One thing to note, that nobody else seems to have mentioned, is that LFS could probably be optimized quite a bit more, once Scawen gets the chance. Take, for instance, the difference in fps between in-car view and wheels view. Even though there are fewer polygons being shown in in-car view (just the dashboard, no wheel, no arms), the frame rate is much lower than wheels view, where you can see both tires and wheels, the brakes, etc.

I'm not a programmer, but my guess is that LFS is calculating polygons that are not visible. If this is true, and if it can be fixed, we could likely see a HUGE increase in frame rates at the start, or whenever lots of objects (cars) are visible. Hopefully this is the case.

I'd say you'd be guessing wrong there (I am a programmer tho this isn't my area)

My guess is that tracks are designed in a linear fashion, instead of one big area. Therefore, view distance denotes which bits of the track are rendered in terms of distance ahead of and behind the player's car.

Quote from llew :

My PC is just touching on 7 years old, and I don't think it was a very good PC when it came out.

The game plays fine, albeit with a few luxouries turned off.

If LFs got better graphics, itd be a 50/50 toss up as to if it could run properly.

I'm making dad buy me a new PC for when i move out later in the year, I'm not taking this antique with me. So in that case, graphics me up scotty.

Llew.

see, the fact that an average SEVEN YEAR OLD pc can run lfs fine, proves LFS is a loooong way behind in graphics. Seven years is a long time in hardware and software development, should LFS really be held back this much?

Just for fun, here's the top games of 2000, according to Game Revolution. My god, Counter Strike is in there.

counter strike got a huge graphics overhaul, did it not?

Quote from Burnzoire :

counter strike got a huge graphics overhaul, did it not?

Nope, Counter Strike Source was released in 2004, but it also got some gameplay changes, that hardcore players didn't like, so they continue to play the old version. On the other hand, I think they're going to release sometime the original Counter Strike with the new graphic engine!

Quote from Burnzoire :

I'd say you'd be guessing wrong there (I am a programmer tho this isn't my area)

My guess is that tracks are designed in a linear fashion, instead of one big area. Therefore, view distance denotes which bits of the track are rendered in terms of distance ahead of and behind the player's car.

The tracks are linear (at least, that's what we believe based on what Scawen has said), but that does not explain why two views, looking down the same track, from the same exact spot, have such wildly different frame rates. And it certainly doesn't explain why the view that has fewer visible polygons, and no moving polygons, has a lower frame rate than a higher poly view.

There are some pics in the screenshots subforum that show a wireframe outline of the cars. You can see through the cars and look at the polygons of the cars and objects that would be blocked from view if it weren't transparent. That would seem to indicate that things are rendered, even if they are not in view (blocked by another object). I'm not positive this is the case, but it seems logical.

Here's a good example of what I mean: http://www.lfsforum.net/attach ... id=27341&d=1175121846

Quote from Burnzoire :

see, the fact that an average SEVEN YEAR OLD pc can run lfs fine, proves LFS is a loooong way behind in graphics. Seven years is a long time in hardware and software development, should LFS really be held back this much?

I really don't want to make this suggestion, but wouldn't it be possible to give users the option of switching between full DX9 mode and the older DX7/8 compatibility stuff? rTractor has this option, and I had to use the old mode for the brief time I played that, because my PC at the time sucked ass.

That way everybody wins. It retains the ability to work on old machines, but new machines can turn on whatever nice options they choose to add. Even stuff like polycounts could be set up with compatibility modes - the same way the distance optimisation (simple wheels, etc) works now. Current track polycounts could stay as a compatible mode, but the rest of us could use pixel shading and extra trackside features like grandstands, trees and stuff.

Quote from Cue-Ball :

That would seem to indicate that things are rendered, even if they are not in view (blocked by another object).

Determining visibility is an extremely complex problem, and there is no (good) algorithm that will cull each and every invisible polygon. That's just way too inefficient since you'd spend more time checking for visibility, than it would take you to render those same polygons.

I assume LFS just culls the big ones (Buildings, cars, trees etc.) against each other and the track, and draws whatever is left with the part of the track you're on. The fact that stuff behind cars and other relatively small objects are rendered is quite normal. Framerate can also vary quite a bit if you're moving around the area where something big gets culled (for instance where the BL garage drops out of view when you turn T1).

Quote :

I really don't want to make this suggestion, but wouldn't it be possible to give users the option of switching between full DX9 mode and the older DX7/8 compatibility stuff?

It's possible, but it would mean Scawen would have to create two separate renderers, and Eric would most likely also have to create two versions (though similar) of all pieces of content (at least textures and shaders). A lot of extra work for a small team.

I always wonder how many say they could handle better graphics.
With my Nvidia Geforce 7900 GS/1Gb DDR2/E6400 I did struggle when driving into T1 in a 32 cars grid. The fps were barely over 30. I consider that the lowest acceptable framerate and so I'd say no, I wouldn't be able to handle better graphics.
Did I configure something wrong?

Vain

Quote from Vain :

Did I configure something wrong?

If you tweaked the dynamic LOD reduction setting (misc tab), you'd get a lot more FPS at the expense of graphics quality. My computer (a lot slower than yours) can easily get 40+ FPS on a ~30 car grid. It looks bad of course, but it's better than low FPS.

EDIT: It's also very likely that you could handle quite a lot of fancy pixel shaders on top of the existing LFS graphics without slowdown. LFS is heavily vertex bound, so the pixel shaders on your card are most likely close to idling when LFS is running. There's a lot of headroom there I think. (This is less of a problem with the newer unified shader cards like the GeForce 8XXX series and the upcoming R600 since they can balance vertex/pixel workloads on the fly.)

I did that after the first drop in fps and could maintain a proper fps number through turn 1 in the following races. But the point is: My PC is at it's limit with the current graphics in a full grid.

Vain

The last update which raised the minimum level of lod (number of polygons used) has forced me to give up live for speed unfortunately. Before the update I could keep a consistent 60fps alone on track, and about 30fps, 20 at the least, when many cars are nearby. Now I run at about 30-40fps by myself and 10 or 15 when cars are nearby. Obviously you are just a wreck waiting to happen at those speeds so I cant play anymore online, which is the only way I played.
I had been using every possible method/setting to speed up FPS as well. Im on a 2003 presario 2100.

Quote from KurtG85 :

Im on a 2003 presario 2100.

That is a laptop, right?
I heard that laptops tend to slow down when there is a lot of work for CPU or graphic card, for saving a battery or something like that... if someone can confirm this...
So if there is a way to switch that option off(if it is switchable), maybe you could play it normally..

Quote from wien :

Determining visibility is an extremely complex problem, and there is no (good) algorithm that will cull each and every invisible polygon. That's just way too inefficient since you'd spend more time checking for visibility, than it would take you to render those same polygons.

I think you are probably right. But it would seem to be logical that you can't see the wheels in dash view (in the tin tops, at least). Making such a change could be good for a 20fps increase, judging by the difference between in-car and wheels view, and wouldn't require any intensive culling.

I always go for maximum detail/performace with my hardware.
Im powerd by: (budget limet)

AMD Sempron 3000@3500 (cooled by 6x80mm and 2x12mm fans 35c idle 46c loaded)
1512DDR 333@400 with coper heat spreaders :P
XFx 6800XTreme 256MBz in agp 8x mode @ 425MHZ - 1300MHz

Next upgrade im going for a Athlon X2 and XFx 7800GS 512MBz
So high detail must be going much more easy i geus

Edit: my FPS is around 50 to 60 (overclocked @ 4000 is hits 80 to 90 but the machine is unstable an making artifacts then)

Quote from Boris Lozac :

That is a laptop, right?
I heard that laptops tend to slow down when there is a lot of work for CPU or graphic card, for saving a battery or something like that... if someone can confirm this...
So if there is a way to switch that option off(if it is switchable), maybe you could play it normally..

Yes its treu becuase laptops have 'bad' cooling. And when hardware tends to get above 60c it slows down the performance because of the building up heat inside. I recommend all laptop gamers to put an usb powered laptop cooler under thear sweating laptops !!
If your laptop has heat sensors looke up for Aida32 and you can read out the temperatures inside the laptop...
Example, u like to workout in 25c gym or 60c one !??

Yah, ive always had a strong ass fan blowing directly on my laptop along with my laptop sitting on top of some 20 dollar pampered chef cookie cooler thing when i played lfs.... So yah, like I said, i've tried pretty much everything. By the way, that did in fact work in improving my fps by 15-20 everytime. Hopefully the devs will re-enable the ol' octagon wheels and shoebox car graphics so my comp can handle it again, but for now ive diverted my interest elsewhere. Playing close combat cross of iron at the moment. I dont have the money to blow on a new pc.

I can run LFS pretty well on my laptop, a 1.73 Pentium IV M with shared-memory graphics.
I reduce resolution to 640x480x16, texture size to half (important!) with the LOD sliders to 0.0, multiplayer draw distance around 100 meters, and disabled skin-downloading. That works pretty well up to a couple of cars. Just for driving around on demo-servers with my laptop during a lecture at the university.
I hope that helps you to get your LFS-fix until you can effort an upgrade.

Vain

A quick overview of my system:

AMD X2 4400+
3 GB of ram
7950X2 (1GB)
Sata hdds
lfs has everything maxed @ 1920x1200.

Enriched graphics will make lfs look pretty, but wont help me race any better.