Thinder

No problem... Yeah. Bomber!

Actually no, since it isn't built for PCIe 4, my B450 handles it with PCIe 3 and only needed a BIOS update and it isn't a PCIe newer spec, the fact that GPU manufactuers doesn't implement it to older cards has little to do with the PCIe bus but is a commercial decision, furthermore it can be updated with simple drivers at a later date as was the case for my motherboard. DCS tries to implement the Vulkan engine so the whole PCIe 3/4 technology is right on it, and fully part of what is needed to be worked on by developers. Again you prioritize in the dark, I'm certain that you haven't informed yourself on what developers worldwide are making of it. Vulkan is directly linked to the CPU and GPU workloads, so there is absolutely no reasons for implementing it while ignoring Smart Access Memory and Resizable BAR since they are already technically part of it, more to the point, it is precisely what we need to see the rise in performances we need. Here is one example: RADV Vulkan Driver Begins Landing Optimizations For AMD Smart Access Memory Drivers will come out sooner than Vulkan will be implemented to DCS so when this happens, DCS developers will have the choice to stay level with the competition, they don't need to develop a different version of Vulkan, just support drivers for Smart Access Memory and NVIDIA Resizable BAR, otherwise said, offer full driver support for CPU and GPUs.

Just in case you missed the scoop it is not a "new vendor specific gpu functionality" but a CPU-to-GPU bus improvement (PCIe 3) which brings up to 13% more performances in 4K games that supports it, it means that BOTH CPU and GPU have to be conceived for it as well as their drivers, reason for NVIDIA not to introduce it to other cards younger than the 3080 and are developing their own version. https://www.theverge.com/2021/1/12/22226560/nvidia-resizable-bar-support-intel-amd-smart-access-memory-feature AMD, Intel and NVIDIA are not "new vendors", they develop technologies that will be used by 90% of DCS users within a couple of years, one only have to have a look at topics on AMD Ryzen and new GPU to see this, DCS is hard on CPU Core speed and when it comes to load, even at the lowest settings there are limits and the Minimum system requirements doesn't allow for a really enjoyable experience. In short you're arguing that improving the game at every levels from the lowest to the highest settings wouldn't bring any benefit to DCS developers while everyone is crying out in this forum for more performances from the game, in two years, a B450 will be good for the museum, the Ryzen 5600X the base low-end gaming processor, a Radeon RX 6800 mid-range and yet they already support it today. What do you expect from developers? A miracle? Do you seriously think they'll come up with extra FPS for the poorest and boost them for VR players as well without squeezing every single frame out of the possible support for hardware that brings it? I think not. As I already pointed out, the concurents doesn't wait for DCS they already are on the ball.

I thought bemchmarks didn't transtale to DCS? I'd say it's nowhere near as simple as that. What people doesn't realize is that the benchmark they refer too most of the time are only 100% valid if you have the exact clone of the system which ran them. I keep saying it but O.S optimization for gaming including page files size and location, storage speed, processor and its bound to the RAM matters a lot, when the CPU is well bounded to the RAM, your GPU performances will increse anyway, the reason seems to be controller and CPU access to GPU VRAM even without thinking about smart access memory. So you can go for any of those GPUs, if you have a bottleneck somewhere, your CPU controller will throtthle down both itself and the RAM and allocate less bandwidth to the VRAM access, so your GPU will suffer more load for the same FPS, what matter is a good ballance between the whole system, on one side you have faster bus, on the other more VRAM, but it won't matter if your CPU to CPU bus is not used 100%. Then for future applications using an all AMD or Intel NVIDIA system would make more sense, it would have been useful to know your system specs... I refer you to one topic where I listed results of tests and what I did for optimizing my system, for your info, I gained 6.04% in CPU performances at 4K but also 1.33% in graphic score and 1.35% in combined score, all of this using 3D Mark Pro at 4K and 2 X MSAA, only by fitting the best RAM to my system. Those results are for Physics test, CPU bench of 3D Marks. If you intend to play DCS at 4K in complex scenarios, it might be wise to get your CPU to work at its best without any bottleneck, since I intend to get another VR set, 6.04% CPU improvement is not a small gain, as I pointed out, the average headroom for O.C a 6000 series AMD GPU is 5%, and my results were obtained without O.C, only Ryzen Master and Afterburner both in Game mode (without touching voltage)... According to this video the NVIDIA GPU is about 6% average faster at 4K, that would be on his bench with basically the same system to run both GPUs, Ryzen 9 5950X and DDR4 3200 MHz CL 14 which is a configuration I would chose myself for a Ryzen CPU only if it is 4 X single rank, now I think everyone can rely on the info given by multiplayer server users who seems to indicate that the CPU is important (RAM bound then) in these scenarios. In short there is no ideal solution, it is up to you to figure on the basis of what you have, what you can or can't upgrade, which combination might work best at the resolution you intend to play your games and if the game of choice is heavier on CPU or GPU load at this resolution.

And which niche set of user would it be? This feature is available to every AMD/Intel/NVIDIA using new generation of CPU and GPU (probably the majority at the time of the realease of the Vulcan engine), quiet a niche. As for what you qualify of marginal, compare that to the average percentage of headroom for O.C with the new 6000 Serie GPU which is 5%, below half of what can be gained by using Smart Access Memory when well implemented. Otherewise said, there is no argument against it, apart if you wish to see DCS fall behind in terms of development... And just for the record, even my B450 GAMING PLUS MAX supports it if I fit an AMD 6000 or NVIDIA 3080 in it.

What I expect them to do is not being left behind, because as emerging as it is, Smart Access Memory is already well supported, more to it, when AMD, Intel and NVIDIA are coming up with some stuff like this, proven to increase performance by up to 11%, generally, developers take notice, and so should DCS developers because if they don't the concurence will.

At a time where AMD (and Intel/NVIDIA) are putting a lot into increasing the efficiency of their CPU/GPU combos, perhaps it would be a good idea for DCS developers to fully integrate support for Smart Access Memory. The game itself can improve and allow for better graphics from mid-range but it can't do it without optimization for the use of RAM and VRAM by our systems, especially in VR/4K and complex scenarios and maps where players have the most problems running at high settings with good FPS. Smart Access Memory support would help everyone.

Great! Some Recee missions would be a good idea, we have A2A and A2G but no recee in DCS yet, so a CR/CT variant?...

Yeah, after a while both Windows Mixed reality and Steam VR couldn't detect the device, while windows 10 could, it might have been an issue with the headset it self. SystemActive support were very good to me, they suggested a refund straight away and I had it after a few days from delivery to them. Anyway, after refund I got the best RAM available for my Ryzen 5600X instead and have some money left for a second hand Samsung HMD Odyssey Plus to keep me waiting, since I get it from CEX for £250.00 and that they buy them for £117.00, it will help lowering the cost anyway...

Yeah, that's exactly my feeling. I was lucky to have one of the early G2 released in the UK but it packed up after a month of use, then I figured that Windows Mixed Reality and Steam support for this headset were average to garbage, but it is STEAM VR. If I understand well, the deveopers for this headset are working at their own software which hopefully will be better... They also are working on improving on the FoV which is 114°.

Hi! I'm a little bit fade up with the big companies gear and attached strings such as Facebook account etc. So I preo-rdered this headset and apparently it is promising to be released in 4/5 month. Look at its specs here.

It's already out of stock at least in the UK. Mine packed up, neither Windows Mixed Reality nor Steam VR could detect it, I had a refund from the HP provider and bought some nice G.SKILL RAM kit with it. I'll spend a little in a second hand headset and wait until the new generation come out at lower price and hopefully better FoV, the G2 is good, but from my point of view HP shot themselves in the foot releaseing it with too little improvement to stan its own vs newer headsets, the technology is progressing very fast and we'll see better pretty soon. That said, after the Oculus CV1 it was quiet a joy to use, I only have 3 issues with V.R sets: Limited FoW and the weight of the set itself which make the recorded image shaking at every head movement, amplifying it because of the forward weight inertia, then the recording was decentred vertically, I never was able to set it up (didn't have time to do so before it packed up to be honnest) and from VR to full screen recording didn't completely show what I was looking at.

Best advise: Do NOT go for Windows 10 Home Edition, it is out of control (does literally what Microsoft wants it to do) and memory management is abbysmal. Buy Windows 10 Pro instead. First it is faster, then you can chose the way it manages memory, uninstall and turn off everything you don't want to run without your knowledge such as background apps which are useless for gaming. This way you'll be able to allocate more memoiry usage to your page files and gaming.

I know but the problem I have is to find one without having to break the bank again and I need a headset to really enjoy playing DCS, without it it's a pain having to use the witch hat to look around, not only it's difficult to follow a target but on top of that, I'm loosing useful functions on my Hotas. I keep looking for a G1, that's how I figured how much people were selling them, basically the same price than the G2 and some even more than what my G2 did cost me (without controllers), if I do find a G1 at a reasonable price, I'll buy it. Question: Did you try to modify your Odyssey Plus?

While I was looking for second hand headsets, I noticed that there is a number of HP Reverb G2 for sale, my impressions were rather positive while it worked, appart for the FoV which can be upgraded with some good modificatrion. Also the G1 sells second hand on Ebay nearly as much as I paid for a brand new G2 without controllers which I don't need. My conclusion is that I'd better wait for the next generation of VR headsets and go for a second hand Samsung HMD Odyssey Plus to keep me in the game, they sell it for £250.00, also, apparently, people came up with modification kits to improve on both FoV and optics, so I might investigate and try this. From my PoV, HP have kind of shot themselves in the foot with the G2, if optics, definition and clarity are good, it will soon be totally out-classed by newer headest and already people are selling them back, I am not sure about the reason for it. But in any case, if I Iike the improved image quality of the G2 compared to the CV1 but there was nearly no improvement in terms of FoV, which is something I think manufacturers are working on, especially because there is a strong demand from the driving simulation community...

I'll look it up, thanks for the advise!

Hi! After my G2 packed up, I got a refund from H.P but there are no replacement available. I spent some of this money in a RAM kit and will be looking for a second hand headset of the previous generation, the best picture (clarity/definition) possible, I only have experience with the OCULUS CV1 and G2, so it's going to be an improvement over the CV1 anyway, until perhaps the next gen of head sets. I won't go for anything linked to Facebook, they deleted my account years ago during the first big pruge and anyway I'd rather spend the money on a crowbar to do Zuk's head than making him reacher by buying another Oculus. Any advise on a good alternative here? I was thinking about the Samsung Odyssey + if it is better than the CV1... Thanks in advance.

https://www.tolvapc.co.uk/shop-2/amd-graphics-cards/powercolor-amd-radeon-rx-6800-16gb-graphics-card/?utm_source=Google Shopping&utm_campaign=new product feed &utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=27637

Nothing to do with hacking, hackers doesn't need help.

Yeah sure, when it's not the user it's one isolated moron.... How do you want people to take you seriously? According to you, people in charge of the security at Yahoo knows less than you do about it, since you can't even figure the difference bewteen a virus infection and hacking into people email through their providers, I have doubts about you being a genius at 8 years old and able to tell us how crapy Win 95 was. For the record I did all my ECDL training on Windows 95 and saw the update and its effects, reason why I mentioned it as being the best Microsoft had ever released because it worked for us, made the O.S stable and since it was simple and didn't try to make our coffee and tell us what to do, it was a pleasure to work with once updated. Between what Microsoft think we need and what we as gamers or professional need, there is a much of a gap as between hearth and the asteroid belt, if it wasn't the case, internet service providers wouldn't get hacked in the first place and the internet wouldn't be full of people proposing ways to go around Microsoft Windows 10 issues with optimisation for gaming. I saw crappy as O.S but this one takes the myckey, so people can trust Windows Defender all they want, I wouldn't advise them to disable it, but pretending it does a better job at protecting your PC than a good dedicated Antivirus package is just not true.

Oh, sorry, I didn't know that...

Let me guess, you were already building your P.C when 95 update made it stable and are 34 today? Enuff said. Stop talking about what you don't know, hackers doesn't need any help from users, if banks, browsers and internet providers can be hacked, a simple home user has little chance to do anything about it with even the most conservative use and Windows Defender doesn't stop them doing just that. FACT: The more convoluted and complex Windows became, the less user friendly for the professionals and gamers, if there are access to low-level settings such as registry editor in Windows 10 Pro and wasn't with early Home edition it is because Microsoft didn't bother making it good themselves, reason why there are so many alternatives ways to counter Microsoft freak control compulsions. The Israelis blah... Politics has nothing to do with email providers being hacked and having to publish security alert to their users, money does, you're the one living in kukuland here, starting with pretending to know about Windows 95 when you were 8 years old, funy at the time I was two years from building my first P.C. I'm done with geezers like you, I saw entire 3D depatments having to waste time setting O.S because of bad memory management and crapy updates, having to plan which machine to update every 6 month because they don't have the time to get this cr@p going when the machines are never turned off, either being used for 3D or or network-rendering. Professionals like gamers don't need that, the only reason why we use Windows is because it is the cheapest and most flexible available platform but if one other existed, Microsoft would be dead by today, they sure made sure there is none of it in the market. We need conttrolable, stable O.S that doesn't do what it wants when Microsoft decides it has to, and Microsoft Windows 10 isn't that.