Minor Hotfix Update for Assetto Corsa Competizione Released

I have a similar PC spec, what I suggest is to use NVIDIA Launcher and the use the optimize button.
If you run offline you need to put all to low essentialy ( if you run with rain and 30 AI)
if you run online you can increase to quality.
But generally speaking the GTX1070 cannot do more than that..
I9-9900K / GTX 1070 on my side and I tend to disagree. At least at 1080p.
I think many people here underestimate the importance of a very potent CPU which is needed in ACC.
Most settings at high/epic and I noticed no dips under the 60 FPS mark. (Vsync on).
 

DrRob

250RPM
^^ This. I also have a GTX1070 but only a 4 core i5 @ 4Ghz.
More than 15 AI cars just slows the game too much down. Have to upgrade to a 8 core CPU I guess.
GFX wise I have everything on High/Epic besides shadows, mirrors and foliage. I run on native 38something x 1080 ultrawide 49" and locked 59fps and vsync'ed. I am not too sensitive to tearing, mind you. Stuttering is almost entirely gone after I applied the hack from the "I got my FPS back" thread. Strangely I have to re-do that after every game update.

My brother has a RTX2070 and a I7 and runs it with full grid and nearly everything maxed out on a the same ultrawide 49". GFX wise the gain in ACC is less with the newer card than getting a better CPU.

First game I play, where my CPU is the bottleneck, not the graphics card. :roflmao:
 
It's the only sim, where my pc is not powerful enough too without frequent drops below 60fps.
UE4 was a mistake for a lot of reasons, that Kunos seem to have acknowledged, and hopefully learnt from it.
GTR3 does not bode well either, if it also uses this terribly optimised engine.
IMO, outside screenshots, it's not natural looking like other Sims out there.

My specs are a i5 6600k oc to 4.6, 1070 again oc to 2000, and 16 GB ram. Running 1440p. Even dropping it down to 1080p yields minimal improvement, as it's obviously CPU bound.
AI is a killer, whereas online it's acceptable, but again public servers is a no go for any decent racing.
Game is a massive flop IMO
 
Another 1070 gtx here. At Least at FullHD no Problem to the Card handle min. 60fps all the Time. Most maxed out only shadows and mirrors at high.(24 Opponents).
But i am lucky to own potent CPU. It seems quite important Indeed. Ryzen 2700x
 

maelstrom

100RPM
If you want it to look anything like the pretty pics that Kunos put up advertising the game, then you will need a lot more than that. But as you said, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
I disagree. I have a 6700k and a GTX 1080 running at 1440p and I have almost everything on either epic or high and it runs smoothly and looks great, even with a full grid. Just because you can't get it to run well, doesn't mean it's not possible.
 

PuRe_AdDicT

Creator - PuRe IMO Tyres App
Premium
Definitely a pattern of my pc is not good enough, therefore the game is terrible.

That's a shame, because you're missing out on an incredible driving experience.
 

protonv5

500RPM
I disagree. I have a 6700k and a GTX 1080 running at 1440p and I have almost everything on either epic or high and it runs smoothly and looks great, even with a full grid. Just because you can't get it to run well, doesn't mean it's not possible.
Haha. No you're not. Read my post again.
 
Last edited:

Ciccina2016

25RPM
Premium
I9-9900K / GTX 1070 on my side and I tend to disagree. At least at 1080p.
I think many people here underestimate the importance of a very potent CPU which is needed in ACC.
Most settings at high/epic and I noticed no dips under the 60 FPS mark. (Vsync on).
Let me put in this way.. I don't give a duck :) if Assetto Corsa Competizioner requires all this power.. I am not going to spend money to update my hardware for just one videogame :) and the GTX1070 is superb on all other sims.. sooo :)
 
Lol I'm here with my Lowly Rx 570 and Xeon E3-1270 @3.40 boost @3.7, and people with Top of the Line GPU's and withing 3 gens of Intel, and Still complaining a lot. lmao I'm on Almost LOW with x3 1080p screens @80% scaler and with a Cap of 50fps because I don't like the dips so I limited it to have a consistent experience.
 
^^ This. I also have a GTX1070 but only a 4 core i5 @ 4Ghz.
More than 15 AI cars just slows the game too much down. Have to upgrade to a 8 core CPU I guess.
GFX wise I have everything on High/Epic besides shadows, mirrors and foliage. I run on native 38something x 1080 ultrawide 49" and locked 59fps and vsync'ed. I am not too sensitive to tearing, mind you. Stuttering is almost entirely gone after I applied the hack from the "I got my FPS back" thread. Strangely I have to re-do that after every game update.

My brother has a RTX2070 and a I7 and runs it with full grid and nearly everything maxed out on a the same ultrawide 49". GFX wise the gain in ACC is less with the newer card than getting a better CPU.

First game I play, where my CPU is the bottleneck, not the graphics card. :roflmao:
My i3-8350k @ 4.2Ghz can handle 21 AI cars at the Nurburgring without going slower than 70 FPS. Indeed the CPU cores are very close to max usage. On a more powerful CPU I would take a look at your memory configuration, not just memory size. On a stressed CPU, memory speed can become a bottleneck, particulary on heavy or dense 3D scenarios, like race grid start. I am currently using DDR4 @ 3200Mhz.
 

DrRob

250RPM
My i3-8350k @ 4.2Ghz can handle 21 AI cars at the Nurburgring without going slower than 70 FPS. Indeed the CPU cores are very close to max usage. On a more powerful CPU I would take a look at your memory configuration, not just memory size. On a stressed CPU, memory speed can become a bottleneck, particulary on heavy or dense 3D scenarios, like race grid start. I am currently using DDR4 @ 3200Mhz.
Good point. I need to upgrade the whole lot: mainboard, ram, cpu.
I'm currently on DDR4-2133 CL14 btw.
 

tr1v1um

100RPM
Definitely a pattern of my pc is not good enough, therefore the game is terrible.

That's a shame, because you're missing out on an incredible driving experience.
Sure it's a shame but also a result of poor development desicions and not the fault of the users. The problem here is, that it seems to be very difficult to opimize the game and scale it according to hardware and even Kunos seems to have acknowledged this. With my system it doesn't really matter if I run the sim on max, high mid or low settings as I allways get a stutter now and then while it runs smooth 90% of the time. With my system I should atleast be able to run the sim on low but without stutters (GTX1070, 8GB Ram and i5 4570 at 3,7 GHz). FYI, there are other very demanding games that run well on my system. PUBG, Squad, ArmA III and the bunch of the sims to name a few.

It is no secret that ACC requires beefy hardware. The question is if it is justified and if the results are that much better compared to other products that are out on the market. rF2 allways got the flag for looking crap while requiring very good hwardware, to some extend rightfully. With that sim we are at a point where it runs at stable 60 FPS, while looking not the best but decent enough with over 50 cars in all conditions at very demanding tracks like Le Mans. And while the people have a good lough about the blocky shadows in the news screenshot, most people are able to run that sim with todays hardware ranging from low to highend hardware.

Same goes for PC2, iRacing and even AMS 1. I would have to tune ACC below AMS image quality to get my desired framerates while the game gets a blury and aliased mess and with objects popping up everyhwere (especialy the trees). Whoever at Kunos thought it was a good idea to throw their AI with player physics on top of UE4, wich is naturaly a very CPU demanding engine is beyond me. And all that for a sim that was described as the next GTR successor. If they want to create a tech demo, then it's all fair and square, but this will backfire if you want to have a broader audience.
 

DrRob

250RPM
Just did three 30 minute races against the AI incl. 15 min qualy. What a blast!
Not sure if this is just me, but I noticed three things:
  • The AI got better. Really so much better racing the AI now. Also blue flags properly respected by the AI. I have the feeling the settings across race tracks are more consistent now. Previously I had different difficulty settings for different tracks, now I can set 90% and the AI feels similarly strong on different tracks. Tested with Hungaroring, Zolder and Paul Ricard.
  • The FFB got better on my T500. I set the forceFeedbackIntervalSteps to "0" in the control.json - was "2" before. I feel so much more information through the wheel! 95% strength, 0% min, 15% road. Did something else change in the game code? Wow! Was even capable of improving my laptimes to some extent!
  • There is a new setting to scale the ingame menus in the HUD options. Good work Kunos! Now on 80% and the menus do not obstruct the screen anymore. Perfect!
 
Last edited:

protonv5

500RPM
Just did three 30 minute races against the AI incl. 15 min qualy. What a blast!
Not sure if this is just me, but I noticed three things:
  • The AI got better. Really so much better racing the AI now. Also blue flags properly respected by the AI. I have the feeling the settings across race tracks are more consistent now. Previously I had different difficulty settings for different tracks, now I can set 90% and the AI feels similarly strong on different tracks. Tested with Hungaroring, Zolder and Paul Ricard.
  • The FFB got better on my T500. I set the forceFeedbackIntervalSteps to "0" in the control.json - was "2" before. I feel so much more information through the wheel! 95% strength, 0% min, 15% road. Did something else change in the game code? Wow! Was even capable of improving my laptimes to some extent!
  • There is a new setting to scale the ingame menus in the HUD options. Good work Kunos! Now on 80% and the menus do not obstruct the screen anymore. Perfect!
I find that the AI ram me more from behind where as before, not so much. Hopefully over time, this will change for the better.
 

DrRob

250RPM
I find that the AI ram me more from behind where as before, not so much. Hopefully over time, this will change for the better.
Good point. This I noticed as well, had this on two occasions. Monza curva parabolica (last corner entry) and Hungaroring first corner entry. Both times it was rather a love tap and they slipped through with me only loosing 1-2 places. Somehow I found this a nice touch to be honest (literally? :roflmao:). Made them more believable as competitors.

If I had spun out, I would have been mad for sure. But all good as it was. Cought them later anyway again. ;)
Aggro on 60% btw.
 
Sure it's a shame but also a result of poor development desicions and not the fault of the users. The problem here is, that it seems to be very difficult to opimize the game and scale it according to hardware and even Kunos seems to have acknowledged this. With my system it doesn't really matter if I run the sim on max, high mid or low settings as I allways get a stutter now and then while it runs smooth 90% of the time. With my system I should atleast be able to run the sim on low but without stutters (GTX1070, 8GB Ram and i5 4570 at 3,7 GHz). FYI, there are other very demanding games that run well on my system. PUBG, Squad, ArmA III and the bunch of the sims to name a few.

It is no secret that ACC requires beefy hardware. The question is if it is justified and if the results are that much better compared to other products that are out on the market. rF2 allways got the flag for looking crap while requiring very good hwardware, to some extend rightfully. With that sim we are at a point where it runs at stable 60 FPS, while looking not the best but decent enough with over 50 cars in all conditions at very demanding tracks like Le Mans. And while the people have a good lough about the blocky shadows in the news screenshot, most people are able to run that sim with todays hardware ranging from low to highend hardware.

Same goes for PC2, iRacing and even AMS 1. I would have to tune ACC below AMS image quality to get my desired framerates while the game gets a blury and aliased mess and with objects popping up everyhwere (especialy the trees). Whoever at Kunos thought it was a good idea to throw their AI with player physics on top of UE4, wich is naturaly a very CPU demanding engine is beyond me. And all that for a sim that was described as the next GTR successor. If they want to create a tech demo, then it's all fair and square, but this will backfire if you want to have a broader audience.
I can understand your frustration, but I have to say your CPU speed may not be fast enough. I would recommend at least something that can deliver 4Ghz and for sure increase the system memory to 16GB.

I do not believe any poor development decisions happen. It has been already explained why the path to UE4 took place. Also, comparing ACC to other sims in regard to hardware requirement is not totally fair. For me ACC graphics are a step forward compared to rFactor2 and iRacing. ACC graphics are not perfect and there are still some issues to be addressed but the immersion they provide to me is beyond other sims. I had go back to AC and rFactor2 and the driving experience feels dull to me. I am not talking about the physics, which are great, but the whole package. In terms of AI implementation I actually feel better to know the cars are driven under the same physics conditions as my car and not by some 'scripted' or predefined line. Also, not perfect, but I believe is getting better and better.
 
I would recommend at least something that can deliver 4Ghz
It's not just the CPU speed. Also the core/thread count is very important. Even my old i5-4670k @ 4.1GHz all cores wasn't able to handle ACC very well. It was alot better with the i7-4790k @4.4GHz all cores. Tests with HTT off/on shows clearly the game needs more than 4cores/4threads.

Not any problems since I got a i9-9900k :thumbsup:
 
To those with a potato that are having performance issues I’ve found a very temporary solution.

I changed the resolution to 1600x1024, I know it's not ideal but the sim looks incredible as now I can crank up resolution scale and run settings on mid and get 60 constant fps.
And yes, that's and ultrawide below with a matte black background to counter the 1600x1024.
I'm doing an i5-8400/2060 build next month, for now this is the best I can do with what I have.
My bad pics don't do it justice it really looks great.
IMG_0048.JPG
IMG_0046.JPG
 

DrRob

250RPM
@Jason Mullin I just upgraded to an ultrawide a couple of weeks ago and totally chuffed with the added immersion and better view into corners. Total game changer for me.
Happy for you that you found a solution, but I'd rather go on lower settings and use the full width instead. But if it works for you, happy days!

With the six-core i5 and the GTX2060 you should be able to do much better in ACC even on 4K and ultrawide!
 

Dirk Steffen

Porsche Factory Jackass™
Premium
@Jason Mullin I just upgraded to an ultrawide a couple of weeks ago and totally chuffed with the added immersion and better view into corners. Total game changer for me.
Happy for you that you found a solution, but I'd rather go on lower settings and use the full width instead. But if it works for you, happy days!

With the six-core i5 and the GTX2060 you should be able to do much better in ACC even on 4K and ultrawide!
On the Kunos ACC forum are two threads in the General Discussion section where people share some benchmark data.This should really help some people to get an idea of what hardware can be expected to perform how with ACC.
 
Top Bottom