Woah, ASUS finally released AGESA 1003AB BIOS for my mobo, now my scores are much more realistic compared to @Thomas Jansen's:
By tonight we should have a direct benchmark comparison of a i5-8600K and 1070TI, upgraded to a 2080TI.
I’m still happy with my system so no 2080ti for me for a while, nevertheless I’m curious how it turns out for you.
A not-so-difficult prediction - it will make no noticeable difference in the benchmark (it really shouldn't)
Does anyone know if Raceroom can run on max settings on the triple 27 inch 1080p at 144hz, i7 9700k and the latest Nvidia 2070 Super?
I can run it with all maxed out with my system. (On 5760x1080) So I presume you should be able too as well. Best way to find out is to try it.
Thanks good to know. Do you find a drop in performance with any particular tracks or if you race against more than 20 cars? Sorry for asking these dumb questions. Tomorrow will order a brand new computer and just want to make sure that I am getting the right one without any compromise or drop in Raceroom performance.
Well you are compromising by only getting the 2070S and not the 2080Ti but 2070S is near 1080Ti so will work enough for R3E but if uncompromised performance is goal get the 2080Ti .
My upgrade to the 3600 was definitely worth it, got my Valve Index today and I'm able to run it on 144Hz when alone on track, which is what I do a lot of as a dev nowadays anyway Can switch back to 90Hz or run at 72Hz in reprojection when doing actual races, not sure what's better yet
I pre-ordered one as well, is it true that one base station is enough for sim racing? I have zero experience with VR so I'm trying to gather as much info as I can.
Yeah it is, I had mine set up for roomscale with only one station facing my simrig at 4m distance and tracking was basically perfect
The final form, I think, of my 3600: new RAM (quick RMA) compared to last results. Nothing super fast but definitely an improvement. Maybe a new cooler would help, but I'm looking at GPU as my next major purchase. Edit: Highest minimum on the whole chart I think. Do I get an award? .1 more than thomas and balrog
Yeah, noticed exactly the same going from 1080 to 1080ti, this is definitly a highly CPU bound test. Now what is interesting to know is how does it change in game fps for you. Being CPU bound at 640x360 doesn't mean you'll be loosing much performance at actual gaming resolution especially when talking about 1440p or ultrawide res.
I only play Raceroom in VR using a Rift S. The goal is to lock at 80 FPS in a 20+ car scenario and so I have no information on FPS "gains". After upgrading from the 1070 TI to the 2080 TI, I was not able to increase supersampling beyond 1.5 and lock at 80 FPS which I was already running with the 1070 TI. I was hoping to get to 2.0 because it looks clearer for sure, but cannot without significant FPS dips. So no supersampling gains with a GPU upgrade, from my experience. I with probably be looking at a 10th Gen Intel CPU when they came out. I can't justify a 8th to 9th Gen upgrade. I was able to increase numerous in-game graphics settings that I was not able to increase before. To some degree they help, but not as much as sumpersampling, at least to my eyes. I have not had that much time to test setting combinations as methodically as I would like. What I can say is that I can now completely max out the graphics settings in The Climb, including 2X supersampling and maximum anti-aliasing which looks amazing.
Good to know, so SS is way more CPU bound than GPU bound, I come from a 1080 so rather similar to 1070ti and I upgraded to 1080ti to get more stable 90fps "lock" in VR. So I should be good with that, but not for increasing SS as I have similar CPU performance than you according to the benchmark figures, a 3700X upgrade will be necessary then... Thanks for your feedback. Were you able to run more cars on track keeping the 80 fps locked with the new GPU ? Or is it CPU bound as well ?
CPU: Intel Core i5 6600k CPU OC: 4.5Ghz Memory: 16GB DDR4-3200 MHz Dual Memory timings: CL16-18-18-36 GPU: AMD Vega 64 8GB
Your results are a bit off from what we should expect from that CPU... You must have a shit ton of software running in the background... You're leaving on the table at least double digit % performance headroom on the table imo.