We've been looking for multi-gpu support for awhile. Although there will always be those who argue that it isn't required, it's surprising it wasn't implemented during the early stages of this game considering serious sim enthusiast probably have multi-gpu's and monitors / TV's with resolutions greater than 1080P. Good luck trying to run this game on Surround Gsync 1440P monitors maintaining 120FPS with a single GPU let alone 60FPS at the highest settings. I've got a 60" 4K Samsung TV and ASUS 28"4K Monitor that requires multi-GPU's to play at 60FPS. Adding that additional GPU usually nets much more than a few FPS as long as the game has been optimized. Edit Looks like crossfire may be working. Try disabling Shadow Split in the video options. Noticed in-game flickering disappeared and both of my GPU's were under load. Menu's still exhibit flickering though. I also suggest deleting the "graphics_options.xml" file located under X:\My Documents\my games\SimBin\RaceRoom Racing Experience\UserData
shadow split? shadow contacts? im not at home but i dont recall a split option. I'm the one who created the other crossfire topic that mentioned you could use the F1_2015.exe crossfire profile to use crossfire in RRE. But also this was broken after the mid december RRE update. I will try you fix this weekend. first and foremost, you play the game using the monitor. Fixing the presentation is paramount. Most "show your setup" topics are full with tripplescreens for obvious reasons. This ain't a first person shooter.
Even though CF/SLi is not supported by RRE/S3 does not mean it has no benefit at all. I am not a computer wiz or a technician, I am just an incessant tinkerer.Look, read, adjust, modify, touch, try, test, learn. I am an AMD user also. I am Running CF Asus Direct CUII OC R290X and Previously CF 7970. I have always ( Since SimBin 2013/14 ?) ran RaceRoom and every other title i play sim or not,with CF enabled. I just ran some testing in Audi TT car @ Laguna, Bathurst, and Hockenheim. I definitely, and consistently got 10 - 20 higher Frames with CF enabled, and that's being conservative. I understand that what works for my system may not work for others. However, i have spent hours upon hours of testing, testing and re testing different CCC and more recently Crimson and game settings to get the game to run and look as best it can for me and my system. I run 3 x LG 27" monitors @ 5760 x 1080 @ 60Hz, not the best, buy they do the Job and look fine to me. In Game i run everything ON or on High except for - FXAA - I can run it, but off looks better to me. Motion Blur -- Off Shadow Split - Off Shader - Med Car Shadows - Off Contact Shadows - 10 Other Cocks - Off those giant sign posts - definitely off. Number Vis cars - 15 Vsync - Off and the view thingy - 0.8. In Game FPS = 180 -200 / solo and 130-150 with 23 cars on track. ( According to the steam FPS counter app i always have running bottom left screen.) My AMD Radeon Settings are default with CF enabled. The OC cards are factory set from Asus. The game still runs smooth with one card, however i have two, so Fruck it, Iam going to use them. Just my opinion
I too would love to see proper multi gpu support in R3E. It's one of the few sims (seemingly the only now) that doesnt have any form of working multi gpu support. I have been hoping for quite a while now this would turn into more than just a wish, and have asked the devs about this before, but sadly, it's just one of those things that needs to be pushed to make room for other more important programming. I suppose it's probably because few people actually use multi gpu setups, so the benefit for a massive amount of work will not be felt by everyone. And if development of multi gpu support pushed back other things... Im sure a large portion of people would then come to these forums and start complaining that "X" or "Y" is taking too long to be added. That said, those that dont have 2 or more gpus might not understand the necessity, or value of them. It's a tremendous way to gain more life from your computer without shelling out hundreds of dollars on a top of the line gpu. Not everyone can afford $400 on a new gpu every year... But an extra $100 for a mid range card that is a year old to add to your existing gpu, hell yeah. Also, those with high refresh rate monitors need multi gpu support, even more so with a triple monitor setup. Personally, I get anywhere from 90-120 fps while playing. Sounds good for a sim right? But since I have a 144Hz display, Im between 20-50 away from my monitors max refresh. Of course, this is by no means an easy thing to code. I've seen @pixeljetstream talk about this here and on RD i believe (or maybe some other sim racing forum), and he probably has more knowledge on this topic than anyone here. So he could probably further explain why driver support isnt a thing. From what I know, it is true that AMD/Nvidia help devs with official driver support. However, look at who they are helping. Triple A game devs. Not lowly sim racing devs. They also have a certain amount of staff and cant provide official driver support for every single game out there. R3E is one of literally thousands that would request support. So AMD/Nvidia pick and choose who they help, or I suppose whoever pays them more A game with a 'small' audience isnt going to get official help there. Will we see multi gpu support in R3E though? I know it is on the devs radar as something they want to do. I believe they have even mentioned in the past couple months that they want to get to working on it. Shame we dont have it working, but what else is there to do really? Complain about it all the time? I know I could, but I dont let these things bother me. Woah, massive hyperbole there. I know from my setup, my 2nd gpu gets me a whole hell of a lot more than 2-3 fps. No game has perfect double performance scaling... but I easily get around 180% performance of 1 single gpu. Yes, nearly double. More or less depending on the game/implementation. When you are talking near double... that would put me close to 200 fps. With that high of a frame rate, I can finish maxing the graphics settings I dont have turned up, or add more AA. So to say multi-gpus dont have their place is a bit mistaken. As well as saying a gain of 2-3 fps. No game has that awful of performance scaling unless it doesnt support multi gpu setups at all. In which case, it is usually a hindrance to have your 2nd gpu enabled.
what are you guys talking about. When crossfire is enabled, the framerate drops to 20~ ish and the image is flickery7corrupted
As you said due to economic reality the hardware companies will focus on what helps them in terms of marketing, or what has strategic value... paid by developers hardly makes any sense. why would a game developer pay for something he doesn't make money off. It is not like the small percentage of multi-GPU users would help boost the game sales that much. The game has to stand on its own. However both hardware vendors provide guidelines to developers to avoid pitfalls for multi-gpu usage. Even if a title is not "officially" supported on the hardware vendors list of titles, that shouldn't mean it doesn't work (as others have mentioned before). Developers have either by chance not fallen into any pitfalls, and it works just fine, or they have taken guidelines into account early on and kept an eye on it. Then the investment by the game/engine developer is not that high and he can offer it as additional value to the customer... As someone else mentioned taking care of this early on is "easier" than retro-fitting some grown code (which is what likely applies to R3E as some of the devs hinted in past interviews). Therefore it's hard to say how much work it really is to fix the pitfalls, it could be something rather simple, a day's job, or something more ingrained into the system... in both cases requires some time and understanding to hunt the issue down, which also requires hardware... Which leads to another level of investment, and that is in hardware. Again the very big developers will likely get some of that stuff for free, but small developers would have to invest into a couple multi-GPU systems for testing and development... Multi-GPU is a bit a of gamble, and sometimes it doesn't work out, other times it's a great way to improve perf at good costs. Even for the very latest games with effects like temporal AA or in general the use of last-frames result is troublesome. Some games tend to use the last frame's image to improve the reflection quality, now you cannot use the last-frame in the multi-GPU case as that frame is on a different GPU and we don't have a dedicated high bandwidth connection between GPUs. So you have to go back one more frame, that will decrease the quality, as there is more "drift" in pixels from 2 frames then just 1 frame ago... For VR the situation should be a bit better, as we have one per eye and not this frame-alternating. Hope that sheds more light on it.
Okay, now I'm a little confused. If you 'easily' get 180%, and no game has perfect double performance...... What exactly would 'proper' multi-GPU support entail? Besides, 180% seems to be a very rare case. Taking mattemans numbers, he's seeing a further 10-20 FPS. Compared to 180-200 on one GPU. So we're looking at a 10% increase, maybe 15%. For double the GPU expense. Now, I'm not questioning whether another GPU will increase your frames. Of course it will. And if you have them, by all means use them. Anything else would be daft. What I'm questioning is whether it's cost-effective. Obviously we'd all like to have dual GTX Titans in our machines. But the phrase 'overkill' does spring to mind. Speaking of overkill.... I've never really understood why people wish to have everything cranked up to max. It's a racing-game. You're unlikely to stop and admire the view in the first place. Lower your expectations (and your sliders) a little bit, and your FPS will sky-rocket. I mean, I'm running triple-screens on a dinky little GTX560SE with fairly decent frames. Just because the game is theoretically capable of doing 100+FPS with everything maxed, doesn't mean you necessarily have to do so to enjoy it.
I wanted to get 2x crossfire cards, but went against it. So I will just stuck to my single R9290X 8G, that thing has more than enough horsepower to drive my 34 curved 4K monitor.. I get 60 on ultra.. Don't need anything more I guess.. Ant
Apologies if I wasnt clear enough or didnt word things well. Basically, in games that support multi-gpu setups, you can expect to gain a lot of fps over using 1 single gpu. That is pretty much a given correct? In my experience from all of the games I have played with my gtx 660's in sli, i get around 180% performance of 1 gpu. Basically, if 1 of my gpus can output 100 fps in a game, using 2 of the same gpus gets me around 180 fps (or 180% the performance of 1 gpu). Not perfectly double, but quite close to it. No game can possibly offer perfect double performance (or triple if you have 3 gpus), so nearly double is quite good. Since this thread is about R3E lacking multi-gpu support, I think it can be inferred that using more than 1 gpu is non-beneficial. As in, since Crossfire/SLI isnt supported at all, my 2nd gpu gets me exactly 0 extra performance. In fact, having both gpus enabled actually loses me a few fps. So whenever I play R3E, I go into the Nvidia control panel and disable my 2nd gpu. Proper support would simply mean that the 2nd gpu is utilized, and I would then expect to see about 180% of the performance I am getting now. Currently, my 1st gpu is being utilized 100% and my 2nd gpu is being utilized 0%. Hopefully that clears this part up. 180% is not a rare case at all. In games that support multi-gpu setups, that is pretty close to standard, at least for Nvidia. AMD might be a bit different but I am unfamiliar with their multi-gpu performance. Matteman is getting 10-20 fps more simply because R3E doesnt support more than 1 gpu... You are referring to performance numbers in a game that doesnt support the feature. So, since this isnt supported at all, any increase is a surprise. Again, in games that support crossfire/sli, you can expect a hefty gain. As for the value of adding a 2nd gpu... I can offer first hand experience. Both of my gpus total about $250. If I were to replace them with a single gpu, I would expect to spend the same amount of money just to exceed their performance. Right now, the most recent single gpu that can do that, is the gtx 970. Which beats my setup by about 10-15% depending on game/benchmark. Not very much. So for my gpus to get so close to a 970 is quite a value. So, you would prefer to have less world detail? More jagged edges? No shadows at all? No reflections? Or anything else that eats up framerates. Your statement reads as though every game should just get rid of their max settings because they are unnecessary and people dont need them If you have the horsepower to crank up the graphics, might as well do it. And I have been quite happy with how R3E looks while maintaining decent frame rates. Cheers
Okay, so we've been talking past each other here. I read it as if you were getting 180% in R3E, not in officially supported SLI/Xfire games. Couldn't figure out why 180% wasn't enough. Now, now, stop putting words in my mouth. Yes, if you have the horsepower by all means utilize it. But reading through this thread there are a number of posts speaking of wanting to be able to run everything maxed out on triple-screen 144p. My question is, how much of this detail do they even notice at 160+mph? Animated backgrounds? 10+ contact shadows? SparseGridSuperSampling? Really? Try removing some of the less important ones, and see if you even notice. Again, just because the game gives you the ability to have animated pit-babes cheering you on every time you cross the finish-line, it doesn't mean it'll actually contribute anything worthwhile to the experience. (Though come to think of it, I wouldn't switch that particular option off....ever. ) And just for the record, I'm also quite happy with the way R3E looks, even on my very modest rig.
hehe sorry about that. If I got 180% performance in R3E, I would be way more than pleased. Even a little bit more than I get now would be more than enough for me. Although, with my 144Hz monitor, it would be nice to have sli working so I could max the refresh rate of my monitor. But, 100 fps overall isnt really all that bad. I may have been exaggerating a bit I think if someone has triple screens, high refresh rate, and high resolution, they should expect to turn down some settings to even get 60 fps, as that kind of setup is very demanding. Or, they will just need a top of the line gpu to be able to get the kind of experience they want. But I guess if they can afford high end monitors, a high end gpu goes with the territory. I havent really ever turned down the graphics all the way, so I dont have first hand experience of what they look like. Since even with a mid range gpu from a couple years ago, I can nearly max every setting and still get ~100 fps. Although, I have seen screen shots of the game at lower settings and there is a difference. Cant really say how much I would notice while driving, but of course, driving would be center stage for me and visuals 2nd. Cant argue with having some pit babes though I do think you are right with your thoughts though. Cranking up visuals at the expense of a smooth driving experience is never the way to go. Especially in sim racing where having high frame rates and lower latency is more crucial than in an action game or an RPG. If I had to, I would definitely lower the settings enough to get the frame rates to where I have them now. And come to think of it, I am pretty fortunate I get such good frame rates and can still crank up the settings. Some games just dont provide that luxury.
Simple because we can...? It's all fine and dandy that some people are willing to accept lowering some IQ settings in-game to make it run smoothly with their setup, and that's totally OK! Considering you're running triple screen 3840x720 (Based on your sig specs) that's not very demanding at all and very well within the limits of your GTX 560SE. Try that with lower settings on triple 1440P or even triple 4K. It'll definitely bring you back to the good days of Sim Bins GTR2 when it comes to visual fidelity. Now I get that it's all about enjoying the game regardless of your setup, however if the game is capable of giving you the ability to max it out isn't that part of the experience and immersion? Surely if one's goals were to build a dedicated system just to play RRE this may not even be an issue, but for those that enjoy othre games that require advanced hardware, i'm sure they would love to be able to maximize their setup with this game also.
Here's a shot with Native 3840x2160 4K. Notice my OSD on the top left both of my GPU's are full load which usually tells me that Crossfire is usually working. (Not always the case) There are times both GPU's will show a full load without a significant increase of performance which can only be tested by isolating to one GPU. Playable FPS is subjective for everyone as 60 maybe smooth for some while 120 and 144 for others. Enabling Vsync usually removes the unsightly screen tearing at the cost of possible input lag and high latency if your system can't keep up with your monitors refresh rate. Crossfire Enabled 144 FPS Crossfire Disabled 80 FPS Looks like Crossfire seems to be working! Far cry from a couple FPS... We can dig in even more with performance data logs of Crossfire enabled/disabled. If you guys would like to see. Now until S3 validates working Multi-GPU this is all we really have to go by for now. Performance was kinda wacky with the last couple RRE updates. I noticed my performance was smooth again when I disabled Shadow Split in the video options. Keep in mind Crossfire is not fully ready yet as the game menu's still flickers until you get to the drive screen. Also be sure to lower car reflections quality a bit to minimize in-game flickering with some of the textures.
Went ahead and did a comparison using the latest version of FRAPS, MSI Afterburner, Rivatuner, RRRE Version 0.3.0.4863. My System Specs Intel i7 5820k @ 4.3ghz | Asus X99M-WS Motherboard | Sapphire VAPOR-X R9 290X 8GB (CrossfireX @ 1030mhz) | Corsair 16gb Vengeance Ram LPX | Crucial M4 256gb SSD | Toshiba 4TB 7200rpm HDD | Silverstone Temjin TJ08-E Case | Swiftech Apogee Drive II | EK VAPOR-X GPU Water-Block X2 | Bitspower 5.25" Single Bay Reservoir | Alphacool XT45 180mm Radiator | Alphacool UT60 120mm Radiator | Nidec Gentle Typhoon AP29 controlled by Asus FanXpert | Silverstone AP182 180mm Fan | Asus PB287Q 28" 4k Monitor Video Options Video options were set to High with AMD Crossfire disabled however with Crossfire enabled you're required to disable Shadow Split for optimal Crossfire performance which is the reason you see the settings at Custom for the following images. Results Notice the increase in FPS with Crossfire enabled from a maximum of 82 FPS disabled to 130 FPS Enabled. RRRE Version should read 0.3.0.4863. Crossfire Disabled Crossfire Enabled Notes As of RRRE Version 0.3.04863 I noticed every time you change a video option you're required to restart the game for optimal performance. For example I changed Shadow Split and Car Reflection Quality without restarting I noticed my performance dropped significantly as well as this odd missing textures for the cars. All is well once the game was restarted. Another thing I noticed was when racing with the AI there is flickering texture corruptions with the in-game race stat banner up top. You can tame that by enabling VSync and lowering Car Reflection Quality when Crossfire is Enabled. Just remember if your system can't keep up with your monitors refresh rate with VSync enabled you will get FPS drops. Main menu's will flicker until you reach the drive screen with Crossfire enabled. Last but not least for those playing with less demanding resolutions compared to 1080P+ Surround/Eyefinity, High refresh, 1440P and 4K+, naturally you may not notice the difference between single and multi-gpu performance. With this game you may not even require another GPU. It's more of a justification that it works on your setup, but not on everyone else who may have higher end setups... Can it be playable? For sure! Multi-GPU Support? Hit or miss... [ EDIT ] Main Menu Flicker Fix The UI menu flicker can easily be fixed with a command line: Right Click on the game in the steam library. Click "properties." Click "SET LAUNCH OPTIONS..." Enter -cefNoGPU -cefNoD3D11 -cefLogInfo in the text field. Click Ok. Start the game. Cheers!
Sure thing! Interesting results! Performance dropped when Shadow Split is disabled for single GPU when Crossfire is disabled. Notes Based on these results it leads me to believe this game was developed from the ground up using a single GPU. (DUH!) haha. I'm sure as soon as S3 gets out of beta we will have Single GPU's available to crush this game with multi and high refresh rate monitor's. AMD Polaris and Nvidia Pascal are right around the corner.
Disabling shadow split does indeed enable good crossfire results. I still found the game to sometimes stutter heavily with crossfire enabled, and some image corruption here and there. Its not a perfect fix but workable
5ghz i7 2600k 2x R9 290x watercooled Latest Crimson beta driver The stutters appeared mostly when the image moved vertically (big bumps)
I suggest deleting the "graphics_options.xml" file located under X:\My Documents\my games\SimBin\RaceRoom Racing Experience\UserData And reset your video settings including disable Shadow Split. Does this happen with AI racing and practice single racing? How's the performance when you turn Vsync on? Another option is to use the Frame Rate Control while disabling in-game Vsync in the Crimson Control and see if that balances it all out. Did you make sure to install the latest Crimson drivers with a clean install using Display Driver Uninstaller DDU (Link)?