F1 2011 PC Performance Analysis

DSOGaming writes: "Codemasters has just released the latest version of their F1 game. One of our biggest complains about F1’s previous version was the fact that it wasn’t optimized at all on the PC. Contrary to Grid or Colin McRae series, F1 2010 didn’t perform as we’d expect and was CPU bound. We were expecting Codies to optimize the Ego engine, but it seems that everything is exactly the same as with last year’s offering; same performance issues and the game remains CPU heavy."

[steve30x]

I just done a benchmark on my rig

Core I5 760 @ 3.6ghz
4GB DDR3 1333mhz ram
GTX580 (Not overclocked)
iiyama b2409hds 1080P

I get an average of 81FPS and the lowest FPS is 65 with everything maxxed out in DX11.

[iamgoatman]

If you have F1 2010, what kind of performance do you get in that?

Just did ran the benchmark myself and average 54FPS with a min of 47FPS and that's with -

i5 2500K @4.5Ghz
4GB DDR3 1600Mhz CL7
ATI 5850 1GB

Waiting on a crossfire fix from AMD though so I can put my second GPU to use. But looks like we need some new drivers all round, only having a min of 65FPS with a 580GTX doesn't sound brilliant, pretty much means every other single GPU card will have a min frame rate of 60 or below which isn't optimal for a smooth experience.

[iamgoatman]

From article:

"Codemasters didn’t optimize it at all. We are seriously wondering what their programmers were doing this whole time"

Well it certainly wasn't spent fixing even basic bugs that existed in 2010, which to be fair should have been patched a year ago, yet they're STILL there.

For example the game STILL doesn't register what type of CPU you're using correctly. Even though I'm using a quad core the games hardware info file says I'm using a dual core with hyper-threading, so assigns the files used for that instead. It doesn't seem to hurt performance much at all but WHY IS IT STILL THERE!?

Codemasters have become a joke over the last couple of years, and unless they actually get and support this game unlike F1 2010 it will be on ebay in no time.

[Si-Fly]

They say you'll need an i7 to top 60fps... Bollocks, I'm running triple screens with sli 580s and an i5 2500k and getting average 73 with minimum 62 fps with ultra settings and 8msaa.

[iamgoatman]

Yes, but a 2500K pretty much beats all the previous gen i7's apart from the 980x, and that's probably what they were referring to as they're using a last gen i5 for the tests.

So even though the article may exaggerate a little the point still stands.

[Si-Fly]

Ah, I didn't know that! But still, I'd be hitting well over 100fps with a single monitor, is a 2500k really twice as fast as the previous generation?

[iamgoatman]

@Si-Fly

"is a 2500k really twice as fast as the previous generation?"

Never said it was twice as fast, but the i5 2500 is faster than any of the last gen i7's clock for clock, although in applications that make use of hyper-threading or more cores it can loose to older i7's like the 980x or other models that support HT. But that's what the i7 2600 is for, and beats everything unless the application is very well coded for 6 cores.

[john2]

i5 is from Intel ix series (new architecture) and that's why you get a nice performance. The fact that you get a nice performance due to raw power doesn't mean that the game is optimized.

Take a look at Hard Reset if you want to see great optimization. The difference between a dualcore and a quadcore is 16fps, not just 6fps.

Keep also in mind that in F1 2011, reflections are affecting the CPU instead of the GPU. It's hilarious that a graphical effect is affecting the CPU instead of the GPU. This is the definition of bad optimization, plain and simple.

[kevnb]

sounds like their performance is fine, but they like to complain.