today I decided to put my personal textures in 0.6H3 and I faced problem about textures "wrong format" (in printscreen). this changed my FPS for some reason, but textures works normal. i have this in 0.6h without any issues.

Quote from MiniVan :

so many VOB mods, and unofficial accounts, this community has gone downhill.

I agree. this mods changed physics 1% to 10% or more, but looks nice all good for this kids.... people with unofficial account play years on demo servers and never buy s2....in my opinion LFS need free demo with 30 dias or something like that, no free so many years.

Quote from Scawen :

Quote from Abone :

cfg.txt works, but the difference between 0 and x8 is very small. I installed again 0.6E, 0.6F, 0.6G, and i dont have any antialiasing functions.. i really dont understand why.

Could it be a graphics card driver option, somehow forcibly disabling Multisampling AA? I am trying to imagine how DX9 could report that AA settings are not available. If there are any such options then the usual one should be "application controlled".

this is not necessarily disabling Multisampling AA, i guess. just use it to define the quality in the application (LFS) as shown in the picture.

PS:I do not know if my video card supports Multisampling AA ... if not, why antialiasing work with cfg.txt?

Last edited by Abone, Thu, 2 Jul 2015 20:09.

Quote from Scawen :

Quote from Abone :

I got fps improvements, but still drop in points I mentioned before (in printscreen). for some reason I dont have full-scene antialiasing and mirror antialiasing in options. previously i modify the values in cfg.txt for this reason.

I get a frame rate drop at those same three places. Normally it doesn't affect things but for example in the Rift it will drop below 75 fps and that means stuttering.

I've written it down to take a close look if there's anything strange / buggy going on there. But it may not turn out to be anything really strange... a lot of scenery can be seen from those locations.

Those missing antialiasing functions... strange. In the code I see this means the D3D function "CheckDeviceMultiSampleType" is not indicating that there are any valid AA settings. When you set it in cfg.txt does it have any effect? Do you remember a version which did have these settings available in the options screen?

Quote from cargame.nl :

Yes, this; https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/1887346#post1887346

Exactly what I keep repeating... "modern" CPU's which are not properly utilized.

Well... in a sense they are not properly utilized... if you mean that LFS isn't taking advantage of multiple cores? I'd like to do physics and graphics on separate threads at some point, but it's a big restructure and is some way down the (imaginary) priority list.

On the other hand if we accept that this is a single thread program for now, it does seem that a lot of CPU is used at some points and this can use all available CPU power, so limiting the frame rate without fully loading the GPU. Seems to be related to the large number of objects at Westhill and LFS doesn't yet have the optimisations to deal with that. I'll have that closer look again at those specific places.

In your case, is there any noticeable change from H to H2 / H2 to H3 or does it all seem much the same?

cfg.txt works, but the difference between 0 and x8 is very small. I installed again 0.6E, 0.6F, 0.6G, and i dont have any antialiasing functions.. i really dont understand why.

note: improvements 6H to H3, dont see any difference in H2

I got fps improvements, but still drop in points I mentioned before (in printscreen). for some reason I dont have full-scene antialiasing and mirror antialiasing in options. previously i modify the values in cfg.txt for this reason.

Quote from Gutholz :

Press "S" to place start-position for time-attack mode.
OR
To build startgrid use the grid-positions from "controll" tab of objects.
But that only works in multiplayer because AI drivers can not drive custom layouts.

i know, I was wondering if it would be possible in single player.it is definitely impossible,thanks dude.

hello everyone. I tried to make a race (single player) on the autocross track, but I'm not the place to put the cars on the starting grid before the race starts .. can It is not possible to race in autocross?someone help me?

It has been mentioned before, but we need support to create tracks(for old and new people come here )....the people are tired of being deceived with minor updates,more than 70% of players lose hope and migrated for others simulators (simply delete DEMO servers and observe s2 activity). money is missing ? maybe because it was spent on something that should not be high-priority?i dont know ....... my account not have much time and I'm really disappointed with what I've been watching since I got.. for older users is always the same boring tracks, for me ( new here) is boring the online community so weak.

Quote from -LegoBased- :

Honestly don't see what's hard in adding some more coders to the team. There are a lot of amazing coders in the community that will be glad to help. I just think for such a huge project this is a lot for 1 person..

Been on LFS for 7-8 years now took a break and came back 6 years later and it is still the same team and same game with few little updates. Sad to say but the community is really dying out. People only stick to LFS now because it is truly the best racing sim out for pc at the moment. Just a matter of time until something else comes and steal the remaining players that still plays.

I agree, adding that some of these players do not stay more than 15 minutes by LFS be getting really boring

I can guess what comes afterwards, but do not want to talk about it. I do not know what happens to the racers so I speak of what I see in drift servers. just see a lot of lazy people who think know everything, ignore people by name or team tags, etc .... of course the problem is the community and not in LFS. maybe ppl come back with a support for track creation (exemple : real life tracks) and create more options like engine, etc .. in today's cars. i cant see real life cars, LFS with real life cars is not more LFS. I think tracks can be made by users with few rules, maybe evaluation period made by developers before that content be released...( I think devs save time and we would have more content). just my opinion

previously I showed my system and printscreens where my fps drops (all I was shown around drift). this week i made a races with XRG for fun and not faced screen so strong lags. I think the FPS drop also is related to the number of calls per objects and in drift camera movements are 90% higher, which provides large calls for objects and faster due to speed of movement.

the difference is significant with the same FPS

Last edited by Abone, Sat, 2 May 2015 21:47. Reason : bad english

Quote from MadCatX :

You might want to get ThrottleStop and check the CPU clock while you're playing. Your CPU and GPU are on the same chip and if they're both working at full power, it might easily overheat and throttle down.

I tested and ThrottleStop dont make difference, it is not overheating stupidly (continued stable), the only changes that are lags in the 3 points I mentioned in westhill. i find information (in official site) about ThrottleStop and it can damage the computer's battery or other components, is not good for use i guess.

Quote from cargame.nl :

No I am not wrong. Your CPU is dual core, 4 threads and while one part is completely busy the other part of the CPU is doing nothing.

25% is the max you can score concerning LFS because LFS uses only one thread. The problems are not @GPU. If you would have a GPU monitor you will see that the GPU load stays steady. But you cannot run a GPU analyzer because of crappy "GPU". Which is not a GPU, just a Media Accelerator. (Youtube and such).

I do not I mentioned to you. interesting your explanation, thank you. you have way to use all the CPU without damaging my laptop?

Quote from Gutholz :

@Abone
You only have a "Intel HD graphics", that is not a "real" graphics card.
It is just something built into the CPU so that the processor can act a bit like a graphics card. Means CPU has to do both, normal CPU-work AND graphics-works, it is not very good.
Even a very cheap graphic cards would probally make a big difference, not sure if it is possible to upgrade. (Is it a laptop?)
Those onboard graphics are never very powerful, it is more for office-work etc. One can not expect good performance for games without gfx card.

You are wrong, As you can see in the printscreen my CPU is working very well(remains stable across the curve) a turn where FPS drops. maybe the problem is GPU. but I think every case is different and we are reporting problems we see in our system.correct me if I'm wrong.

Quote from oleroc :

@abone
You should really upgrade to windows 64-bit. As you can see from your system page, you are only able to utilize about half of your installed memory. With 64-bit windows, you can utilize all, less onboard graphic card use.

You should also check out your bios settings, and see if you can ramp up the cards dedicated Video memory a notch.

yes I know, I got this information before. I have my keyboard broken(now i use usb keyboard) and CD player does not work, it does not enter the bios by the normal method ( you if know more help me for open bios). I'm hoping some friends with more knowledge resolve this issue for formatting. memory is not the problem, but it would be good to use 100% of it

As promised here are print screens with my system requirements, places with critical descent FPS ( screen and sometimes sound lags)


I got intel HD graphics and Power Options in max performance. with msconfig i enable 4 processors(with 1,2,3 or 4 dont make a difference in LFS), disable unnecessary processes, desckpot windows classic and i use CCleaner alwyas before a open my LFS. my hard drive has 407 GB free.

It is not a supercomputer I know, but these places except I do not have a so drastic FPS drop, have a low fps (not always) but he is stable.

Quote from Scawen :

Quote from Abone :

according to the description Scawen we do not have significant improvements and in future FPS will drop further ..... this patch has no graphical improvements, just have files with a higher resolution, something that users already previously created(HD textures) without obtaining problems with fps. Scawen explain the problem, but without much will to fix in my opinion .. a quad-core i5-3570K is not exactly a bad computer and you got the same problem XD

What? Have you seen the new Westhill?

It seems from what you are saying, you think it is just like any of our other tracks but with higher resolution textures. That is not the case at all. It has about 3 times the number of objects and far more geometric detail.

Quote from kristipops1 :

Quote from Papa :

At first I thought it was a problem WITH recent drivers since I updated to the latest drivers not too long ago. So I installed some older drivers again which didn't lead to any difference at all.

I will test whether I get the same results with one screen at 1920x1080 later this week.

Well i have done it before u then, fps drops even more :)1920x1080

I'm not sure what you are saying. Are you saying that you get high frame rate in a window. but not when in full screen mode?

I don't think we can do anything with this information unless you tell us what type of computer you are using. I'm not seeing a pattern here but it's hard to see a pattern or a connection without a bit more information.

At the moment it seems I am mainly seeing people saying things like:

"I have frame rate issues on Westhill"
"I have lower frame rate on all tracks"
"My computer has frame rate issues when in full screen"
"My laptop randomly goes into power saving mode"
"There is a lower frame rate when a lot of detail is visible"
"It is all good and running smoothly on my computer"

And this is why there isn't really much I can do at the moment. There is some time now for me to look into certain optimisations, and have a look and check that the hidden object removal has indeed been generated well and doesn't randomly draw the whole world at some points, in case there are any such bugs. But I don't think there are such bugs, really, because it works well and smoothly on most computers. I do understand that some computers are struggling with the higher level of geometric detail and high memory use due to the textures. That was always going to be the case if we went for higher level of detail.

Seems a bit like this:

Before 0.6H: "Why do you insist on making LFS run on a Casio wristwatch from the 1980s?"

After 0.6H: "OMG this is impossible, I don't have a Cray supercomputer!"

I agree and understand what you said earlier, but textures for high resolution improved the track by 90% or more in my opinion. if we go back to old tracks we can see that the fps is not more stable as a 0.6G version and old tracks not have both geometric work as the new Westhill or more objects... I dont have issues on old tracks (reason is better fps sure) , my problem is only in the new westhill. later introduce printscreens showing the places where the fps descent is critical and my system requirements.

Last edited by Abone, Fri, 17 Apr 2015 10:13.

Quote from Papa :

Quote from Papa :

I also faced some FPS drop trouble when first trying out 0.6H and the new Westhill environment today. I was running LFS on a AMD Radeon 7950 at 5760x1080 and full detail with FPS never really dropping below 80 before, but today encountered some serious FPS drops to below 20. Even lowering details didn't really help much. It's not only Westhill, but on other tracks FPS seem to be significantly lower as well.

Well, I haven't been looking to deep into what's going on on my machine, CPU (quad-core i5-3570K btw) and GPU-wise. I was just surprised about how huge the difference in FPS was going from 0.6F to 0.6H, not only in Westhill.

I average now like 30 FPS on WE1 with frames really jumping from 15-40 back and forth while going around the track (while still running LFS at 5760x1080 and full detail as before). Lowering all the details didn't really lead to significantly increased FPS (around 10-15 FPS maybe).

When switching to windowed mode I steadily gain ~100 FPS. So I went back to maxed out settings and run LFS having 100-160 FPS at WE1 in the largest possible window that spans over all three screens. While windowed mode is somewhat ugly, at least racing is possible again (regardless of graphic details).

Maybe also an option for other people who can live with these minor flaws. Or even a hint on what may be the problem here.

according to the description Scawen we do not have significant improvements and in future FPS will drop further ..... this patch has no graphical improvements, just have files with a higher resolution, something that users already previously created(HD textures) without obtaining problems with fps. Scawen explain the problem, but without much will to fix in my opinion .. a quad-core i5-3570K is not exactly a bad computer and you got the same problem XD

Quote from vourliotis :

i think isnt about low specs hardware, the frame drop at some points at Westhill. I usually have over 150fps but at 1-2 corners frames drop at 80.
Problem is at even at 80 i am facing lag for a moments, which isnt usual for 80fps.
Maybe the memory usage is the problem, as a friend above mention.

I convert all dds files to 128x128 and Fps still drop. my texture memory usage after convert is 23.0mb, so problem is not memory. in other tracks fps down little, but have more stability (dont drop)

Quote from MandulAA :

Quote from Abone :

Quote from MandulAA :

Liked the video! Does he know that the service roads are drivable?

This way of calling us stupid is not very friendly, if you've had the same problem, your comment would be different .

Mate, you COMPLETELY misunderstood my comment. I talked about GamerMuscle, who uploaded the Westhill review video.

You're right. I apologize.

Quote from MandulAA :

Quote from fatalunfair :

It's funny when people complain this game needs higher graphics and no one has an ancient computer anymore that can't run games at higher graphics settings, then everyone is complaining when Westhill is a little bit heavier track.. Oh well

+1

Liked the video! Does he know that the service roads are drivable?

This way of calling us stupid is not very friendly, if you've had the same problem, your comment would be different .

Last edited by Abone, Mon, 6 Apr 2015 00:45.

Quote from luki97 :

Quote from Abone :

Scawen, FPS still drop in new Westhill. I think you do not want to fix it... Good luck

Well there are fps drops still. I didn't make full tests of 0.6h and im not sure if you devs made some improvement on this thing but for a first look i think (but can't be 100% sure without full testing) there is no more game freezes (at least for me) in those 3 places i've mentioned.

here fps drop in the same places and another thing I did not mention ( fps in normal track, track x or y are the same) i dont have this problem on old tracks this happen only in new westhill.

i dont really understand why

Scawen, FPS still drop in new Westhill. I think you do not want to fix it... Good luck

Hello everyone..

Scawen, i and others talk about fps drop but we dont have nothing for show you. well.. this time i have one video for show you how much fps drop. this guy on video have really good system, so he dont have really problems. watching all video please, but if you start on 10:23 minutes you see incredible 330 fps drop to 225fps, in one computer not so good this is really bad.

note: He driving on outside zone and karting tracks but is good for you see what happen in other systems

link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wiBpQmwdAs

Quote from luki97 :

Quote from Scawen :

An occasional frame rate loss has been reported by several people. For some reason apparently the CPU is randomly switching to power saving mode. I don't know of any way to avoid that, but I believe you can avoid it with your settings.

Well for me it only happens in 3 places (on the westhill international) and it's probably not cpu power saving mode, i have always everything on 100%. (even with turned off cpu termal throttling in bios).
Basically if people have good or average pc 100fps+ and on that 3 places of the track which i've posted before in my previous post they have drops to around 60-70fps and they don't think its bad because they still have 60-70fps which is still very comfortable to play.

But if someone have older pc (or poor gpu like mine) then it drops from my average 30-40fps which i have (and that's fps its quite okay for most track) to even 15-20fps at those places which is not so good then. For me (and my poor integrated gpu) those places of the track are:
1. entry of the last corner at westhill international (drops from 40-60fps to 20-25)
In the middle of the corner somehow its going back to 40-60fps.
2. exit of the last corner at westhill international (when exiting from last turn and looking at main straight) again drops to 20-25fps.
Well in the main straight from pit entry to the first corner again somehow its back to 30-40fps which is ok for me.
3. First turn at the westhill international here it sometimes drops to even 15fps or less if more cars is in the race (but when driving alone it drops to like 15-20fps)

I think that might be a thing that in those places there is much things or objects to render maybe, and it needs to render them now and sometimes (mainly at first turn) game freezes a little (0.1s-0.5s). As sayed before, without that 3 places where fps hugely drops rest of the track is great and there is no fps drops and the rest of the track at my poor integrated gpu is around 30-40fps and sometimes even goes to around 80fps .

Oh and almost forget, with lower resolution track textures (it quite helps) game not freezes (at least not when driving alone) but that fps drops still not gone away and it didn't fixed my problem with fps drops.

happen the same with me. i put all settings low performance and fps drop in specific places. so i make a test, i convert all dds files to 128x128 for better performance(unlucky). fps drop always for me and all players but people with good computer dont cry about..

My texture memory usage with low performance:

Before convert - 81.6mb
After convert - 23.0mb

problem is not textures, is the new system i guess.

devs not close our eyes to this