Thinder
-
Posts
1414 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Thinder
-
-
On 11/21/2021 at 12:07 PM, eracer1111 said:
I've been buying these parts over the past few months, and while I was hopeful that RTX 3080 prices would have gotten reasonable by now ("Dreamer....you know you are a dreamer) I bit the bullet and snagged a used GTX 1080 that should work OK for a year or so. Not ideal but, uhhhh, there it is.
- Motherboard: MSI PRO B550-A PRO AM4 ATX (Black Friday at Newegg $109.00 after $10.00 mail-in rebate.)
- AMD Ryzen 5600X ($249.00 at Best Buy.)
- 64 GB (4x16GB) DDR4/3466 CAS 16 (Free. )
- beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 4 CPU cooler ($80.00) This thing is huge.
- EVGA SuperNova 850W G6 80+ Gold. (On sale for $129.00 at Newegg. About 90W overkill.)
- PCIe Wi-Fi 6/Bluetooth adapter. ($36.00 at Newegg. The budget MOBO has neither.)
- Hynix Gold P31 2TB M.2 NVMe ($208.14 at Amazon with coupon.)
- Fractal Design Meshify 2 Compact ($150.00 at Amazon)
- ASUS ROG Strix GTX 1080 (used) ($320.00. Includes water block, but no other liquid parts.)
I'm going to buy about
$250.00$350.00
worth of open-loop cooling parts to finish this off. Oh, and of course a legal copy of Win 11 to really finish it off - for now.
Total cost will be right around
$1,680$1,780 + tax. I think I did OK. (ETA - 'Budget' build became 'Mid-range' build.)
Down the road I plan to upgrade my TM16000M HOTAS. I may jump into VR at some point - probably after I get a 3080.
Looks good, but I wouldn't splash $350.00 in liquid cooling, you'd gain more performance with a Cl14 B.die RAM kit and retain manufacturer warranty just in case you were thinking about O.Cing your CPU, all non-premium RAM come with a bottleneck and in my case, the gain from a Cl16 kit was 6.04% at 4K 2 X MSAA, and 1.33% GPU due to the fact that the B.Die removes those bottleneck including CPU-to-GPU channel.
In short, under load a Cl16 RAM kit will cause your CPU to throttle back, while a Cl14 B.Die kit will take advantage of 5600X architecture, designed for lower latency, I'd recommand a 4 X 1 rank stick since you will also beneficiate from interleaving, as a thumb rule, no more than 4 ranks and 3200MHz, if you go out of those limits, you'll create a bottleneck and you'll gain little if not nothing in normal load and quiet a bit under load. That's due to controller limitations.
Since you play a demanding game, it is not too hard to figure that what you want is a RAM which will let your CPU work at full capacity and not slow the whole system down when the gaming get tough.
I use this kit I got from Newegg if you're interested, worth the money...
-
20 minutes ago, BitMaster said:
It installs and it tries to load but gets stuck for ever in a black screen as of now.
I followed a few threads on how to fix some issues but none has helped so far, seems like I need to try out different Nvidia drivers, currently using the newest one Ubuntu offered but I know from the past that older ones are far more stable...so, when I get the time I will try different drivers until I can fly the Su-25T online
It's not trivial as of now, so I dont think it is suited for users who dont want to mess around in a shell and heavily modify the OS.
Once it's only click&fly in Steam it's where it should be.
That's always been one of Linux/Ubuntu issues, driver support isn't best but I believe they can and will sort it out especially because Windows 11 seems to be a complete dud.
-
2 hours ago, BitMaster said:
I hope one day each game comes as a bootable Linux distro with all tools onboard that you need and nothing else. It's not too far fetched btw.
Boot DCS and fly
edit: just watched this update video:
He mentioned DCS... so there is that. Wonder which controller/Hotas setups work and which don't. Iirc, my TM WH is not picked up in Ubuntu/Mint but also never tried to use it. Well, maybe I shrink one NVMe a little bit and install Ubuntu bare metal, fire up Steam with my DCS and give it a shot. That really interests me how far it has come now.
Most sense would make if the Server would run on Linux w/o Steam, that would cut the monthly cost some pay to have their server hosted with MS lic included. Linux is usually ~20€ cheaper per month. If the hoster doesnt mind Steam it could well be already in action if Steam offers DCS Server on Linux, don't know if they do.
Yeah, there is DCS listed, and I think that before I feel the need to upgrade my O.S it will only get better, my personal dislike of Windows since 10 is the main reason, it became far more intrusive and is now a tool for Microsoft personal data collecting, reason why they created so many different triggers for updates and made it nearly impossible to disable the automation.
Fortunately I've been able to find ways around and prevent this to happen while obtening a good O.S stability in the same time but Windows 11 will chnage that when Win 10 is no longer supported, since I'm tired of this war against Microsoft breach of my privacy, Linux looks increasingly like the alternative I'm looking for.
-
On 12/2/2021 at 4:19 PM, nikita_nomad said:
A bit off topic one. Do you guys reckon a 700w is enough for 3070ti or 3070?
Sent from my CLT-L09 using Tapatalk
It all depends on the quality of your power supply, there is a difference between guaranteed constant power delivery and pick power delivery, I got a Corsair 750W and I'm sure of 750W delivered on a pernament basis, which is not the case of many cheaper power supply units, quality lways come with a price.
-
-
-
1 hour ago, nikita_nomad said:
I might go down that route still :), although i see even cex start to raise their gpu prices. But it still looks tempting
Well if your actual GPU is passing their test it might cut the price of purchase and make the buy worth it.
I'm not going to upgrade this 1080Ti unless there is something significantly more performant for a reasonable price, I got vouchers from my previous GPU and was able to afford it, I've been with them for more than 10 years now and have nothing but good things to say about them.
-
I've done it and I'm happy I did. For UK players, try CEX.
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB GDDR5X. £615.00
Thoroughly tested with a two years warranty on top. A tip: Register, sell your old GPU (if it passses their test) and exchange for wouchers + cash.
-
On 11/18/2021 at 5:44 PM, BitMaster said:
It will be A LOT harder to find a performance wise sufficient GPU for acceptable money. No one can tell you what the market looks like in 6 months, 9months or a year down the road.
I couldn't agree more.
Especially since it seems that AMD shot themselves in the foot when all AMD players were waiting for them to release the equivalent of an 3080Ti at lower price... Dream on, and that was was before Covid and all the mehem it caused to the industry.
I was a strong advocate of an all AMD or all NVIDIA solution and I run a 5600X but I don't think I will upgrade my 1080Ti to an AMD GPU, I still don't have the budget so I'll have to wait (which might be a good thing after all), a GPU of choice would be something like the MSI GeForce RTX 3080 Ti SUPRIM X 12G, when I was looking at building a mid-range system, there is no way around the need for a very strong GPU for playing DCS at higher settings.
But... NO stock. And the price!!!!
-
-
4 hours ago, Bossco82 said:
The best I could find at a sensible price were 2x16gb 3600Mhz C16 kits from Corsair, I think something like this will be fine, thoughts?
Thinder if you ever have the time to write a step by step guide how you optimised your system for DCS I would find that interesting. I struggle to fully understand it when its part of a debate.
The Corsair vengeance kits seems to be popular among Intel users, but B.Die will always come with a premium so 32GB will be costly, I personally would go for a 4 X 8 GB kit to make sure it uses interleaving.
I procured my RAM from Newegg
https://www.newegg.com/global/uk-en/
>>>
I'm far from finished with my own system, since it'strial and error, looking for the infos, installing the apps when applying, doing into registry editor, comparing results etc, IF I come up with something like this it is not going to be before some time.
Then there is the issue of players having upgraded to Windows 11, I haven't and am not planning to, more to it those issues took a lot of time for the most advanced users to sort out in Windows 10 and Microsoft was engaged in some form of struggle to make sure people didn't take and keep control of their O.S, I saw that with the number of updates they released which reversed the progresses made with Windows memory management, including reversing all settings, reinstalling all background Apps etc.
So at the moment I'm just going step by step but making sure I severed the link with Microsoft so those updates and triggers doesn't find their way in my system.
-
2 hours ago, LucShep said:
If you found something that is 100% sure of curing part of the problems like you say, then consider creating a step-by-step guide and share with other fellow users here on the forums by opening a dedicated thread, meant for everyone, including the tech iliterate users. Otherwise, you're just going to look like someone pretending to flex some smarts, and none of that will be of any relevance, even if it worked, for the regular user or even an advanced one skilled in IT for that matter.
To be honnest I'm not bothered with the way I look in forums, I don't take them for pagents and go "and world peace", I already have treated the subject of system optimization several time over and you're yet another example of the sort of reaction I get from mentioning those facts. Players don't take this subject seriously.
The reason I put an emphasis on this is because as I already stated, I built a mid-range system and I don't expect to beat records with it, but once again, without getting rid of all bottlenecks, you just can't point fingers at the game as being responsible for all those issues.
Best example is mentioning lack of RAM capacity when in fact this RAM kit removed the bottleneck and improved performances under load and the GPU you mentioned would do the opposite under the same amount of load, like mine because they are simply not up to the task.
It's pretty simple: The CPU don't store data, that's the job of the RAM, if the GPU can't recycle it fast enough, the data stored in the RAM will have to wait before the CPU can process it anyway, so it will end up with more than necessary to store and still will not be the source of the issue, doubling the capacity will only alleviate it, not sort it out.
QuoteAt the end of the day, the point of it all is something like this.... you do not buy a car and be asked to be a mechanic. That's just not how it works.
I don't own a car license, I drove bikes since 1975 and you'd better knew how to do an oil change at the time, check your tire pressure, chain tension and the rest of it, it's a culture, like PC gaming is a culture, a visit on an AMD, MSI or Intel forum will tell you a lot about it, if people want to build gaming PC, they NEED to learn about them and it starts with the O.S, meaning all the crap Microsoft have thrown at us with Windows 10 and probably 11.
QuoteFor a sim/game that basis itself on contant progress in a platform (and, it seems, has assets (and spagheti code?) going 20 years back) that shows more and more performance issues with every new version, and is this expensive, it's beyond unreal to ask from a user to go to such lenghts, when no other game in the market today seems to be as demanding as this is, or shows this kind of problems in the current day and age.
Hang on a minut, I'm not a techie OK? So I had to go through a lot of home work and research only to figure which RAM kit would work well with my 5600X especially because this particular kit is not even listed as supported by my MSI motherboard.
People build P.Cs for gaming like building racing cars but according to you it's too much asking them to learn about the basics?
QuoteIt sucks to be forced to have a well above average PC just to enjoy this sim/game any decently (mid-range system being the bare minimum), but that is the reality, and right now that is the only solution to fight/contradict DCS's limitations and performance issues.
It's not about own system maintenance or tricks. And it's not about perfectly capable GPUs that only in this abnormally demanding sim/game show such limitations.I wouldn't qualify a 8GB GPU as perfectly capable, especially after owning a 1080Ti even if the GPU in question is faster, I perfecly understand the importance of having more VRAM to tackle a game such as DCS, reason why I am planning to upgrade to at least a 12GB GDDR6X 3080Ti, which btw will still be the bottleneck when bounded to my 5600X.
The point I am making here is that without having optimized your OS, reduced all bottlenecks to at least below 3%, you won't know for sure if you lack RAM capacity simply because your RAM will be affected by the performances of your GPU, while a simple 32GB of 3200MHz Cl14 B.Die make it work 1.33% faster under heavy load at 4K 2 X MSAA.
I appreciate the work done by all those who have tried to figure what the game issues are, not saying there aren't any, but there have been no procedure starting by reducing system RAM management issues and latency so far, so we still are very much in the dark as to which is the problem appart for the facts I mentioned about those RAM kit effects on the systems.
And something else, when talking about culture, people post their system stats with RAM capacity or frequencies, never RAM type (number of ranks, Chips material etc) or latency, which mean that those players are mislead to think that those are the specs that matter most and when posting them, deny people like myself of the most important information to figure out what their real problems are.
So one can conduct tests, using benches or DCS all they want, we don't know if their system is really up to the task, that's one reason why I don't give too much attention to those topics, I'm aware but not overly concerned, instead I focuse on getting the informations I need to optimize my system, starting by the O.S and it's not an aquired taste.
It's pretty much the same with Youtube Videos comparing this and that, if you don't have all the specs in hand they are useless appart for the owner of the channel which makes dosh from them, it's everyone home work and fact checking, contacting manufaturers support and asking questions in relevant forums which makes the difference.
So As I said, before even thinking of spending this sort of money on another RAM kit I'll upgrade my GPU with reducing the bottleneck to a minimum in mind, then only I will be able to make a full and precise assessment on to which level of performances I really get from my RAM kit, for the time being it is it which reduces bottlenecks.
-
23 hours ago, LucShep said:
It is that way, the problem has been discussed with some data to back it up (but has been simply dismissed). See the threads pointed below if curious.And if even users who do take care of their systems have troubles, then it is NOT an assumption at all.
The reality is that E.D. and 3rd parties have decided on absurd texture sizes for everything, including less important objects, while at the same time there is a visible struggle with
They also provide with ways to set up texture size used by players.
QuoteLatest GPUs like RTX3070 and 3070Ti have 8GB of VRAM, and I wouldn't call them slow or "bottleneck" type by any means. ...would you?
If you expect 8GB of VRAM to be on par with 32GB you're delusioned, as simple as that, that's a bottleneck and the 3070 is certainly not one GPU I would chose for an upgrade from my 1080Ti.
QuoteWhat bottlenecks?
YES those GPU are 7.32% GPU bootleneck with a 5600X. Got it? 32GB of Cl14 B.Die make this CPU faster, this GPU would slow down the whole system in both case, UNDER LOAD, when DCS RAM and VRAM demands picks.
So basically without any evidence that the RAM capacity is to blame for the issue, or to what precise extend, although doubling it would alleviate it by default somehow, you imply that those 8GB GPU are not the issue when in fact thay already are with an humble Ryzen 5 5600X, are you kidding me?
How do you expect the RAM not to saturate when your GPU will be limited by its own VRAM capacity and the whole system made slower because it IS the bootleneck?
That's WHY the majority of those issues are GPU related so unless you guys really figure it out in a more serious fashion, you won't persuade me to splash an extra £500 in RAM when an underperforming GPU is causing a lot more of those issues, I know where my priorities lies and it's not on doubling the RAM capacity without solving the problem.
QuoteIntel is not as sensible to RAM CAS latency as AMD Ryzen, it never was.
The O.S doesn't restitute RAM and there are a LOT of issues with Windows 10 (don't know about Windows 11 but it certainly didn't cure the mediocrity of memory management).
There are people working on those issues and I don't believe your bunch have been looking hard enough into them for a starter, then coming up with a 3070 8GB GPU as example is plain funny, it does nothing for the credibility of this rhetoric which is looking at the game first and not at the O.S and players settings.
You mentioned stuttering, did you guys sort out your RAM cache? There are plenty of very simple trick to make a system a lot more responsive and RAM efficient than just the basic I already quoted, only it takes time and trial to figure which one work and not especially if you're looking at the level of details quoted in those debate.
I don't know if you understand how the RAM affects the Ryzens and how low latency have been used from a generation to the other, the FACT that the 5000 series make better use of low latency is a plus, not a minus, it was used previously to O.C the RAM because those kits are B.Die and could reach 3200MHz with those CPUs, not to take advantage of lower latency.
My Ryzen 5600X was already 21% faster than the 3600X it replaced with Cl16 RAM, the Cl14 kit made it 6.04% faster than it was with the Cl16, and the GPU 1.44% faster UNDER LOAD at 4K 2 X MSAA.
Here are two examples sreenshots taken within a couple of mn from each other, the cache fills up real fast, I saw up to 8GB of cache files before I applied this fix, it never was even looked at by Microsoft, it slows down the whole system and causes stuttering. How many of you have it sorted? Mine empties itself every 5mn with task scheduler, don't look on yours, you haven't got the fix from stock O.S and updates.
So as I said, you want gaming P.Cs to tackle the most demanding game, you'd better start by doing your homework and sort your O.S memory management and system Latency properly because if you haven't you have no valid basis on which to rely for comparison and so far I havent seen anyone coming up with this most basic infos.
-
Quote
Second, and we're going off topic (sorry Ged!) there is a reason why those going for Multiplayer are now getting 64GB of RAM.
Optimizing system, big page file on fastest drive, and closing unecessary apps, that is all par for the course - it always has been for DCS.I mentioned this issue several time over in this forum, looking at the reaction it didn't seems that way and I think it's a hell of an assumption to say that players having trouble in multiplayers are taking that much care of their system, then if you are building a gaming PC it is far from being off topic.
I built my system as a mid-range and I'm not even looking for 90FPS (like some) performance that's for a start, second, you might want to get this sort of performance by splashing above £500 to gain what? 20FPS?
As I said, I don't think an optimized system with 32GB of Cl14 B.Die bounded to a 5600X will fare that bad even in DCS Multiplayer and looking at what I get out of my system testing it at 4K X 2 MSAA I don't expect to run into trouble with FPS once I will have upgraded my GPU, most probably to a 3080Ti...
So how many players have had those issues in the condition you mentioned with the solution I have now and how many chose B.Die kits for their upgrades?
QuoteNext, the latency (think of it as the response time of memory).
This can be even more important than speed for a very intensive sim/game like DCSIt is the most important simply because it removes the bottlenecks existing and the gain is substential with a 5600X, I should know, I upgraded from a Cl16 kit, right now, I have a 9.52% GPU bottleneck with a 1080Ti, a 3080 would only reduce it to 3.47%, so I know I have some margin, that's what this 32BG RAM bounded to a 5600X kit does.
QuoteIn DCS, when in SP you only have to load the textures of the modules you own. Already harsh on its own.
But in MP, when someone else joins, you have to load his/her textures as well (!), and this is for you, me, and each user in the server.I'm perfectly aware of all of that, I played SP in VR with quite high settings and it was smooth even with the Cl16 kit, then if you're looking at the highest settings with this game you have to build a high end and it's not what I am looking at, I'm satisfied with lower settings and FPS that's what you get when you spend half the money than you suggest to play this game.
Then you mentioned the REAL issue you have which is VRAM and GPU performance, to put it bluntly, I have 11GB of VRAM already and I'm not planning to get less with my GPU upgrade, this way my GPU won't have to wait for the RAM, actually it is the other way around, the RAM can't recycle to the GPU if VRAM only 8GB, does it occur to you guys that the RAM could have to wait for the GPU and not the other way around?
32GB of Cl14 B.die remove the RAM-CPU bottleneck with a subtential gain in CPU speed, Sort your GPU bootlenecks and you will see what it really can do.
Now. We all know that DCS is heavy on GPU use at high resolutions and considering that even a 3080 would be the bottleneck with a 5600X I am not so anxious about heavier loads than playing SP in VR, as I said I'm not looking at too high FPS or settings.
-
53 minutes ago, LucShep said:
This freakish game gets hungrier each new release, it devours every available resources and, given the chance, it'll now chew over 40GB of RAM when in Multiplayer at populated servers.
What no one has mentioned so far is the way you guys are setting up your systems, because if you have multiple apps running in the background, unsorted paging files, game installed on the same disk than the O.S etc, there is no valid comparison possible.
Then 64GB of Cl16 aren't going to do much better than 32GB of Cl14 bounded to an optimized system, since most of the RAM will be allocated to the game, and of course DCS is really demanding when it comes to RAM but I doubt very much that it is that much harder to deal with than a 3D Mark 4K test designed to pull the hell of it.
Don't forget how RAM is working it will recycle data as long as its channel to CPU is not limited and there is a bottleneck with Cl16 non B.die kits, 6.04% difference CPU and 1.55% GPU speed with my old kit, 64GB of it wouldn't have changed anything.
-
44 minutes ago, Bossco82 said:
Hi Ged, thats single rank DDR4 similar kit to mine except its 3600Mhz mine is 3200Mhz. Thats a Samsung B Die kit and I dont know how important that is for your build. It was important for mine because I am on AMD.
Hi Thinder, I get what your saying mate. Isn't all that only applicable to AMD 5000 series on the X570 chipset regarding the memory controller? Genuine question mate as I dont know the answer.
How does all that apply to Alder Lake, this is for Z690 after all?
Ged I honestly dont know which specific DDR4 kit would be best for your 12900k. I know G.Skill is some of the best DDR4 you can buy. I've got an educated guess that 3600Mhz is more than enough for DCS. For your 12900k I dont see it being dual or single rank causing a problem. I dont see having C14 being needed either, its nice to have but... is it worth the extra cost?
Ged you plan on using VR and I DONT know how that effects how much Dram you need. Also I only play single player, if you want to play multiplayer you might need 64gb. I DONT know the answers to these questions. Get an answer from someone who does before you click the buy button.
When I contacted MSI support I gave them my full built specs including the Ryzen 5 5600X, so their reply involve this generation of CPU, from my own researches on the subject, the controller are similar between the 3600X and 5600X, but I only got one source to validate this so it could be inacurate.
Zen2
Zen3
Looking at the recommanded RAM frequency for the 12900k, it is possible that the controller can deal with more than 4 ranks but I wouldn't bet on it, because once you commit to a kit, if this problem occurs, it's too late and you'll have to changeit. Best to contact Intel support to make sure.
As for low latency, I'm a strong advocate of lower latency, it's simply faster for the same frequency and allows your CPU to cope with higher load, because most of the time those kits come with B.Die chips.
I didn't know which CPU he uses and since it is a recent model, I haven't really researched the subject I must admit but I'm sure there are RAM kits designed for those CPU with the two solutions in mind: Fast/Gaming or cheap/all-purpose solutions.You and I chose Fast/Gaming I believe for the same reason with playing DCS in view, I run all my tests at 4K 2 X MSAA.
At the end of the day, there are so many combination possible it is really up to him not only to do his home work (asking in an Intel forum would be a good idea too), but also to chose according to his budget, his CPU is really fast, he might not need a B.Die/Cl14 kit to squeeze the most of it like we did, or he might chose to do it, in which case he can chose from the number of RAM kits suited to his CPU.
About VR, at higher resolutions the GPU will do more work than the CPU, reason why I run my tests at 4K 2 X MSAA, and there the RAM work just as well since the channels aren't limited by the CPU controllers, with my 1080Ti I gained 1.33% in CPU performances during the same test, so it works when it comes to bottlenecks...
The most important from my PoV is good bounding between all 3, making sure there is no bottlenecks especially RAM because it does affect both CPU and GPU through the CPU controller.
I just realized that what they were calling OverClocking this G.skill kit with the old generation of CPU was taking them to 3200GHz, when you think that I (and probably you as well) didn't need to do anything apart for enabling XMP in BIOS to get them to this speed, it says a lot on the role taken by the controllers.
-
37 minutes ago, Ged33 said:
Its not that I thought DDR4 would cause a performance loss I just thought DDR5 would be better if you know what I mean
I sort of understand what you are saying about the ram I had a quick look on line and found G.Skill Trident Z Neo 32GB (4x 8GB) 3600MHz CL14 DDR4 It does not say what rank it is though? is this what I should get?
It's 1 rank, if it wasn't I wouldn't have seen an increase of 6.04% in CPU speed compared to my Cl16 kit, 4 X 2 ranks is too much for the CPU controller to deal with.
Sure DDR 5 will be faster but then again, you'll have to build your whole system around it, motherboard and CPU included and make sure the RAM is a proper bound for it.
Here is what MSI support told me about it.
Note that the last gen of Ryzen make better use of low latency, for Intel, this sort of B.die kits are mostly used to O.C them, so you might have different options in the market than those Cl14/3200MHz, the Intels are more high frequency biased so there are popular RAM kits out there that respond to those who want this, like the G.Skill Trident Z Royal Elite or Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro.
But as I said, look at the number of ranks per sticks, if you get a 2 X 16GB kit, 2 ranks per stick is still OK, see below the article published by Intel on the subject and you can use the B.Die finder to figure which kit is best suited for your CPU.
-
30 minutes ago, Ged33 said:
mmm more thinking to do. All I have actually brought so far is the 3090 and 12900K so Im still free to choose a motherboard. after what has been said maybe DDR4 would be a better way to go and every thing is available now. so the revised shopping list would be MSI Z690 EDGE WIFI DDR4, Samsung 980Pro 1TB drives, PX1000 PSU , 360 AIO cooler all in copper if possible and 64GB DDR4 ram, I have seen ram at 4000mhz and above should I get that or is 3200 just as good in DCS?
Two things matters more than RAM frequencies: The latency and the number of ranks per sticks, this is because of the CPU controllers limitations, reason for both Intel and AMD giving the recommanded frequency at 3200MHz, they assume that players don't spend the extra premium on B.Die kits and so their RAM can't provide the CPU with the right timings.
When it comes to latency, at the moment the Cl14 kits are B.Die, this allows for much tighter timings, they also are mostly 1 rank per stick which mean that one can fit 4 X sticks and still stay within the controller's limit of 4 maximum, passed that it will throttle down under load so the gain made by higher frequencies is wasted.
In short if you spend the money on 64GB of Cl16 non-B.die RAM you will keep the RAM bottleneck and your CPU will throttle down under load, while it won't happen to Bossco82 or myself because we use B.Die kits, the lower frequency matters a lot less than the latency, and ability of the CPU to work to its full potential under load, which is what matters the most in a game such as DCS which is load heavy.
As a thumb rule you shouldn't fit more than 4 ranks (2 X 2 per sticks or 4 X 1 ranks) on your motherboard and the rest is your own choice, you might want to chose the option of a larger capacity with 64Gb but I don't think it is necessary if your O.S and paging files are sorted and your game installed in a different disk than Windows, then higher frequencies without B.Die will retain the RAM bottleneck that a B.Die kit removes, it is unlikely that you will find any gain in performance with 3600MHz Cl 16 compared to 3200MHz Cl4.
-
1
-
-
-
57 minutes ago, Hiob said:
I changed nothing special recently. Just common windows security updates (no w11 update) and installed some steam games…
Windows is notorious for the mediocrity of its updates, try uninstalling them...
-
-
1 hour ago, Harlikwin said:
So, as I said, the 2000C with the RDI and 530D, wasn't a thing for most of the 1980's. Lets assume your 87 date is in fact an actual operational date not some rosey eyed oh we have like 1 working plane and 2 missiles that are "technically" working which most of those dates usually are. So lets see lemme do some math, 1980-1987 thats 7 years. Then 1987-1990 is 3 years. So, last I checked 7>3. So, I'd say my statement that the RDI 2000 and the 530D werent a thing for most of the 80's is in fact pretty accurate.
Also at no point did I even bring in some block25 viper into the conversation.
Also I'd be curious since we have a 2000's era M2Kc what sort of upgrades did the RDI, and 530D get over the course of the 90's.
Keep your assumptions for fanboys, the sources I posted are official, not only AdlA but also Centre des hautes études de l'armement. Département d'histoire de l'armement. Comité pour l'histoire de l'aéronautique. Paris COMAERO. That's the official French Defense archive site for the R530 F and D development and performances, not to mention MATRA slide on the snap up performances and intercept profile of the 2000C RDM/R530 F.
This mean that for years the Mirage had potent BVR capabilities even the RDM variant, and the F-16 hadn't, then I assume that the block 25 came into service with full BVR capabilities which might or not be the case.
In short you posted whatever on the subject, so it is NOT as you said.
QuoteThe F-16 was never intended to carry the Sparrow missile because it was designed to be a short range day-time interceptor without any BVR capabilities. Although the possibility of equipping the aircraft with the missile were already tested succesfully in 1977 it took untill the introduction of the F-16C block 25 and the F-16 ADF before the Viper got a BVR capability.
Service entry of the Mirage 2000C RDI - M53-P2 1987
QuoteFollowing initial deliveries to overseas units, the 312st TFTS stationed at Luke AFB in Arizona became the first continental US unit to receive the F-16C/D, getting its first planes in April of 1986 and becoming fully operational in October of 1988.
QuoteThe Super 530 D is the version adapted to the Mirage 2000 equipped with an on-board pulse doppler radar (called RDI, pulse doppler radar).
The main differences in characteristics compared to the F are as follows: - semi-active EMD doppler seeker (see chapter 8, EMD), with digital technology from 1980 (microprocessor for management); significantly increased range of AD: 50 km; very high resistance to modern countermeasures; - partially digitized computer pilot; - more efficient vehicle: increased mass and length (+ 30 kg and + 265 mm), total impulse thruster 16% higher, with a composite SEP casing; - performance: maximum speed of Mach 5; Possible elevation gain, allowing attacking targets at 24,000m; minimum target altitude of 60 m; Maximum firing distance of 50 km, with an intercept distance of 35 km.
At the time, this missile was "the must have" from a performance standpoint. Launched in development in 1977, it was commissioned in 1987.
1,000 missiles were produced, of which 620 (including 30 training) for France. It was exported with the Mirage 2000 to Egypt, India, Abu Dhabi, Greece. It was widely used by the French Air Force on patrol with AD operation, without fire, during the Gulf War and the conflict in the former Yugoslavia.
This use had not been foreseen and the operating potential of the AD (the mechanics) was limited to 25 hours; but it could be increased to 200 hours after testing. For its part, the third American generation consists of the 7 F and 7 M versions of the Sparrow.
The vehicle has been improved; but it was above all the AD that needed modernization. The reliability of the Sparrow 7 E version used during the Vietnam conflict was viewed by reports in the US Senate as unacceptable; AD had stuck with "tube" technology.
Version 7 F, featuring solid state technology, did not enter service with difficulty until 1978, due to flaws encountered during the evaluation phase; we will see the consequences with the hasty launch of its successor, AMRAAM (Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air
http://marc.mistral.free.fr/aventure/militaire/missiles tactiques/mt 59 79/mt ch 09.htm
-
-
Just now, sylkhan said:
I never said that we need a 2000-5/9 :), i just said that, IF RAZBAM can do a 2000-5 in the futur, then a 2000-9 would be a better option (IMO).
For the rest i agree with all you have said
Never mind my English.
It's just a pitty that A-Cs are not pitted vs eachother with time limits for their loadout.
What do you love and hate of DCS?
in Chit-Chat
Posted
Love: most of the aircrafts I flew, realism, even the music.
No hate there but dislike at diverse levels, like replays aren't calibrated to VR set view, Binding not always obvious and in a particular case (Mirage 2000C), the A-C not been pitted vs aircrafts of its true generation, that's before the integration of AIM-120 to F-16/18, which mean a clear discrepency in weapon performances.
I don't play PvP and still will have to relearn to fly the Mirage when I'll get a new headset but I wonder how people manage to fly this version vs the Falcon and hornet as they are equiped with more advanced systems and weapons than even the Block 25.