In order to compare rFactor2 with iRacing and Assetto Corsa, we have compared the most important key points of the individual simulations.
Points 1-6 were evaluated using known objective characteristics from various data sheets of the different simulations. Among others, Wikipedia, PC Games and Gamestar were used.
A maximum of 2 points were awarded for each of the individual evaluation criteria 1-6 and color-coded as follows:
2 points
1 point
0 points
As a subjective assessment, various driver opinions were obtained and broken down in point 7. The rating is made up of the percentage of positive ratings.
To be honest, we ourselves are amazed at the result. Assetto Corsa wasn’t our favorite from the start, but we were surprised that rFactor 2 achieved such a high score and dominance in the comparison. We don’t want to give too much away – see for yourself.
Basic 29,99€/one-time
Basis approx. 110€/ annual subscription
Base 19,99€
Ultimate 39,88€ (all DLC)
Vehicle DLC 4,99€/ cheaper in a package
per vehicle 11$
only in DLCs 4,99€
Route 6,99€ – 11,99€
Distance approx. 14,99$
Tracks only included in DLCs
for PC: 2013 (ISI)
for PC: 2016 (Studio397)
for PC: 2008
for PC: 2014
Continuous further development
Continuous further development
Development discontinued at the end of 2017
Modding allowed
Modding not allowed
Modding allowed
Route advertising possible
No route advertising possible
Route advertising possible
Vehicle paintwork freely customizable
Vehicle painting only predefined or via external software
Vehicle paintwork freely customizable
Paint finishes and routes are shared via server
Paint jobs must be shared manually or via external software
Routes and paint jobs must be shared via external software or manually
most extensive tire physics
Extensive tire physics
Good tire physics
Good physical damage model
Good physical damage model
Good physical damage model
Pit lane with collision
Pit lane without collision
Pit lane without collision
Pitstop not animated
Pitstop animated
Pitstop animated
Dynamic rubber abrasion – also weather-dependent – always visible
Increasing grip on the track – visible depending on the track
Increasing grip on the track – not visible
More and more laser-scanned routes
Almost all routes laser scanned and large selection
Good route guidance, hardly any laser scanning, few routes
Replay local and server
Replay Local and time-limited server, no automatic storage
Replay only locally or via external software, very memory-intensive
Driver rating under construction
Very good driver rating system
Driver rating only offline or via external software
open server management
Server management only via iRacing.com
Server management relatively open
Driver change possible
Driver change possible
no driver change
Following a small survey, we were able to obtain the following subjective and objective opinions from users of iRacing, rFactor 2 and Assetto Corsa.
Best ForceFeedback
real weather/ rain
Best price/performance ratio
Day/night change
No monthly subscription costs
best tire model
Textures in need of improvement in places
Vehicles that you do NOT drive but that your opponents drive must also be purchased
Large number of good mods
Driving physics and engine is also used by racing teams – rFactor Pro
Good image display and VR require high computing performance
Damage model not very detailed with official content – looks better with modded content
Comprehensible driving behavior
largest community
many online races
Very good rating system
ForceFeedback feedback is ok
Cockpit view only
“only useful if money is not an issue or you really want to use it”
Greatest fun factor
laborious start
cost-intensive
Vehicles that you do NOT drive do not have to be purchased
better graphics
fair racing
no rain/ poor weather effects
large community
no day/night change
ForceFeedback is useful
Vehicles generally understeer unusually strongly
no dynamic weather
Singleplayer ok – Multiplayer
Lots of mod content
“Arcarde Game” – Character
5/6
0/6
3/6
3/4
3/4
2/4
8/8
1/8
7/8
8/12
7/12
3/12
7/8
6/8
3/8
We have tried to evaluate the graphic display objectively. To this end, in-house tests were carried out and aspects such as attention to detail, texture quality, reflections and shadows as well as realism were evaluated.
1/2
rF2 has good graphics with a high level of detail. Textures are clear and easily recognizable. Smoke, water and other effects are available. The visible damage model is only mediocre. Shadows and reflections are good. High contrast ratio. On the negative side, the graphic processing is very computationally intensive. In general, a “blue cast” can be recognized.
1/2
iRacing has mediocre overall graphics. The density of detail appears to be the lowest. Smoke and particle effects are present. On the other hand, there is a very good damage model for some vehicles. Shadows, reflections and textures are mid-range and rather standard. The low system load and the natural color display are good. In general, a partially exaggerated “yellow tint” can be seen.
1/2
AC has good graphics. The level of detail is average. Textures and reflections are good. Smoke and other effects are present. The visible damage model is consistent and better than in rF2. The color scheme is generally realistic. You can recognize a “yellow tint”.
32/40
18/40
19/40
78% positive impressions
63% positive impressions
44% positive impressions
No liability is assumed for the correctness of the information!
M.W. d.s. t.b.