If I pick South City Long track, for an example, and I do a run in Single Player or just being alone - I get 250-333 fps, if I just go racing with big grid, the first car gets something like 115-130+ fps, the car that stand in the middle of the grid - around 60-80fps.. but when there is close racing and many cars are involved - it can drop to 40 fps which is not good. I don't know why is this. It's really powerful card which should run lfs without any problems.

My PC specs:

AMD Phenom II X4 925 @ 2,8Ghz
8GB of RAM (2 x 4 GB Kingston DDR2 @ 800 Mhz)
GPU: MSi HD 7850 OC 1GB GDDR5 256 bit @ 900/1200 Mhz
HDD runs at 7200 rpm

EDIT: even some weird optimization during Single Player, for an example, if you pick Westhill track and going on the track - fps is like 160-180fps, but if u run again you get 450-500 fps limit. Really weird.

LFS is more CPU that GPU

I think is 80% cpu / 20% gpu

Really? Oh ok. You calmed me down

I had the same problem when I updated from XP to Win 7 with my GTX 470 - I don't even remember how I fixed it, since there was a clean install of W7 64-Bit I had to pick the right driver for my card as W7 installed something which I didn't want to etc. The game was running perfectly fine on XP with old drivers, then I installed W7 64-bit and this problem started to occur. I know it won't be laggy even on 40FPS but I need at least 50 FPS for my eyes so I was struggling with settings for my gpu, OS, LFS itself a good while...

To summarize - It was 2 years ago, but from what I can remember this should be a driver related problem. Can't remember any more, sorry.

Btw. This is not optimal behavior and it should stay on high FPS all the time, so don't give up and try to find solutions.

Same here, on Windows XP I got like 2 times more FPS than the Windows 7. Also when there are a lot cars on Windows 7 my FPS used to drop to like 5 FPS, while on XP its 50+ all time.
I tried mulitiple drivers for Windows 7 but it didn't helped, so I switched back to XP just because of LFS
Guess LFS isn't really optimised for Windows 7 ( Scawen is still using XP )

Quote from Mysho :

I had the same problem when I updated from XP to Win 7 with my GTX 470 - I don't even remember how I fixed it, since there was a clean install of W7 64-Bit I had to pick the right driver for my card as W7 installed something which I didn't want to etc. The game was running perfectly fine on XP with old drivers, then I installed W7 64-bit and this problem started to occur. I know it won't be laggy even on 40FPS but I need at least 50 FPS for my eyes so I was struggling with settings for my gpu, OS, LFS itself a good while...

To summarize - It was 2 years ago, but from what I can remember this should be a driver related problem. Can't remember any more, sorry.

Btw. This is not optimal behavior and it should stay on high FPS all the time, so don't give up and try to find solutions.

Ok, mate. Thanks a lot for your time! I really do appreciate this. Yeah, well.. I think I am gonna play little more with drivers, maybe a new one is out, if nothing helps then Windows reinstall

Quote from DANIEL-CRO :

Same here, on Windows XP I got like 2 times more FPS than the Windows 7. Also when there are a lot cars on Windows 7 my FPS used to drop to like 5 FPS, while on XP its 50+ all time.
I tried mulitiple drivers for Windows 7 but it didn't helped, so I switched back to XP just because of LFS
Guess LFS isn't really optimised for Windows 7 ( Scawen is still using XP )

Aha... I see. Will keep this in mind. Thanks for your time.

Quote from DANIEL-CRO :

Same here, on Windows XP I got like 2 times more FPS than the Windows 7. Also when there are a lot cars on Windows 7 my FPS used to drop to like 5 FPS, while on XP its 50+ all time.
I tried mulitiple drivers for Windows 7 but it didn't helped, so I switched back to XP just because of LFS
Guess LFS isn't really optimised for Windows 7 ( Scawen is still using XP )

It may be optimized a little bit worse than with XP, but still getting lower than 40 FPS with this kind of graphic card is not a problem for optimization I think. I can get stable FPS now, just can't remember how I did it. xD

I do have better CPU - Phenom II X4 965 and GTX 470, maybe the reason is nVidia and not Radeon, really dunno.

Quote from Mysho :

It may be optimized a little bit worse than with XP, but still getting lower than 40 FPS with this kind of graphic card is not a problem for optimization I think. I can get stable FPS now, just can't remember how I did it. xD

I do have better CPU - Phenom II X4 965 and GTX 470, maybe the reason is nVidia and not Radeon, really dunno.

(full start grid on cargame)
HD6750 and E5200@4GHz = <10 FPS on Windows 7, 50+ FPS on Windows XP

Quote from DANIEL-CRO :

(full start grid on cargame)
HD6750 and E5200@4GHz = <10 FPS on Windows 7, 50+ FPS on Windows XP

Yeh it was directed mainly to seniecka, I understand your reasons.

LFS is not multithreaded; your cpu AND memory are not particularly fast. 40FPS on an older system with many cars nearby isn't that bad, it is what you should expect from your system.

For more fps you may need more Mhz on the CPU and faster memory which would require you to upgrade your systemboard, making it not an easy upgrade. Getting a faster(more Mhz) CPU of the same architecture will probably have the most effect for the smallest price. Getting more cpu-cores won't help.

Maybe its just best to turn down the graphics a bit on busy servers?


I always get 99 to 100 fps, because i have limited the framerate to 100. Creating more frames is just a waste of energy which is really an issue with the lousy 6970 msi lighting II card. CPU usage is about 8% to 12%. 5 cores actually doing nothing at all while runnig lfs. Please note, cpu-cores from an 1100T and a phenom 925 are not very different from each other.

WIN7 64bit
amd1100T underclocked at 3.29Ghz, turbo disabled, 4x4 DDR3@1613Mhz CL9, ati 6970@900Mhz (under-clocked msi lighting II).
1920x1200, all graphics settings on maximum possible.

Ok, I see. Thanks for vital information, Bluebird B B

I still don't think 40 FPS would be equal for his rig, but I might be wrong.

Did some testing today... Put myself at the back of the field at SO4 having full grid of XRGs. Minimum FPS I noticed was 70 then it went only upper of course. I might not provide so technical information but I still think seniecka's problem is Windows 7 and either GPU driver or any other driver related, because I am sure he would have had a lot more FPS with the same rig on XP.

Not saying this is only W7 fault but... I experienced something same when I installed W7 for the first time and I simply can't remember what I installed, but after that I got a significant FPS growth. I was having like 30 FPS at first, something I really couldn't resist.

My rig:

• Phenom II X4 965+ @ 3,40Ghz, no overclock.
  
• nVidia GTX 470 factory clocks, no overclock.
  
• 4GB DDR2 RAM
  
• Windows 7 64 Bit
  

IMHO LFS is very badly optimized. It's running on old Direct X, the graphics are far from advanced/current standard and still while looking at 20+ cars in front of me I'm lucky to get over 40FPS. (alone it's always 60fps with vsync).

I also have HD7850 OC, Q9400 and 6GB ram (Win 7 x64)

Quote from majod :

IMHO LFS is very badly optimized. It's running on old Direct X, the graphics are far from advanced/current standard and still while looking at 20+ cars in front of me I'm lucky to get over 40FPS. (alone it's always 60fps with vsync).

I also have HD7850 OC, Q9400 and 6GB ram (Win 7 x64)

Your CPU is also a bit outdated It was introduced Q3 2008, over 4 years ago.
Simple indication how much faster cpu's are 4 years later:
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cp ... e2+Quad+Q9400+%40+2.66GHz

it performs similar to phenomII 925/940, not surprising you get the same performance as the topic starter. Sounds really identical

Ok, but what are you trying to say? That my CPU is too weak for LFS? LFS was introduced long before my CPU. Also, nothing in LFS changed so dramatically that would impact CPU's performance over last 5 years. I bought my computer in 2009 and LFS is still the same - still same low performance.

Also I don't understand one thing - why is it the performance is poor when I see more cars and it doesn't matter how many cars are in race? If it's CPU related, does it mean LFS computes other car's physics only when the cars are visible? As the number of -visible- cars rises, the FPS drop significantly. If the physics of all cars is computed all the time regardless of cars visible, I can't explain the FPS drop otherwise than GPU-related.

The GPU needs to be fed with lots of data which needs to be computed by the CPU. That is why Graphics cards have huge bandwidths available to communicate with the cpu. Over 1gbyte/sec (byte not bit) is currently very common for each graphics card in your system

Since lfs is really single threaded, one cpu core going to be very busy. GPU's are used to offload big part of the work load from the cpu, but not everything. The number of cars in view has the biggest impact on FPS in lfs. It doesn't matter whether the cars are in your mirrors or in front of you. And that is exactly what your problem is?

LFS did receive some graphical updates long time ago(three years?), also people are also using higher textures resolutions and number of cars allowed on the grid has been increased a few years ago.

If you really want to be sure a cpu core is the bottleneck you'll need to run monitoring software and check if lfs is often using 25% cpu, assuming your cpu has 4 real cores and hyperthreading is off, you most likely have a cpu bottleneck....

Ancient article about bandwidths:
http://www.tomshardware.com/re ... caling-analysis,1572.html
Please note: newer pci-express types provide a lot more bandwidth per lane!

There appears to be a bit of a confusion about what HW you need to run LFS. The short answer is - ANY today's hardware will run LFS just fine. A Sandy Bridge i5 laptop with Intel HD3000 GPU runs LFS at 1600x1200 32bit, 4xAA, 8xAF and with 11 AIs on track at 20+ FPS at all times. You have got to realize that LFS does not use any of the advanced rendering technologies that stress modern GPUs. There is no realtime lighting, no volumetric shadows, no pixel shaders nor tessellation. Really, there is nothing for the GPU to do. Cranking up AA and AF might push some low-end GPUs but that's about it.

LFS used to be CPU limited back in the days of single core P4s & co. Physics of all visible cars is calculated on the CPU (obviously). AI cars are even more taxing because their physics has to be calculated even when they are not visible plus there is all the AI logic processing.

If you are having performance problems with LFS on a gaming grade PC with current hardware, there is something wrong with your machine. CPU might be overheating due to clogged fan, worn off thermal grease or incorrectly installed heatsink. Overheating CPU will throttle itself down by lowering its speed or executing "empty" cycles. The drop in performance can be quite huge, easily over 50 %. Bad drivers are another common issue; I once had a dodgy sound card driver that apparently used so much CPU time that my framerate in games took like a 500% dive. Some laptops use more aggressive power saving settings that trade off performance to save every single milliwatt of battery capacity. Passive cooling policy is a nice example: when it's enabled, CPU will clock itself down under load so that fans don't have to kick in to cool it.

I hope this busts some myths about LFS and its hardware demands.

Quote from Bluebird B B :

The number of cars in view has the biggest impact on FPS in lfs. It doesn't matter whether the cars are in your mirrors or in front of you.

Like I said - it does matter.
25 cars on track + 24 in front of me = 40FPS
25 cars on track + 0 in front of me = million FPS

which clearly seems like graphics issue. But ok, I'll check the CPU next time how it's going.

Quote from majod :

Like I said - it does matter.
25 cars on track + 24 in front of me = 40FPS
25 cars on track + 0 in front of me = million FPS

which clearly seems like graphics issue. But ok, I'll check the CPU next time how it's going.

the more cars in sight, the more cars your CPU has to render. GPU is only a small part of it

Why does CPU render cars? I don't understand.

Quote from majod :

Why does CPU render cars? I don't understand.

cuz position updates physics etc

Well. CPU is tricky thing. Not easy to just upgrade it since, as one of you guys already stated, you need to upgrade motherboard. So.. Not a cheap excursion.

MadCatX, thanks for the input.

When I was installing Windows 7 I actually had overheating problems with my system. Since that time I have been playing with side of my case down and I've got no overheating issues at all now.

Didn't know this could affect LFS, but that would probably be the reason of my LFS' - FPS raised significantly. I thought I just installed the right driver or something. Nah, I let some air into my case.

LFS still is badly optimized for today's hardware. I have no problem playing Battlefield 3, which is known for being CPU-hungry, but a lot of cars on SO will still bog it down. I think if it wouldn't run on one core it would make a huge difference.

Then again, we have more important stuff to wait for, like those tyre physics. :sleep2: