I have a 1080Ti, I7-8700k and the game on an SSD. I have a hard time getting the flight portion to load but when it does, I get between 45-60 FPS with vsync off on a 120 hz screen. Is this the max the game can run at? On the ground with lots of fighters taking off I get 30.

It would be nearly impossible to say without knowing a lot more details...but - speaking broadly and generally - the 1080Ti is a killer card and with that CPU, I'd expect well beyond 60FPS. I'd anticipate easily into the 100s, depending on the usual factors (settings, air activity, etc).

Something seems off TBH. Among other things, make sure the monitor refresh rate is actually set for 120 in Windows and the Nvidia control panel. This could be a problem. Also, is the machine a laptop?

Yes, that does seem a little low for your system - actually close to what I got regarding fps (my specs below). WOTR does take more of a fps hit than WOFF, that is for certain. The game does use an "older" engine under the hood - and sometimes that means that even having a very powerful system does not directly transfer linearly to performance increase as you might expect.

A recent example for me is Mount & Blade Banner Lord vs the much older Mount & Blade Warband. I can play the new edition Banner Lord (new engine) which looks far better, having much higher detail, AND far more troops on the screen at a time with actually higher FPS than the much older game using the identical system.

@Racingfan,

Ave. fps in WOTR are lower than in WOFF. When run in stock form, fps in my WOTR install ave. between about 40 and 60 fps (dual AMD FirePro D700 setup in my case). I recommend loading my "WOTR GPU Tuner Patch" via JSGME - it's linked to in my sig. file below and gives out-of-cockpit ave. fps of above 100 sometimes, ave. fps of about 60-70 in-cockpit views. I'm currently tinkering with the patch some more, hoping to squeeze out another 10 fps or so - will post an update if results are successful.

Happy flying,
Von S

To be clear, a 1660 Super doesn't come close to a 1080ti, not by miles and miles. In fact, a 2070Super doesn't (I have examples of both cards in my shop ATM), maybe not even a 2080, depending. He should be getting way higher frame rates than with a 1660.

A "tuner" isn't going to make the kind of difference he's reporting, either. I'm sure it can help with certain things, but if that's all it took, 1080Ti's wouldn't be selling for $500+ used right now.

If a 1080Ti is not performing any better than that, there's something else wrong.

Nope, that wasn't what I was implying at all - only that his fps experience is close to what I got. :P

Sorry for any misunderstanding. Perhaps your saying "sometimes that means that even having a very powerful system does not directly transfer linearly to performance increase as you might expect." caused some confusion. I can assure you, a 1080ti will do just fine in this game, probably well beyond 100 frames as I said earlier. Although I'm not looking at specifics right now and thus admittedly relying on memory, I feel fairly certain that others with lesser cards have suggested they are getting frame rates between 60 and 100.

No worries, just wanted to be clear. And I am just suggesting that newer engines are perhaps better able to take advantage of "newer" cards in some/many/most cases (and I citied a real world example for me regarding Mount & Blade - you would think that there would be no way that fps is lower with less detail and graphics and few things to render - but the new engine on the new version is more optimized and adjusted to take advantage of newer tech -- so it not only runs far better, but looks way better doing it as well). -- Also, looking at just graphical engines specifically an example would be comparing a pretty decent independently developed title, Stormworks: Build and Rescue to Microsoft Forza Horizon 4. Stormworks isn't even a hair within the graphics of Forza Horizon 4 and has very little on screen at any given time (using more simpler block rendering) - yet it's FPS on my system is quite a bit lower than Forza Horizon 4 - which uses an entirely different engine and Microsoft has it so incredibly optimized (runs and looks AMAZING) -- different engines, different optimization (also different know-how too) - but is an example of a far far far more detailed and visually exciting title running far better than simplier one.

So I guess I am trying to say is there is more to factor in than simply just computing horsepower, if you will...that's all

But I do agree that the OP should be getting higher FPS than he is.

You are absolutely correct, and every game is different.

The reason I feel it's important to make the distinction here is that the emphasis, in this case, really appears to be needed on determining why the OPs system isn't performing as it should (or maybe it is; again, more detail is needed). As I put it above, broadly and generally speaking, he should not be having problems like he's describing. And it's not because that CPU and GPU are inadequate, nor something within range of simple tuning.

Using the GPU tuner and reduced settings, I get about 45 on the ground and 60-117 in the air. It still seems low but might be an engine limitation. Now I just need to stop fiddling and play the game....or buy WoFF as well.

That sounds about right for expected ave. fps with the WOTR GPU Tuner Patch installed, with minor variations depending on rig. setup. About 40-60 fps. in in-cockpit views while on the ground, about 60-70 fps. in-cockpit when flying, and about 90-120 fps. out-of-cockpit, when flying. Without the tuner patch installed, ave. fps. are usually about 20 fps or so lower. I doubt that the fps. can be bumped much higher without degradation of graphics quality to terrains - and probably wouldn't be worth it - maybe about 10 fps. max higher, on ave., than with the Tuner Patch in its current form. (WOFF by the way has higher fps. on ave. than WOTR, even higher with the WOFF GPU Tuner Patch installed.)

Von S

As I explained above: With the hardware the OP has, if he's still only seeing the frame rate he reports, then (whatever is at issue) is not going to be overcome by a tweak, mod, or tuner.

Originally he reported as follows: "I get between 45-60 FPS..."

After the tuner patch, he reports "Using the GPU tuner and reduced settings, I get about 45 on the ground and 60-117 in the air."

45-60 FPS before and after. He doesn't mention specific values in the original post for "in-air" FPS, so nothing to compare to. (I suspect he probably was getting 100 or so in the air before, but you can't compare with no data).

In any case, the figures he cites in his original post are just not that different from after using the tuner - and, per his report, that's using reduced settings (which could easily account for any differences all by itself).

In summary: Unless something's really wrong, there's just no way a system like his performs at that level and yet can still be improved much by any tweak. His follow-up report confirms this, and his conclusion seems to hint at what really could be the explanation: "It still seems low but might be an engine limitation."

It's entirely possible, as per your latest post, that there is some other bottleneck on the OP's rig. that cannot be solved via the gpu tuner. As indicated in my previous post, there are lots of factors that affect fps (gpu tuners are only one tool in the arsenal of things to try). Hopefully the OP will be able to sort things out and enjoy high, stable fps in WOTR. On a related note, I doubt that it's possible to go beyond 60-70 fps in in-cockpit views in WOTR, or beyond about 130-140 fps in out-of-cockpit views, no matter what rig. or setup one is running - that seems to be the max. fps ceiling, thereabouts. The trick is to have a nice compromise where fps are fairly stable and smooth, but not at the expense of (very noticeable) terrain graphics degradation for even more fps. Anyway, I have no more to add on this particular topic/thread. Good luck to all attempting to wring out as much fps as possible from WOTR.

Von S

1080Ti are renowned for getting 100+ FPS in many demanding modern games, even at very high or 'ultra' settings. In some games, a 1080Ti with an 8700k (like the OP) can exceed 200 FPS with very high or ultra settings. In the UL/3DMark FireStrike benchmark - a widely respected and accepted empirical measurement tool for graphics performance - I've tested two different 1080Ti cards, and both scored 110-150 FPS in the two game tests. These tests, by design, are very demanding of graphics cards and even a card like a "plain" 1080 barely scores 100FPS in the same tests.

So a 1080Ti is an incredibly capable card, more so than anything up through and including a 2070 Super (which I also own and have tested, first hand). If it's getting the kind of frame rates the OP reports both before and after the tweak, it tells a lot about the situation. He's not wrong, that level of performance is low for his setup - and I am not convinced anything's really wrong with his system. I think his conclusion regarding the game's limitations are probably accurate.

FWIW I think you are probably correct about these same limitations he mentions, with the figures you cite above. I also agree that smooth frame rates are more important than sheer high FPS, and I've said for years now that having high FPS does not guarantee smooth game performance.

The 1080Ti and I7-8700k is a beast combo. The issue with them being beastly is that they point out the issues in many game engines. Have 100 FPS, get a loading stutter down to 30, you feel that . Random game engine stutters as shadows get drawn in when you crest a hill or turn a corner, you feel that drop. It amazes me how many game engines have built in microstuttering for loading or just "random stutter even on a clean install of Windows 10. Or games designed for consoles that do not play nice at FPS >30 or 60.

For WoTR and WoFF, the issue seems to be, it is an older game and many do not scale (really at all) to modern hardware. Many are limited to to using 1 core on the CPU and cannot take full advantage of new graphics cards. Nascar Racing Season 2003 is similar. Some of these older games higher graphics settings are still unoptimized for modern hardware. You have to brute force the older games with CPU speed and there is a limit which seems to be about 50-60 FPS on the group with 10-20 planes in front of me. It just is what it is and I've finally got this running decently and have performed about 10 missions and have been setting up but not playing WoFF.