trevoC

Just starting a thread to post my results. Old Build: 5900x Water Cooled (liquid arctic cooler) Asus Hero MB w/ 64GB DDR4 3090 (not liquid cooled) 2 x 2TB Gen 3 NVME EVGA 1200 watt PSU New Build: AMD 7900x3D Water Cooled (Arctic liquid 360mm rad) Asus ROG Crosshair X670E Hero 64GB DC DDR5 6400 Ram MSI Suprim RTX 4090 Liquid X (Liquid Cooled) 4TB Gen 4 NVME (Kingston Fury) 2x2TB Gen 3 NVME Corsair HX1500i PSU NZXT H7 Flow I'll do some tests on the old system and post a screenshot of my settings so I can attempt a similar setup in the new system. All results are in VR on the HP G2 Reverb (Gen 1) Just waiting on the arctic liquid cooler before I can start my build, will run older system tests in the meantime. Not attempting a perfect scientific method comparison but will be as thorough as I have the patience to be to offer the community some semblance of comparison. For context, my 3090 build is severely CPU bound which is why I didn't attempt to get a 4090 for it. Most of the time the 3090 is not over 89% usage and many times is in the 60% usage area while the CPU is full tilt (20% OC'd) Not sure if the 7900x3D was the perfect buy over the 7950 but we'll see. Initial results show the two of them almost head to head, less than 1% difference (7950 edging it by a bit) but no DCS tests I've seen. The reason for the 7900x3D over the 7950x3D is the higher base clock speeds which should result in better single core performance and because its a 6+6 chiplet design over an 8+8 design there should be some extra headroom (in regards to heat) in the 6 chip design to squeeze more Over Clocking out of it as the 8 chip design will generate more heat and DCS won't use them anyway. Is my thinking correct on this, who knows, we'll find out soon enough. In the 5900x vs 5950x (I've run both) the 5900x was faster in my builds. Same was true in the 3900x generation. Either way, the difference would probably be insignificant. The real gains for me will be the extra CPU headroom over the 5900x for more draw calls to the 4090 which I'm hoping I can take much more advantage of than the 5900x did with the 3090. Excited to build this, but not sure when I'll be able to get around to it. Too many projects on the go and this build requires me to build 4 pcs essentially as I have a rotation of parts as I build new machines. (my old machine some parts to my son, and my sons old machine 3900x back to me for the office and my office machine back to one of my daughters etc.. etc..) I love upgrade time, but it will be busy on the workbench for a bit. Some parts sleeping under my desk until the cooler arrives.null

Obviously I won't know until I can test this, but I have a 7900x3D arriving Friday (full build specs in signature) and will post results here and probably a full post. Currently running a 5900x w/3090 and will do a benchmark on that system first and attempt to replicate settings on the 7900x3D/4090 build to give some idea of what to expect from the duo upgrade for VR users (I'm on G2) Really had to think about which one to get 7900x3D v 7950x3D. My thought process goes like this. In the past, the non 3D bins 5900x for example would do better for DCS and other single threaded CPU bound applications than the 5950x because the base clock speed is slightly higher. On top of this, it has been confirmed that the 7900x3D is a 6 + 6 design meaning that the 6 cores have more Cache available to them than the 8 cores would if it were an 8 core design. DCS won't use more than 6 cores even with vulkan and "multi-threading" upgrades anyway so I'm safe here. By the time that arrives I'm on AM5 and will probably have either upgraded CPU to 8000/9000 or on AM10 by then. lol Either way, parts should all be here by next week and I will take some time to build it out and test it to give some results here. my 5900x/3090 build is severely CPU bound which is why I had not upgraded to a 4090 yet. Didn't see the point. Hopefully the 7900x3D can push enough draw calls to the 4090 to see some nice gains. We'll see. Will keep you posted

I do not use upscaling, just set the foveated rendering to Preset (Quality/Wide)

No matter the specs, you'll always be hunting for fps in DCS (or any flight sim for that matter) I've had all types of rigs with most GPU setups and obviously increasing your rig specs helps, but by far the largest improvement I've ever seen is openXR using FOV on quality wide. I barely notice it (unless I look for it) and it gives me a good 30%-50% increase in framerates.

lol... perfect answer.

yes, but it's 2 more weeks from now just to be clear, this message is continually relevant until its release.

In an attempt to explain someone a concept without any prior knowledge, you use analogies. You may not like mine which is fine, but nowhere did I attempt to actually convey that an aircraft or its wing has feelings. I think you know this.

you are clearly taking my comments out of context. you can keep doing that, but all was explained above and none of it is untrue.

What I meant was (for the layman) although your ground speed may indicate 500 knots, your aicraft is not experiencing 500 knots and could stall if the IAS is below the Vs speed. It doesn't compare anything. It measures the speed at which the aircraft is experiencing (so to speek) which is why I used "feel". IAS is the most important airspeed as it determines if the aircraft is capable of performing at X V speeds. Ground speed will not tell you if you are about to stall. IAS will. To be crystal clear, IAS is a direct measurement from the pitot tube. No calculations by computers or offsets of other calculated speeds.. IAS is used to calculate TAS which is not so important anymore with GPS ground speed indicators. The pitot tube itself measures the difference between the static and dynamic or ram air pressure inside the tube and gives the aircraft an IAS reading (assuming its calibrated). IAS is the speed of the aircraft through the air. If IAS is 200 knots and GS is 500 knots, your wing is not "moving through the air at 500 knots", Its moving through the air at 200 knots even though you are travelling 500 knots across the ground. I never said it was. We are talking about this so the OP (who's video I wasn't knocking) could take into account the many potential variables that he may not have been aware of when doing it again (which he said he would) Why put effort into another video without understanding the potential factors involved. Then it leaves little question. I'd argue that if both DCS and MSFS had all potential factors eliminated that they would look identical. If they didn't look identical, then one of the applications is wrong. This detail is so easy to program that I highly doubt that either of them got it wrong, hence they will look the same. They don't in this video because of some or all of the potential variables involved which we are trying to eliminate. You also don't need to talk about this if you don't like, but you are here, so...

^ Not true at all. Again, its why I mentioned go elsewhere. I've been flying for 30 years. If you want an explanation its easy to find. "From the ground up" is where I started or a youtube video which I mentioned. No need to garble anything here to someone who may or may not understand. I attempted to explain this for the layman. If you already know, there is no reason to explain. But if you are going to explain in depth, better get it right. "your wing is moving through the air at 500 knots" < never said otherwise. But the air moving over your wing is not moving at 500 knots worth of lift which is why it can be confusing for non pilots. If we really want to be clear, the IAS doesn't adjust for anything and is a direct measurement of air speed via the pitot tube which measures dynamic pressure period. It doesn't measure pressure differention or anything else.

He's doing the going back in time and wiping out half the German front lines with an Apache scenario... pretty standard stuff.

There are plenty of times you could be travelling close to or exceeding the sound barrier while your aircraft is on the edge of stall speed at altitude. I've fought this limit at 47,000+ feet in an F-15 many times trying to get an edge on a BVR launch to gain an advantage. Aircraft is barely staying in the air but travelling Mach 1 across the ground (IAS around 150 knotsish) You also have True Air speed TAS which again is different. For this example though, Ground Speed is all that matters and IAS is really irrelevant. hope that helps. Now granted at lower altitudes air density will have little impact, but what is the weather in this example... is there a headwind etc... There could be a 50 knot headwind in one example and a 30 knot tailwind in the other. This is a 70 knot disparity in wind alone that IAS will not indicate. You start adding up all the potential variables and it could be way out. All I'm tyring to convey (because the comparison is cool to watch) is that it be setup in a manner that could be more scientific (I wasn't claiming that the OP said that, just trying to help with that)

At 30,000 feet for example you may have a 260 knot IAS and a 500 knot Ground speed. Much more than 100 knots. Pretty common. IAS is always shown to pilot as your stall speed is more important than how fast you are travelling, but for this test ground speed would be the most important factor. Tons of videos on youtube that can best deep dive this for you but the gist of it is IAS is the speed which the aircraft "feels" in other words the wind is travelling 150 knots over the wing which determins stall speed. Ground speed on the other hand is the actual speed you are travelling across the ground which would effect the "feel or look" Tons of things effect this... headwind, tailwind, air density, temperature, altitude etc....

All of this I discussed above. I'm not going to get into a <profanity>ting match with you. I've not only suggested every item you've mentioned but also offered to look at the OP's code and fix it if necessary. And there is a constantly changing integer value you can feed randomseed as suggested above. Thanks for googling randomseed to repeat what I've explained above. All I've learned here is that helping people on this forum is a lose lose situation.

define speed? You can see the IAS on the hud which tells us nothing we need to know for this test.

This is all answered above. You don't need an "unpredictable seed value" to seed the random number generator. "1234" works fine. Anything actually works.

you can lead a horse to water......

Personally, I prefer steam guages.... except for navigation.

yeah, its a real shame. Any DCS video I've made, I've used nVidia screen recording to record it live while I fly. Capture straight to disk and use external views while flying. I'd be happy if they just let you change views on a track. I've flown hundreds of campaign missions and (stupidly) saved every one of those track files in hopes that they will be useful one day for me to replay and watch from an external view. Its easy enough to fly (instant action) and use external views to catch footage, but no one is thinking about capturing footage during a mission when crap is hitting the fan. Would love to see some of the external views in those missions. IMHO, a good replay system for DCS would do more for their marketing than anything else as people would be creating more and more content for youtube which is essentially free marketing for DCS. I'm not trying to convince anyone, but your best marketing is the users direct marketing via social media.

My wingman (regardless of aircraft) goes rogue on a good day. The majority of my deaths on my profile are actually wingman effing me up deaths. -flys into me on final during F-15 missions probably acounts for a half dozen or so. -Ka-50 missions landing on me (I guess that was his spot) has happend thrice. -su-25 missions both take-off and landing incedents. In fact, I'd probably have more deaths if my wingman made it through more missions as he frequently fly's half a mission and then ejects (probably out of fuel I guess). I've learned not to depend on him at all and am usually surprised if he contributes to anything at all. At the end of the day my biggest enemey in DCS has not been the enemy at all. Its my wingman.

"This was much ado about nothing" Correct. Nice to be able to do the work to convince yourself sometimes but the solution is simple and posted above. the only consideration is feeding a different seed so that you can ensure different results mission to mission if you are concerned that DCS doesn't initialize the seed differently each time (which it may or may not do). math.random doesn't produce weighted results as discussed above.

why don't you post that code snippet. Not sure you are using it correctly.

Wouldn't mind an ME-262 either but I'm not sure that would be practical to expect much information on it.

As mentioned above, all you need to feed randomseed() is an integer of some type. couldn't you just create a timer on load or use an existing one if you have one and feed the timer value to the randomseed math.randomseed(timer) I'm not familiar with the mission creator or what portion of the API is available, but I'm sure there is some constantly changing integer value you can feed randomseed() with just a quick search I found timer.getTime() math.randomseed(timer.getTime()) -- seed the random number generator with a fixed value local random_number = math.random(1, 100) print(random_number)