Hi there !

Even though my PC is a low-end one, I still manage to get over 150 FPS, but sometimes, for example - if there's approx 20 individuals on the track, it does affect my FPS. Mainly the solution of that is to click button ''f'', but is there any way to increase FPS even more ?

Example #2 - many objects on the track do affect my FPS a lot as well, so is there any chance to improve that too ? :P

I'm not saying at all that such improvements should be done, but it would be great to have stable FPS when there's many objects and / or individuals on the track [after all, I don't want to use the ''f'' button over and over again to improve my FPS when there's a such need =[ ].

NOTE - Regarding the objects, they do not really affect my FPS that much, but right after I see another car approaching me, FPS begins to drop - so I guess it's more likely to be ''more cars near me affect my FPS roughly''.

Each object on the track adds complexity. An extra car means LFS has to do an extra set of physics calculations, an extra cone means LFS has to do an extra set of collision detection for that cone. Everything can be optimized to some extent, but the rule of "more objects = lower FPS" will always apply.

I do believe that LFS only uses 1 core of a CPU, and all the rendering and calculations lowers FPS drastically, when in a full grid.

true Zippy it does only use 1core.. ://

Bump because I would love to get better fps.

The bump was just to you show your signature, wasn't?

Multiplacating cars is a pain for low end pcs. Multiplicate the number of poly plus the physic calculation. Anyway LFS is pretty well optimised except that it would benefit from multicore.
Anyway on high end pc (4 cores and graphic card not too old) it is hard to go under 100fps in hd... not loading a single core to 100%...

well would it be possible to cache or bind items in the scenery as singular objects, preloaded along with the textures, prerendered or the possiblity to remove them ( tree's and such you pay no attention to when driving fast say... on KY1 layout for example ) ideal as this game is surprizingly taxing on a i3 with intel Hd...

Quote from Si Mclaren :

The bump was just to you show your signature, wasn't?

No, it was because I want better fps.

What kind of computers you guys have that you struggle with performance? LFS runs fine on any gaming rig less than 5 years old.

Quote from MadCatX :

What kind of computers you guys have that you struggle with performance? LFS runs fine on any gaming rig less than 5 years old.

AMD Athlon +3000 1.8 GHz, 2 GB of RAM, 1 GB of VRAM. I think I really need a new CPU

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4400+ 2.30 Ghz 4 gigs RAM. Nvidia 9600 GSO

This brings up the fact that LFS would probably greatly benefit from GPU physics of Scawen ever decides to implement it.


For example, CUDA?

Would there be much point in CUDA physics? As far as I know, GPU-physics are most effective for things like particle systems where you have a large number of simple physics objects; the advantage comes from using the massively-parallel capabilities of GPUs to run the same 'shader' to calculate the physics for each particle.

I would have though in something like a driving sim, where you have a (relatively) small number of complex, very diverse components, the advantage of parallel processing would be more than lost due to having to upload/download everything to and from the GPU every physics tick.

Hm, CUDA for calculating particle effects(smoke etc.) would be indeed cool, but a bit of overkill