Wondering if anyone else has a Ultra slow loading of this game, Much like RF1. It takes forever to wait for the launcher to load, then when I click on the helmut icon to load the game, then another 5 to 10 minutes to get into the game. Then to pick a track or a mod, the slider doesn't move hardly at all. When I finally get on track, the games looks great at DX11, although I've had to turn the settings down quite a bit, most to medium or low, to get decent FPS. I even have the game set at 50 FPS. I might try switching the game back to DX9, I could run settings a lot higher & the game looked pretty good. And what's with that picture box to the right of the Mod menu, most of the mods don't show you what the cars look like. I'm going to go thru the mods & tracks in Windows Explorer & delete some tracks & open wheel mods I never use. Maybe that will help. So far very disappointing game for me. Funny thing is, I have just as many Mods & tracks in GTR2. AC & Ams & they all load in a few minutes. Am I doing something wrong, or does this apply to almost everybody. Never had a any game where you clicked on a car & no picture showed up. I was hoping when this Studio 397? took it over, they would change the interface & improve some stuff.
Your thoughts on RF2?
- Thread starter bigfoothunter
- Start date
For me there is no problem with rF2 loading and is quite fast with a 6 year old pc. The car pictures are only included if the car modder took the extra time to impliment them in their mod. Studio 397's GT3 Pack and their Endurance Pack plus all their other content include the car pictures and even the previous owner's (ISI) content showed the car pictures too.
Note: Using DX11 with Post Processing Effects set to "Low" will produce better FPS than DX9.
Also, a new and much improved Interface is in the horizon for a future release by Studio-397.
Do a integrity check of your rF2 installation and maybe it will fix it and if not then try a reinstall.
Note: Using DX11 with Post Processing Effects set to "Low" will produce better FPS than DX9.
Also, a new and much improved Interface is in the horizon for a future release by Studio-397.
Do a integrity check of your rF2 installation and maybe it will fix it and if not then try a reinstall.
Last edited:
Thanks for the info. My PC is about 8 years old. It's an Alienware Aurora, decent specs, updated to a GTX 960 video card. Would love to get a better GTX card, but I'm retired & have to watch our money. So I guess I'll just have to deal with it. Funny, I have all my games set thru Nvidia Inspector, all set at 50 FPS & all stay around 50 with any mod or track, & most all games I can set the graphics at Max or high & still get great FPS. Even AMS, I have as many mods & tracks as RF2 & all settings on max or high & it loads in a few minutes with no in-game lag at all, except RF2. I'll try the integrity check & maybe uninstall Then reinstall see if that helps. I'm not downing the game at all, have fun when I'm racing, actually like it, just a pain it's so slow. Thanks again for the reply & help. Most appreciated !!!!
rFactor2 - SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
MINIMUM:- OS: Windows 7, 8, 8.1 or 10, with latest Service Packs
- Processor: 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo or 3.0 GHz AMD Athlon II x2
- Memory: 4 GB RAM
- Graphics: nVidia GTS 450 or AMD Radeon 5750
- DirectX: Version 9.0c
- Network: Broadband Internet connection
- Storage: 30 GB available space
- Sound Card: DirectX Compatible
- OS: Windows 7, 8, 8.1 or 10, with latest Service Packs
RECOMMENDED:- OS: Windows 7, 8, 8.1 or 10, with latest Service Packs
- Processor: 3.0 GHz Intel i5 or 4.0 GHz AMD FX
- Memory: 8 GB RAM
- Graphics: nVidia GTX 760 or AMD 7870
- DirectX: Version 11
- Network: Broadband Internet connection
- Storage: 60 GB available space
- Sound Card: DirectX Compatible
- OS: Windows 7, 8, 8.1 or 10, with latest Service Packs
Last edited:
I'm also running a GTX 960 but my PC is only 2 years old so the CPU and all that stuff is probably much better than yours. I'm on latest DX11 build, PP effects at medium, in-game settings pretty high and can run 95% of the content at +90 fps.
Loading of the launcher, game and tracks take a couple of minutes but never +5min (let alone 10min). I believe loading times have a correlation to the amount of content you're subscribed to on steam and I'm pretty much subscribed to half of it or more (plus dozens of other cars and tracks).
Loading times are a bit slower than other sims in my case but also i don't have nearly as much content on other games.
I don't know much about PC hardware but even with a GTX 960, your 8 year old CPU, etc.., might be the bottleneck here
Loading of the launcher, game and tracks take a couple of minutes but never +5min (let alone 10min). I believe loading times have a correlation to the amount of content you're subscribed to on steam and I'm pretty much subscribed to half of it or more (plus dozens of other cars and tracks).
Loading times are a bit slower than other sims in my case but also i don't have nearly as much content on other games.
I don't know much about PC hardware but even with a GTX 960, your 8 year old CPU, etc.., might be the bottleneck here
Last edited:
To summarize loading times:
1) Loading content the first time will take longer. There are some files generated that first time which speed subsequent loads. A new version of existing content will count as loading the first time.
2) The more content you have, the longer it takes for the game to launch, just like rF1. Basically rF2 validates all the content every time you launch.
3) To reduce launching time, consider using/making Race Events instead of using All Cars & Tracks. This allows rF2 to skip verification of components not being used.
1) Loading content the first time will take longer. There are some files generated that first time which speed subsequent loads. A new version of existing content will count as loading the first time.
2) The more content you have, the longer it takes for the game to launch, just like rF1. Basically rF2 validates all the content every time you launch.
3) To reduce launching time, consider using/making Race Events instead of using All Cars & Tracks. This allows rF2 to skip verification of components not being used.
1) For rF2 fps problems with 900-series or 1000-series nVidia cards, particularly on an older motherboard, use GPU-Z (https://www.techpowerup.com/download/techpowerup-gpu-z/) to confirm your PCIe is running in 3.0 mode. Most games aren't sensitive to it, but rF2 fps suffer if you're not in 3.0 mode.
2) Highly recommended to NOT use nVidia Inspector with rF2!
2) Highly recommended to NOT use nVidia Inspector with rF2!
Last edited:
Why is that? I use Inspector to enable Fast Sync only IIRC, but all the same i use it. Would be interested to learn more about this.
My motherboard and CPU don't support 3.0 and i use a GTX970 which uses 3.0 Bus so GPU-Z does state and should state that my GTX970 is in PCIe x 16 @ 2.0. You would think that there should be no benefit to manually select 3.0 mode in bios since my board and CPU are only rated at 2.0. Is there something i'am missing here as it doesn't make any sense in theory.
Durge Driven
DD
He is meaning setting AA within NVI which you don't do in rF2 unless you want less framerate with no visual improvement..........
rF2 starts slower ( 5 mins is a joke but) every time you change settings
Surely you notice the 2nd and subsequent times its starts faster ?
Honestly the things people can still complain about are ridiculous
I have Samsung 970 M2's and SSD does barely anything to speed up processes in any sim !
rFactor1 with 50 new mods activated takes longer to start then rF2 !
Myth that SSD is " heaps" faster complete bunkum
Last edited:
Durge Driven
DD
system loading times yes, copying . installing fresh OS yes !
but when a sim is processing stuff to load a SSD can't barely help
Just try copying some folder or game has say 50,000 + files see how your SSD goes
once it starts caching little files
Durge Driven
DD
You missed one "Longevity"
Yeah
all i saying even though I have 6 SSD for me they are the last thing I would add to a sim tower on a set budget I would def not lower system specs to fit one in
My steam folders on Sata load as just as quick
Durge Driven
DD
I tell you the best aspects of SSD I have found
Assetto Content manager hard linking mods compared to Sata
Hardlink is faster for sata too but SSD does much quicker lol
Activate/deactivate 20 track mods you see in pic
150+ addons tracks in seconds
I custom made over 400 AC mods
People should think....
Copy a Large folder with your 100mbs sata now do it with your 500mbs SSD
does it copy 5 times faster lol not even close !
Assetto Content manager hard linking mods compared to Sata
Hardlink is faster for sata too but SSD does much quicker lol
Activate/deactivate 20 track mods you see in pic
150+ addons tracks in seconds
I custom made over 400 AC mods
People should think....
Copy a Large folder with your 100mbs sata now do it with your 500mbs SSD
does it copy 5 times faster lol not even close !
Uhm, yes, you're missing something obvious. You obviously can't enable 3.0 if your motherboard doesn't support 3.0. That is a problem!
If your motherboard doesn't support 3.0, then it is past time to upgrade your motherboard as you're losing out on significant chunk of fps in rF2. There's a long thread on the S397 forum that started back when the GTX 970 was a new card.
Durge expanded nicely on my answer, but I'm wondering why you'd use nVidia Inspector to set Fast Sync when that is already available in the nVidia control panel? Usually one uses Inspector to get at settings that aren't available in the nVidia control panel.
Emery....your quote "For rF2 fps problems with 900-series or 1000-series nVidia cards, "particularly on an older motherboard" was what confused me a little since i'am using a "older motherboard" as you quoted thus my feedback for clarification, thanks! I guess you didn't mean such a ancient board like i'am using.
Aware of my older motherboard (MSI-890FXA-GD70) and CPU (AMD-Phenom 965 4 core) which can't support 3.0 thus their severe limitations! Not getting the performance i should be getting from my MSI-GTX970 but still very happy with my 70-80 fps with 20 ai from the GT3 Pack on mostly medium graphic settings and Post Processing on "Low" so wasn't in a hurry for a unnecessary upgrade and the expense involved.
Aware of my older motherboard (MSI-890FXA-GD70) and CPU (AMD-Phenom 965 4 core) which can't support 3.0 thus their severe limitations! Not getting the performance i should be getting from my MSI-GTX970 but still very happy with my 70-80 fps with 20 ai from the GT3 Pack on mostly medium graphic settings and Post Processing on "Low" so wasn't in a hurry for a unnecessary upgrade and the expense involved.
Last edited:
