Interesting numbers.

Bill Stuntz

Bill Stuntz

Well-known member
I'm not sure where to post this, since it talks about several versions of RF. If this is the wrong place, I hope the admins will move it to where it really belongs.

I finally bought the bullet and purchased EVO last night. And I've been doing some quick&dirty tests comparing FPS in various versions of RF. The numbers are just nice round ballpark numbers, flying around a little, occasionally glancing at the graphics fps in navguides.
My hardware: i7-4790 3.6GHz, 32G RAM, GTX-960, 27" 2560x1440 monitor. RF graphics set to "Highest"
Edit: I just discovered that zoom type also affects the FPS. These numbers are with "Keep ground in view"
Aircraft: Technoid's Ultra Stick 1_1 ARF w/ Doug Schluter's Blue/White CS.
I had to use a slightly different aircraft for RF7.5 since it doesn't support AS3X - Technoid's No Spektrum Ultra Stick beta.
RF VersionAirportFPSAirportFPS
7.5.015Carl Henson (photo field)330Flight School (3D)200
8.00.056300150
10.00.076 (DX9) Medium Graphics550390
10.10.078 (DX11) Medium Graphics500350
10.00.076 (DX9) Highest Graphics380170
10.10.078 (DX11) Highest Graphics300175
ERROR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I screwed up... EVO was set to Medium, not Highest, so I was comparing apples & oranges. I'm including the erroneous numbers as well as the right ones, so take some of the later posts that comment on the much better FPS from RF8 to EVO with a grain of salt.
 
Last edited:
I was expecting the DX9 EVO to be slightly slower than the DX11. And I was even MORE surprised by how much faster either one was than the older versions. I've run RF2,3,5,7,8 and I don't remember noticing such a dramatic increase in FPS until EVO. I think I'll stick with the DX11 version for the automatic updates. I didn't really FEEL the difference. But I DID feel a difference from RF8.
 
Last edited:
Bill Stuntz said:
I was expecting the DX9 EVO to be slightly slower than the DX11. And I was even MORE surprised by how much faster either one was than the older versions. I've run RF2,3,5,7,8 and I don't remember noticing such a dramatic increase in FPS until EVO. I think I'll stick with the DX11 version for the automatic updates. I didn't really FEEL the difference. But I DID feel a difference from RF8.
Click to expand...
Here's a couple of reasons why EVO DX11 might be a bit slower than EVO DX9. First, they might not have the code optimized yet. And second, they might have added a translation layer between the new DX11 code and the old DX9 code, which would lose a little time for each call through the translation layer. One thing you might do is take your FPS readings sitting on the runway after the plane spawns, that way it's a fully reproduceable reading.
 
Good points, but I think the ballpark numbers are "good enough." The numbers on the ground are actually 10-20 lower than they are in flight, and seem to vary by about 10fps just sitting there. They vary more in flight, so I tried to pick nice round numbers that seemed to be pretty much the peak numbers that I saw pretty frequently. What numbers do you get? Maybe just in EVO. I know you have a better GPU, but I don't remember anything about your CPU. I know mine aren't the best, but they seem perfectly adequate for RF. But my 960 probably isn't good enough for VR.
 
You might go back and check both of your graphics settings. I had some mixed numbers like you but when I went back and checked the graphics settings in both versions of RF they were different. Normally I set everything to the highest setting except motion blur and bloom, which I keep off. Anyway here's my numbers.

Numbers are the highest I seen watching after the plane spawned on the runway, no flying.

I7 6700K 4.0GHz - 32 GB Ram - MSI GTX 1080 - eFlite Ultra Stick 1_1m ARF

RF 9.5 Carl Henson - 364.7
EVO DX11 Carl Henson - 358.3

RF 9.5 Flight School - 187.4
RF EVO DX11 Flight School - 202.2
 
I'm surprised. I'd have expected better numbers with the later/faster CPU and better GPU.

I did check the settings. The only changes I remember making were to move the slider in all of the RF versions. I don't think I've ever messed with any of the individual item settings, so I don't know how blur/bloom are set. Is your 9.5 actually 9.5S? I wonder if Steam has anything to do with the differences.

OOPS! I apparently didn't save the graphics setting. RF DX11 (& DX9) were actually set to Medium. So I was comparing apples & oranges. I just re-tested EVO DX11 Flight School & got about 175 in flight.
 
Last edited:
You need to go into the individual settings and set each one to their highest setting, except bloom, blur, and keep the foliage density setting at 5%. I had 600+ Frame Rates in RF 9.5 until I checked all the settings, then it went way down into the mid 300s.
 
If you're following this thread, I just updated post#1 to correct the errors. You might want to go back & look at it again to see the changes/corrections.
 
Bill Stuntz said:
If you're following this thread, I just updated post#1 to correct the errors. You might want to go back & look at it again to see the changes/corrections.
Click to expand...
Did you go into the individual settings and set each one to the highest value or just set the slider to highest? I can't remember for sure but I seem to remember that the Slider at Highest isn't the same as setting all the individual controls to their highest setting, that's Custom. But it's been years since I looked at that. If that's true then your FPS would go down a little more if all the individual controls were set to their highest setting.
 
I just did the slider. That's easily repeatable if people want to compare their numbers with mine. If you make individual changes & later move the slider, you'll undo your fine tuning unless Custom saves your settings & restores them later if you move the slider back to custom if you've moved it somewhere else. WOW, that was an awkward sentence. I hope you can figure out what I was trying to say. Also, I don't KNOW that the Highest/Medium/etc. slider settings in each version sets the individual parameters exactly the same way.
 
Every setting at the highest except for, Post Processing: Depth of Field. (Blur) which is set to None.
Carl Henson 670 fps.
Flight School 350 fps.

Settings at Medium,
Carl Henson 1007 fps
Flight School 850 fps.
All the above figures using; i7-13700k, 64gbs Ram, Nvidia RTX4080.

Using the Intel Iris Xe graphics card, with every setting at max,
Carl Henson 37 fps

Settings at Medium,
Carl Henson 140 fps
Flight School 60 fps.

When you say, DX9, is that the deprecated EVO version? or are you referring to RF9?
 
Depricated EVO version. I never upgraded from RF8 to 9.X. I typically bought about every 2nd version. I was pretty satisfied with RF8, & I told myself I wouldn't buy another version until there was a MAJOR change, probably when a version came out using DX12 instead of DX9. I decided DX11 was "good enough."

I haven't installed EVO on my old i7-4600U/8G RAM laptop yet. I bypassed the Win11 TPM & CPU generation blocks & I'm running it. I get security updates, but no version updates. I'm running Win11Pro 21H2, and 23H2 has just been released. I'm thinking about trying to use a similarly modified installer to try to upgrade it to 23H2. I might try installing EVO after I do that, but RF8 is only marginally usable 45fps at High, not Highest graphics settings.

I wonder if the "shimmers" in that other thread are just low frame rate interpretted as the shimmers. With 37fps at carl Henson, what would it be if he's using a 3D field?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top