Quote from Scawen :

Do you (anyone) think it is a bad idea to enable AA by default?

Not really. It's fine! Also can you disable "window on connection" by default? Is it needed anyway? Connecting is almost instant nowadays

Quote from DarkKostas :

Not really. It's fine! Also can you disable "window on connection" by default? Is it needed anyway? Connecting is almost instant nowadays

It is a default option, if firewall ( or any antivirus software with firewall) pops out on the window, it is easier to select "allow connection", if having first time starting the LFS.exe. Also, after that you can select not window on connection and it stays on memory afterwards.

Quote from UnknownMaster21 :

It is a default option, if firewall ( or any antivirus software with firewall) pops out on the window, it is easier to select "allow connection", if having first time starting the LFS.exe. Also, after that you can select not window on connection and it stays on memory afterwards.

For me it comes back to window [yes] for every patch. I don't care much though...

AA enabled by default sounds good to me

Quote from vitaly_m :

For me it comes back to window [yes] for every patch. I don't care much though...

The antivirus could detect that it is a different executable and ask you again if you want to grant network permissions.

yeah for some reason ccc couldnt force anything else beyond the AA so i maxed out everything in game it got better BUT that i wish that sunset would have been a bit more darker

Quote from Scawen :

That sounds like Full screen vertical sync (Misc Options). But if that was on it would never go above 60. Have you tested again by running the original 0.6E exe and checking the same views? Another thing to check is Mirror antialiasing (Graphics Options) but I don't remember any reports about that causing much slowdown.

I have checked both of those options, neither really affects my FPS. And yes, I tested in 0.6E. Same FPS as in the patches.

I'm all for AA by default too, since I upgraded my comp a few months ago I've had no issue with running higher graphics settings.

I'm running LFS here on a damn potato, Intel Duo core 3.0GHz, 2GB ram, 256MB GPU and honestly, I rather have most of the graphic settings set to low or off (AA off as well) just to have max FPS, mainly because it hurts me quite a lot on the starting grid, especially if you have 32 cars on the grid, I end up having 20 FPS instead of 200FPS.

You call that a potato? I'm sitting here with AMD Athlon 64 3000+ 1.8GHz (overclocked to around 2.1GHz), 2 GB of RAM and nVidia GT 240 with 512 MB of VRAM. To be honest default settings don't really matter because i.e. I always change them to my personal balance between perfomance and quality (favouring perfomance). Oh and yes, I did feel an increase in FPS when comparing E and E19

Quote from MousemanLV :

I'm running LFS here on a damn potato, Intel Duo core 3.0GHz, 2GB ram, 256MB GPU and honestly, I rather have most of the graphic settings set to low or off (AA off as well) just to have max FPS, mainly because it hurts me quite a lot on the starting grid, especially if you have 32 cars on the grid, I end up having 20 FPS instead of 200FPS.

Well, I reckon it isn't your CPU (my Duo is much slower - 1.8GHz - and I have almost no issues except on open layouts), so I'm guessing the GPU is a bit of a dog. Mine's also 256MB but copes pretty well without setting everything to low/off - Radeon 1650XT. AA & AF are on too.
Remember that LFS is single-threaded. CPUs have not got much faster since 7 (!!!) years ago when I bought my pretty meh CPU - it's still only a factor of 4 slower than the fastest CPU you can buy when running this single-threaded benchmark http://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html
So, unless I'm mistaken about your CPU, it's probably not much more than a factor of 2 slower than the best money can buy on single threaded code like LFS...
Or possibly I should get sleep cos I'm writing nonsense

With an i7-3770 CPU @ 3.40GHz, with 12Gb RAM, 1.5Gb GPU, running LFS on 64bit Win7, with all LFS display settings maxed out, including mirrors, I haven't noticed any graphical or other problems in any of the recent test patches.

Unfortunately, I can't test the 3D effects as I don't have any of the necessary hardware or better than a cheap 60Hz monitor.

Thank you all for your help.

I will now close the testing forum until we get to the Westhill public testing stage.