Version 1.0.4 released

Mateusz Najda

500RPM
Jun 28, 2011
699
225
v1.0.2 changelog:

- Fixed wrong impact speed calculation for car to car contact resulting in too much damage
- Fixed possible wrong grain calculations when tyre has no load
- Fixed car bottom not colliding with road
- Fixed bottom collision box for Mercedes SLS GT3, Lotus Evora GX and GTC, Ferrari 312T, Pagani Huayra
- Fixed wrong camber for remote cars on multiplayer
 

paracletus

1000RPM
Dec 6, 2013
1,188
281
hmm.. 1.02 is causing problems here :-
  • replay - all cars appear to be doing an "endo" at the start of lap (rear wheels in the air)
  • car setup screen before hot-lap : fps has plummeted
very strange.
 

Dan ONeill

500RPM
Premium
Nov 27, 2013
554
230
Getting 70-75% CPU usage tonight with this 1.0.2 doing same car/track combo as sunday when it was fine. AC server taking the other 25% means total load across all 4 cores at 95-100%!

I'm surprised it's just me? Maybe I need to look elsewhere but this is all that has changed...
 

Leonardo Chaves

1000RPM
Oct 11, 2010
1,176
413
38
Getting 70-75% CPU usage tonight with this 1.0.2 doing same car/track combo as sunday when it was fine. AC server taking the other 25% means total load across all 4 cores at 95-100%!

I'm surprised it's just me? Maybe I need to look elsewhere but this is all that has changed...
I'm getting constant hickups now.
 

Chris Cox

100RPM
Mar 28, 2013
107
23
50
Assetto corsa needs optimising better or when project cars is released people will move to that,instead of releasing a dream pack they should make the sim run better first
 

Justin

#1 overuser of the :P emoticon
Oct 26, 2010
433
439
29
Assetto corsa needs optimising better or when project cars is released people will move to that,instead of releasing a dream pack they should make the sim run better first
I find this funny as a pCARS tester as in its current build it is very poorly optimised for AMD graphics cards. Equivalent Nvidia cards get upwards of double the frame rate. That will almost definitely change come public release, but saying AC is poorly optimised is not true.

In its current state AC is extremely well optimised for how it looks, and 1.1 will improve on this significantly (smoke generation and reflections are both getting large performance gains).

Something in 1.0.2 must be up as a few people have complained about a FPS drop which I personally haven't experienced. From what I can tell depth of field might need to be turned off in PP for now as I personally don't use it and most frame drops are occurring when the effect is in use, so I'd try that first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dinca Andrei

Bernd Graf

500RPM
Nov 30, 2013
695
971
32
I find this funny as a pCARS tester as in its current build it is very poorly optimised for AMD graphics cards. Equivalent Nvidia cards get upwards of double the frame rate. That will almost definitely change come public release, but saying AC is poorly optimised is not true.

In its current state AC is extremely well optimised for how it looks, and 1.1 will improve on this significantly (smoke generation and reflections are both getting large performance gains).

Something in 1.0.2 must be up as a few people have complained about a FPS drop which I personally haven't experienced. From what I can tell depth of field might need to be turned off in PP for now as I personally don't use it and most frame drops are occurring when the effect is in use, so I'd try that first.
Agree, got a 270X and ProjectCARS has a long way to go to get 60 fps on my system, even with full medium settings, some low. AC is finely optimized, only a few glitches here and there. Stefano Casillo recently tweeted that he found fixes for the CPU status issues and GPU rates, that the game was demanding too much needless memory data from user cards. So even more fps and optimizations planned for AC. I hope pC gets their act together about AMD by March.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dinca Andrei

BroncosXR8

10RPM
Dec 13, 2014
12
2
37
I've had next to nil issues with AC until this last update.
Hard stuttering when getting the 95%> warning, generally when there are a few cars in view and when the track is really bumpy. I thought it might be due to the new floor settings that they have implemented.

W8.1, 4590k overclocked to 4.3ghz and a GTX780 OC. Have perviously been running upwards of 90fps easy.
 
Nov 9, 2014
106
31
40
Excuse me for the possibly stupid question, but I'm curious. What is this 95% CPU warning that keeps getting mentioned here and the AC forums? I have a i7-4790K @ 4,5ghz and every time I look at MSI Afterburner(290X 4GB gpu) monitoring after playing AC, I see that my CPU1 has peaked at 100%. Yet I have never seen the 95% warning. Well, don't have stuttering either.

Other cores are considerably lower though, so is it an average of core usage that issues this warning?
--
^ EDIT: Actually they're not considerably lower at all, here's my peak CPU usage values after some hotlapping(no MP):

CPU1: 100%
CPU2: 90%
CPU3: 95%
CPU4: 97%
CPU5: 77%
CPU6: 17%
CPU7: 98%
CPU8: 100%

Oh well, average 84,25% so maybe this post is as stupid as I initially suspected = more CPU, less potato! :D :rolleyes: :)
 
Last edited:

Stereo

3000RPM
Dec 22, 2009
3,681
4,412
It means one thread of the game (there are 3 last I checked - the main game thread running most stuff, one for directX's cpu component, and one for audio) is running at over 95% of a CPU's top speed. Depending how your computer allocates multithreaded programs you'll see different average loads cause Windows tends to switch threads fairly frequently. So it'll probably be running several of the threads on the same CPU (thus hitting 100% usage) but none of those threads are using it fulltime. The hard limit is that a single thread can only use one CPU at a time - so if in a second it uses CPU 0 half the time and CPU 1 half the time, that's as fast as it can go even though either CPU only has 50% load.

The threads do have to communicate so it's also possible to get slowdowns that way (eg. if one thread does half a second of stuff, then tells a second thread to do half a second of stuff you can't take advantage of multithreading) but I don't think the occupancy warning comes from that, it'll just stutter.
 

Radu Oros

1000RPM
Jul 25, 2014
1,329
409
Assetto corsa needs optimising better or when project cars is released people will move to that,instead of releasing a dream pack they should make the sim run better first
That's why Kunos already announced a big gameplay update to be released at the same time as the dream pack dlc. System optimizations, A.I improvements, better mirror fov, and other features.

That is all more than enough reason to get the dream pack, because Kunos wants to keep developing the game, not just add new content. But dlcs are the income Kunos needs to keep developing the gameplay and cover the costs for car and track licensing and development, very expensive things really. But while a department focuses on content, other programmers will work on the gameplay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paap Muru

Terry Rock

2000RPM
Oct 24, 2009
2,588
1,377
With so many different computer configurations, I don't want to discount anybody's bad experiences.
AC for me personally, has run great from the second update onward and I'm running it on fairly modest hardware. (i7-3820 and TP X79 motherboard with 16GB ram)...so not cutting edge by any means.
It still runs at an average of around 140 fps from the cockpit view on most tracks with most setting turned to upper or max. More importantly, it's very smooth.
From a driver's stand-point, the car's behavior on track is still one of...if not the most convincing of any sim to date I've run.
I think Kunos and company have done a very good job overall.
 

paracletus

1000RPM
Dec 6, 2013
1,188
281
pre-1.02, it was running smooth as silk, but the post processing is now slowing it down here - a lot.
1.02 runs well without post-processing enabled but looks bad.

whatever they have done is a step backwards on this pc (3770k).
 

Chris

9000RPM
Premium
Apr 1, 2011
9,727
6,301
1.0.3
- Switched to a different timer to avoid time drift with software overclock caused by Windows or Motherboard drivers bugs