Hello experts,

So just today I bought a HP computer with those specs:

i7 4770 (8mb cache / 3.40 ghz up to 3.90)
8 GB Of ram @1600 Mhz
HD Graphics 4600
1TB

Installed my browsers, Steam and LFS, Then went on the CityDriving servers to test the FPS, and found out that it was just 40FPS :o

I use 1920x1080

Any help & ideas? I thought that those specs are good (For LFS Atleast) maybe I Installed wrong drivers or...? 40 FPS :o

Used to play the game with a FPS of 50-60 in a laptop i3 + GT 525M / 6 GB Ram @1333

Anyway the problem wont last long as i'm getting a GTX 750TI Soon. But Do i have to stay with 40FPS Now? The game is a bit un-playable.

Disable Anti-Aliasing if it's enabled.

It's quite normal. Intel is nothing when it comes on GPU performance. Just look at the 3DMark benchmark results.

Or even Passmark for a quick comparison; http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Intel+HD+4600

Not normal, my old laptop with Dual Core 2ghz(!) with some intel HD gives me 60-100fps in all tracks, expect westhill ofc. Same is on my i3.


EDIT: full hd

Yep, that's not normal, with my old laptop with HD 3000, I can max out LFS @ 1336x768 and have a rock solid 60 FPS. And no need to talk about the HD 4600 in my new one.

EDIT : Install Intel drivers if you haven't already.

Quote from cargame.nl :

It's quite normal. Intel is nothing when it comes on GPU performance. Just look at the 3DMark benchmark results.

Or even Passmark for a quick comparison; http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Intel+HD+4600

Gosh, you really don't like Intel integrated graphics Dave
Benchmarks are never quite the same as any given application, but they can be useful guides.
In this benchmark the HD4600 scores around 720. My current GPU scores around 120 - 6 times lower - and yet I can get way over 100 fps most of the time (1280x1024) with AA on, and frequently over 200 fps (so I mainly now limit the frame rate). Depends on the track of course - the OP didn't mention which track(s) were tested.

Let's not spread disinformation!
The posts from the people who actually own systems with Intel HD graphics suggest that this really isn't normal. And HD4600 is much quicker than most of the other HD flavours...

wow! my pc 2 cores 1,48Ghz i played 80 FPS in med configs

Sorry my bad english

Quote from racerss :

...just 40FPS :o

I use 1920x1080

Quote from Eclipsed :

You shouldn't compare if you use resolution with half as much pixels to be drawn...

Agreed - it's well worth testing with a resolution more like 1366x768 (which still ought to be good enough to see what you need to see )...

Quote from Neilser :

Depends on the track of course - the OP didn't mention which track(s) were tested.

Let's not spread disinformation!

He did. South City open config. I don't believe you achieve 100 fps @1280x1024 there with AA on with a GPU which scores 120 Passmark. 30 FPS would be amazing.

Quote from cargame.nl :

Quote from Neilser :

Depends on the track of course - the OP didn't mention which track(s) were tested.

Let's not spread disinformation!

He did. South City open config. I don't believe you achieve 100 fps @1280x1024 there with AA on with a GPU which scores 120 Passmark. 30 FPS would be amazing.

Umm, lol, he actually said CityDriving. That meant nothing to me as a non-cruiser

And I just tested three things: SO1 w/o open (typically 170fps, didn't see lower than 140 fps, sometimes 210fps), SO1X (surprisingly, very similar :O) and then the actual CityDriving server, which was almost full.
With a whole bunch of other cars I did indeed get lower frame rate, but still over 100fps almost all of the time, and often over 150 fps. I saw a couple of moments where it fell to 40ish fps, just after I joined the server, but after that I didn't see anything less than 60.
This was all at 1280x1024, 4xAA, 4xAF, quite a few other settings on low or off (too many to list).
I tried 640x480 but it didn't seem to make much difference (despite the CPU not quite being pegged.)

Also, I may have been too generous when I said my card scores around 120 on the Passmark G3D benchmark. It's an X1650XT, which is not listed in their chart; the highest score for any similar card they list is an X1600XT, which scored 110 (dunno where I got 120 from) with all other X16xx variations being lower.

Last time I personally ran their benchmark (in May) it only scored 19 on G3D (!!) before my £8 ebay CPU upgrade - I swapped out the E4300 for an E6600 (both Core 2 Duo). It then scored a massive 44 with the E6600... I didn't mention that because I'm not convinced the Passmark suite is really running properly, and I have seen big variations in multiple parts of the overall system score on repeated runs on an unloaded machine.

Perhaps you are amazed now...
Either that or you still won't believe me!

Eehh no indeed I don't but we need a new replay here on Westhill 2.0 I think to properly benchmark; http://lfsbench.iron.eu.org/?c=instructions

Wow, I had forgotten that existed. 2008: "hopefully LFS will have this function in the future"
Indeed, wd be useful to have it built in.

Yes, the track was South City, Sorry forgot to mention that.

After installing the Intel Drivers I seem to be having a better frame rate, but not when cars are around, When cars are around My frames rate drop down to 40.

I'm getting my nVidia GPU at the end of this month, Which should fix all problems. Thanks for the replies everyone!

Best regards

Is 1366x768 any better?
I would also suggest lowering or switching off the various graphics options to see what helps, e.g. texture quality, sky, shadows, mirrors, whatever else you can see.
For me personally, AA is about the only option I don't like doing without - apart from that it's all about the driving and for that I'd rather have decent fps than gorgeous images Without AA, the visual jaggies are distracting.