining performance. You should definitely watch your VRAM usage with a GTX 970 and obviously stick with 1080p or possibly even use lower resolution (either directly or via the resolution scale setting).

But first and foremost, make sure it is actually your GPU that is limiting the performance. Chances are it's not, I've been getting CPU limited with this game in early access at times even on a 970 at 1900x1200 running my old i7 2600k (and definitely before on my i5 2500k).

This video shows the settings I was using during the Early Access on my old 970 and the performance I was getting under various conditions (but note the pinned comment about my unintentional mistake regarding my CPU clock, and also the fact my framerate is capped at 60 to limit fps fluctuations):

 
Thanks all, I should have said I am 1080 on a single screen. Don't get me wrong I am amazed how well this runs but you know it's all about FPS at the low end. I am GPU strung as my 4690k never works that hard. The price of stepping up the GPU is really annoying at the moment and has been for a while, silly prices .
 
@Greame Champion It cost me like 60 euro to upgrade from 970 to 1660Ti in April. The 970 still holds a bit of value, and the 1660Ti (which I would call the perfect 1080-1440p GPU right now) is pretty affordable.

Not that the upgrade helped me all that much in ACC, I'm honestly kinda surprised GPU is your main problem.
 
Thanks Martin. MSI afterburner always shows 100% for GPU and the CPU never gets near that, so that's as far as my working out goes. Out of interest would you go 1660Ti over a 1070? I am out of touch. Are you disappointment with the acc performance?
 
Thanks Martin. MSI afterburner always shows 100% for GPU and the CPU never gets near that, so that's as far as my working out goes. Out of interest would you go 1660Ti over a 1070? I am out of touch. Are you disappointment with the acc performance?
Yes, 1660ti is newer, got some more modern features and is cheaper everywhere I looked.
Only thing is that it got only 6gb of vram but honestly.. When my 1070 goes above 6gb, the fps go south too much anyway...
Most games are around 4gb even at 3440x1440.
Only wreckfest runs straight into full 8gb but honestly it seems like a memory leak and fps don't drop even though it runs into the maximum of my card.
Weird game.
Witcher 3, acc, ac, raceroom. All below 4gb for me!

About cpu and gpu limit:
If the graphics card goes to 99+ % it's indeed which is limiting.
However if the graphics card is not at 99% or close to this and you don't have a fps limiter active (or vsync), then it's your cpu.
Although your cpu might be at around 30% load, it's still the limit.

That's, as I've written about 50x on this forum now and I start to feel like "cpu limit missionary", lol, down to the "single thread performance limit".

Or simpler: you have 4 cores, the game runs on 2-3 threads. Ac and raceroom only on 1-2.

It simply can't use all 4 cores to the full extend. Windows does a good job at shuffling the load across all cores in such a speed that it looks like all cores are used nicely but really, it's just an average.
In reality it's a bit like: core 1=100%, core2=0% and then core 2=100% but core 1= 0% etc.

With a ryzen 1800x you can be stuck at 20% cpu load since you have a sh*t load of cores but low single thread performance.
 
Yes, 1660ti is newer, got some more modern features and is cheaper everywhere I looked.
Only thing is that it got only 6gb of vram but honestly.. When my 1070 goes above 6gb, the fps go south too much anyway...
Most games are around 4gb even at 3440x1440.
Only wreckfest runs straight into full 8gb but honestly it seems like a memory leak and fps don't drop even though it runs into the maximum of my card.
Weird game.
Witcher 3, acc, ac, raceroom. All below 4gb for me!

About cpu and gpu limit:
If the graphics card goes to 99+ % it's indeed which is limiting.
However if the graphics card is not at 99% or close to this and you don't have a fps limiter active (or vsync), then it's your cpu.
Although your cpu might be at around 30% load, it's still the limit.

That's, as I've written about 50x on this forum now and I start to feel like "cpu limit missionary", lol, down to the "single thread performance limit".

Or simpler: you have 4 cores, the game runs on 2-3 threads. Ac and raceroom only on 1-2.

It simply can't use all 4 cores to the full extend. Windows does a good job at shuffling the load across all cores in such a speed that it looks like all cores are used nicely but really, it's just an average.
In reality it's a bit like: core 1=100%, core2=0% and then core 2=100% but core 1= 0% etc.

With a ryzen 1800x you can be stuck at 20% cpu load since you have a sh*t load of cores but low single thread performance.
Rasmus P Guru of all things technical :) all hail the Rasmus
 
MSI afterburner always shows 100% for GPU and the CPU never gets near that, so that's as far as my working out goes. Out of interest would you go 1660Ti over a 1070? I am out of touch. Are you disappointment with the acc performance?

Yeah, that sounds like a GPU limit all right, even though with the CPU numbers, it's a bit more complicated. Still kinda surprising to me, though, like I said.

As for 1660Ti vs 1070 - well it depends. I did go for the 1660Ti because it's a newer chip that also offers updated NVENC (which I use), the gaming performance seemed on par if not better in certain titles and it was cheaper. But on the other hand, 1070 has more memory, which might be a factor for some.

And as for my opinion on ACC...it's complicated (most things with me are ;) ). But to keep it short, I'd say it could run better and be better optimized, but at the same time, it's probably unreasonable to expect miracles here. The original AC also didn't run all that great, all things considered, at least in my experience, and there was quite a few things added on top of that in ACC.

In your vid saw that little windows showing CPU; GPU temp. It's a ACC native?
Or it's an external software?

That's just a MSI Afterburner overlay.

Only thing is that it got only 6gb of vram but honestly.. When my 1070 goes above 6gb, the fps go south too much anyway...

I don't really have any issues with that. I was hoping the 6GB would be enough for me, and it seems to be. I could generally max texture quality in all games I played since I got it, which was a nice improvement coming from the 970, as running out of VRAM was probably my biggest complain about the card, the performance was still pretty good for my needs. But I am only in single screen and technically only slightly above 1080p.

That's, as I've written about 50x on this forum now and I start to feel like "cpu limit missionary", lol, down to the "single thread performance limit".

I know the feeling ;)

Holy crap, that's a cheap upgrade! Did you get super lucky with selling the 970 for a great price?

I wouldn't say so, I like to think I ask very reasonable prices when I sell my old hardware. I probably got more lucky with the 1660Ti price, I went for a cheap one and there might've even been some sale going on at the time. I believe most of the cards were like 40-50 euro more expensive at that time (but that was still pretty good).

But yeah, it was a nice upgrade for a good price. Only reason I was able to get away with it, to be honest, I fully expected to be stuck with the 970 for a while longer.
 
Nvidia will introduce updated versions of the RTX 2060-2080(and maybe Ti) cards as an answer to the new AMD GFX cars releasing in July or so.

If you are after a new GFX-card I would HIGHLY recommend you to wait 2 or 3 more months, as prices should drop with the new AMD cards coming out!
Good news, I get 75fps in multi player after tweaking so I will wait a while. Thanks
 

Latest News

Online or Offline racing?

  • 100% online racing

    Votes: 107 7.9%
  • 75% online 25% offline

    Votes: 140 10.3%
  • 50% online 50% offline

    Votes: 201 14.8%
  • 25% online 75% offline

    Votes: 381 28.1%
  • 100% offline racing

    Votes: 520 38.4%
  • Something else, explain in comment

    Votes: 5 0.4%
Back
Top