Thinder

Are you kidding? You can find a Ryzen 5 3600X for as low as £141.90, a Ryzen 5 3600 for £144.00 and an MSI B450 Gaming Plus Max for £69.99, and I'm quite certain you can find cheaper with some reseach work, you just have to google it. Regardless of speed, BIOS update capabilities (Updated BIOS is required for compatibility with the Gigabyte Z490 UD like MSI B450), you already lost the agrument looking at your friend's shoping list and btw, my B450/Ryzen 5 5600X beats the heck of the i9-10900K in single core test using CPU-Z and is equals to it in 4 Cores when they're both O.Ced, while it cost me £130.01 less, that's just if he wanted to upgrade his CPU in the future. So you're right, there is no need for an argument here. Now your friend solution vs the AMD solution: CPU only: A Ryzen 5 3600 wins hands up, stock speed like O.C. 1-Core: Slightly faster single-core speed.+7% 2-Core: Slightly faster dual-core speed.+8% 4-Core: +5% O.C speeds. 1-Core: Slightly faster OC single-core speed.+5% 2-core: Slightly faster OC dual-core speed.+7% 4-Core: Slightly faster OC quad-core speed.+7% Intel-Core-i5-10400F-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-3600 The only real advantages that your friend enjoy with his Gigabyte Z490 UD is support for PCIe Gen3, which in this context is completely irrelevant, since only the top GPUs can be expected to use more than 30% of this kind of buses bandwidth, meaning the PCIe Gen2 is just as fast when pitted with a mid-range GPU. The Gigabyte Z490 UD supports DDR4 4500(O.C.) memory modules, the B 450 supports 4133 MHz (by A-XMP OC MODE). So unless he is planning to O.C his memory passed 4133 MHz and use a GPU capable of using more than 50% of the PCIe Gen3, I don't see why he should go for this motherboard, it's more expensive, needs a BIOS update to use a I9 and doesn't offer capabilities he can use now. True, but you can also find second had headsets for below £180, which is what I did starting with a CV1, I would advise to go for a CV2 instead though...

OK. Since you mention being on a budget below €1700, here are my tips: See what you need and what you already have... First. An Oculus 2 would cost you £299 and be a lot better than headtracking, Thrustmaster T.16000M FCS Hotas just above £120, and you won't regret it. You'll need a good power supply, I have a Corsair 750W, the important thing is that it MUST guaranty a continuous ouput at the advertized wattage, this one does it and is not too expensive, a Corsair TX750M 750W Semi Modular Gold Certified PSU cost as low as £94.62, do not cut on the quality or the wattage for budget reasons it can end up costing you a lot more than you would save (underwattage can cause failures). You can get an MSI AMD B450 Gaming Plus Max motherboard for as little as £ 69.99 if you shop around, the thing is; it oozes with quality for the price, its BIOS can be updated to support the latest AMD Zen 3 processors and graphic cards. On the negative side, it doesn't support Generation 3 PCI but it matters little since on a budget you're very unlikely to buy a graphic card able to run faster than its bus. The AMD Ryzen 5 5600X is probably the favourite of the gaming community at the moment, it is a little pricey compared to the previous generation but it can run a lot faster, what you want is to avoid a bottleneck between your processor and your graphica card, so a good CPU is important. You can find them from about £ 299.99. To run a VR headset in DCS you'll need a good graphic card, the minimum would be a Radeon RX 6800 MBA 16GB, I recommand that you do some homework and chose which system you want to build, Intel or AMD but for AMD, it is important to bound both processor and graphic card. You can find them from £ 599.99. Now for the RAM, at low budget a good buy would be the Crucial Ballistix Gaming Memory 32GB Kit DDR4-3200 2 X 16, but if you want a little extra performance I'd strongly recommand a 4 X 8 GB kit, it will boost your FPS by up to 10%. Those will cost you as liittle as £64.79 from Crucial, I didn't see a 4 X 8GB kit from them, but one important thing, try to get a kit of 2 X 16GB or 4 X 8 GB, they will be identical, while different kits can have different chips depending on the batch and cause issues. I have a good case, all I had to do was to add a couple of strong pressure fans but if you're not planning to Overclocking you won't need extra fans, it comes equiped with two of them on the downside you'll need an external CD player, It's a Define C, and you can find them for £ 65.99 or less. Now, storage is also important but a good 512 GB SSD will cost about £69.99, I recommand that you get the larger capacity SSD you can afford within your budget, make two partitions and set DCS on a different one to your OS. Windows Pro is better and faster btw, it manages memory a lot better and on the market it cost anything from £6.99 to £79.99... An USB player cost from £8.00 to £55, think quality here, do some homework. Samsung S24D330 24-Inch LED Monitor, £93.64 Rainbow led usb gaming keyboard mouse and headset set £49.95 That will be £1425.34 for a system ready to go, you don't have to follow this shopping list by the letter, I'd adsvise you to shop around, do some research on price, reliabilty and not to cut corners on PSU, CPU, GPU and RAM, cooling is also important but much less so if you're not planning to Overclock your system, those specs would allow you to run DCS in VR at reasonable settings. I hope you can figure your own solution, get it to work (follow tutorials by the letter) and enjoy playing DCS soon.

You don't need a crazy core count to do that, you can limit it to the number of cores you want but by itself, a package like Ryzen Master will do it automatically, select the best core and give it priority over the other, on the 6 cores, it translate by 4 remaining with one with the highest speed. Latency is already reduced compared to Zen 2 by the Zen 3 architecture and the more direct way for each core to access the cache, so the goal here is to increase an individual core speed withing the factory-set limits of the processor, but there are ways around those settings and people did find settings allowing for 4.8GHz all corps. As I understand it was done with liquid cooling, but we can expect faster core speed from this processor as players experiment and find better settings.

Yeah, right, and you post a video with those settings to make your point about the subject of THIS topic... Ryzen 5 5600x for DCS VR? Just to start on a high, a Ryzen 5 5600x with a NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti will produce only 1.75% of GPU bottleneck on 2160p/4K resolution, which make your point completely moot because they both run at 100%, not in O.C. Bottleneck calculator Did you actually READ the specs before posting it? Some little points about this video here: 1) Setting a Ryzen 5 5600x at 4.7 is a complete kiddies joke, the guy didn't even try to figure what the CPU could do and just O.Ced it with Ryzen Master as I did but with the wrong RAM setting, too bad we know AMD completely downplayed the capabilities of their Zen 3 too. Now, how do you think he get his Intel i9 10900K 3.7GHz to run at 5200 MHz? And we don't have a clue about his motherboard settings either, but just to debunk the usual AMD bashing, people start to get use to theirs and O.C them with fan cooling well passed 4850Mhz, reports of 6000Mhz being reached have been posted by AMD users. AMD Ryzen 5 5600X is overclocked to 6GHz on all cores I already debunked all those Intel vs Ryzen 5 5600X in the past with proper information and links, THIS is what is getting tedious. 2) AMD players knowing what they do will use 4 X 8 GB preferably L16 3600 dual channel, not the 2 X 16 GB kit used and linked by the poster of the video, that's up to 10% extra FPS for you or 94.6 vs 91 FPS in the frame of this video, System Memory Specification Up to 3200MHz. 3) The Ryzen 5600X is +2% faster in single core, +1% in dual Core and pretty much the same when O.C (+1/1%), the i9-10900K is +5% faster on quad Core mixed speed but scores + 0 when O.Ced. Q: Does your use 4 Cores when you play DCS at 5200MHz? Not at a setting of 5200MHz, Intel® Turbo Boost Max will only allow for the fastest core to run this fast. 4) An AMD player will optimize his system, using proper RAM kit and speed, minimizing its latency with a good bound with a Zen 3 GPU, using an RTX 3080 10GB certainly doesn't make this "test" video credible. Find something else. 5) You couldn't make sense of the texts so I'll post a picture of a single Core test I ran after a only couple of hours of fiddling with my new Ryzen 5 5600X and Ryzen Master, but if you did, you'd perhaps have noticed the latency of the system which is also another aspect that can improve performances while playing DCS, my intention was to offer a comparison with my old processor at the bottom, a just below 21% gain in Physics Test performance and higher 6.45 FPS with 3D Mark at high settings, 3840 X 2160, MSAA X2. So when I say that the Ryzen 5 5600X is perfectly capable of providing with equal performances in DCS to those of an i9-10900K, again put in its own context, not that of the Intel processor and false assumptions based on lack of information about the Ryzen 5 5600X, it's based on reality, not biased opinions. If you have an issue running those DCS scenarios with an i9-10900K and a GeForce RTX 3080 10GB, once you have set your AMD system up for its optimized performances, chances are that a Ryzen 5600X and a RX 6800 XT GAMING X TRIO 16G will perform just as well, if not better.

Perhaps well but I can't see how another new Gen CPU will do any better considering that it won't use more corps or run faster, it's not a question of GPU here. So to everyone it's a question of what they want to do with their PCs, playing game or broadcasting while doing it or doing 3D or whatever esle, in any case, it will be a case of using the right GPU for the job, for gaming, the 5600X will do just fine.

Now, let's mitigate those performances a litte and replace them into their context: When I started to upgrade, I needed a new motherboard, RAM and GPU in a hurry because of failure, I was running an Athlon 4000 and my GPU was falling appart, I had to screw a fan on its sink to keep it cool because the stock fans were dead, second hand and completely worn out after years of abuse I must say. I upgraded the GPU twice already this year just to keep up with the demands for VR but I chosed to keep my motherboard because it is not only very good for the price, but also it is likely that AMD will change socket pretty soon, and I'm on a budget, so no hurry to buy a fully new system here, I'm aiming for a mid/high range of system and try to keep cost as low as possible. The MSI B450 GAMING PLUS MAX doesn't support the faster Gen 3 or 4 PCI so its performances are lower when it comes to GPU buses bandwidth, it's a compromise I accepted to make in full knowledge of what I was getting into, and I got my 1080 Ti second hand from CEX with a two years guaranty, just as new as if it came straight out of the box. But this doesn't imply the CPU itself nor the RAM, it's a Dual channel, can take 4133 MHz RAM with O.C mode and I'm not planning to get this kind of speed from my RAM, what I am looking for is (again) a ballanced system with the lowest percentage of bottleneck between the 5600X and my future GPU and RAM. So in this regard, the question as if the 5600X is adequate for playing DCS (even in complicated scenarios when pited with a good GPU) is yes, it was designed for gaming at these levels and I'm quite sure that an RX 6800 XT and a kit of 4 X 8GB of DDR4 3600 will allow me to increase graphic settings and gain in FPS, this processor is good enough to achieve that. From the tests I have seen, a 10% improvement in FPS can be obtained by using 4 sticks of RAM, the DDR4 seems to be the sweet spot and there is little gain in comparison by using much faster RAM or more than 32 GB, that's what the Zen 3 architecture allow for, and I'm sure there can be more performances to come with new BIOS and graphic drivers in the future.

Well, if you're planning to pit it with a stronger GPU than my 1080 Ti 11GB it's a hell of a processor, looking at the results I got running 3D Mark it shows nearly 21% gain in Physics Test and 6.45 FPS higher, I can't argue with that. The thing is, Ryzen 3 architecture can be used to improve at all levels, a good GPU and RAM can further improve the performances of the whole system, but if one component is weaker, the bottleneck shows, not by much in my case because visibly the 5600X is way faster in single core with equivalent auto O.C settings than the 3600X, as the physics test demonstrate. Note that I use exactly the same cooler than with the 3600X, an Artic Freezer 7 X. My tests were done playing the F-18C. Now, I invite you to have a look at the CPU-Z ID score of my 5600X in single thread, I don't think it will be the issue in more complicated scenarios and in any case it never was the CPU which was the issue, even with the 3600X, yet no one can claim that a GEFORCE GTX 1080 Ti 11GB is a weak card even by today standards...

So OK. I got my Ryzen 5 5600X a couple of hours ago, I had some trouble getting the O.S to start because of changes of settings in BIOS it kept returning to it but after flashing CMOS it ran OK. I ran diverse test benches and figured one thing: With equal settings in NVIDIA Control panel Ryzen Master and Afterburner, my GPU seems to run a little slower with 3D Mark. Score with the Ryzen 5 3600X was 6.767 IN Fire Strike Ultra. 6.767 IN Fire Strike Ultra (V1.1) Graphics score 7.375, 41.20 FPS and 26.25 FPS for Graphic tests 1 and 2. But physics score was 7.700 and Physics test is 24.45 FPS with a Combined score of 3.761 and Combined test at 17.50 FPS. With the Ryzen 5 5600X, same settings, I got 7.341 Graphics score (-0.034), 41.55 FPS and 25.91 FPS for Graphic tests 1 and for Graphic test 2 which is slower by 0.34. Physics score is 9.734, 2.034 higher, Physics test is 30.90 FPS, 6.45 FPS higher, Combined score is 3.672, 0.089 lower and Combined test 17.08 FPS, 0.42 FPS lower. Visibly the bound between the CPU and GPU creates a larger percentage of GPU bottleneck than was the case with the 3600X. Settings for the test bench in 3D Mark was 3840 X 2160, MSAA X2. Settings for both CPUs in Ryzen Master are identical in term of boost, NO manual O.C involved. Something interesting though, I ran a test in single thread with CPU-Z ID and ended up with this...

Spot on. That's why the Ryzen 5 5600 are selling like cookies, noteveryone needs to spend more to get little more for gaming.

I understand that people have different needs because they engage into different activities and/or style of gaming. In my case, I was looking for a mid-range to high-end upgrade to play DCS in VR, so it will be what I'll get at the end, still I had to compromise because of budget and recent upgrades as is the case for my B450 Gaming Plus, but it matter little if we consider that AMD is likely to change socket with the next generation of CPUs, plus this board is really good for the price.

There is a lot more than the CPU for VR performances in DCS. O.S optimization: Memory usage. Page file. Latency. Storage. System Optimization: Cooling/thermal limits. RAM; with Ryzen 3, 4 X sticks can improve performance by up to 10% compared to 2 X sticks, RAM speed and latency. Headset. I notice a clear improvement of performances overal since I swaped my CV1 for a G2. Since my Ryzen 5 5600X will be delivered to me in a couple of hours, I ran tests playing DCS and 3D Mark, it doesn't look like my CPU is the issue here but the bootleneck is clearly the GPU and it is no slouch, O.Ced in Afterburner at 1606MHz Core Clock and 6500MHz Memory Clock speed, the temperature never reach more than 76° C. According to CPU Mark, compared to VirusAM results, I shouldn't even be able to run DCS in VR with a 3600X, yet I played several training missions and scenarios such as 1vs1, 2vs2 in the Ukraine and Nevada maps and my FPS never went below 40FPS in average, it made for a quite comfortable gaming all along, for the story, I run antialiasing settings a X 8 in NVIDIA Control Panel and 140% (3752 X 3660) settings in Steam VR. I don't think a further upgrade of CPU will do much to improve my FPS, this is a case of uprading for a stronger GPU, so the Ryzen 5 5600X I'm waiting for is just part of a complete Zen 3 upgrade, all AMD with an RX 6800XT in mind and a kit of 32GB (4 x 8GB) G.SKILL Trident Z Neo DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3600. You can check on the bottleneck all you want, with this combination, the 5600X will cope real well while playing DCS in VR. Since I couldn't find a bootleneck test for the AMD card, I tried with an NVIDIA 3080: As you can see the percentage of bootleneck is way below 5% at 4K, which is the resolution I'm after for playing VR, today I'm at 3.35% of GPU bottleneck on 2160p/4K resolution. Now, those are the results of this morning games: So, my conclusion are that focusing on the CPU only is a mistake, if one wants to mainstream while gaiming, then fine, I can uderstand the need they have for a 5900X but other than that, a 5600X is more than enough and more to the point, pitted with a RX 6800XT, it will most probably offer a better bound than my 1080 Ti 11GB does with the 3600X I am using now. After that (considering that I've been over the whole optimization topics already), the RAM upgrade should help too, in short, you need balanced performances and good bound between the whole system devices, especialy in DCS, even if GPU is the weakest link here, bootlenecks are still what causes the loss of single device performances overall.

£299.99 that's how much I paid for mine, I'm skinned for a month but I think it was worth it and I just got an email from my provider saying it's been dispatched, I should get it tomorrow or Thurdsay, then I'll run a test bench... cclonline.com AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 3.7GHz 6 Core (Socket AM4) CPU

A SNA is not an INS, but rather a suite of sensors including an INS if available at the time depending on the export variants, but the Spanish F1 were fitted with a SAGEM ULISS 47 INS for example, upgraded with a Sextant inertial navigation system with GPS interface in April 1998. https://web.archive.org/web/20050112092808/http://www.janes.com/regional_news/europe/news/jdu/jdu010426_1_n.shtml The most advanced variant in service with the AdlA was the CT, its SNA was very precise and included an upgrade of the Cyrano IVM-R radar with additional ground attack modes, it also featured the SAGEM ULISS 47 so was probably the closest to the Spanish variant when it comes to avionics. About the Cyrano IVM-R, I don't think it had full doppler capabilities, in any case it was designed to fire the MATRA Super-530 F with long range and high altitude in mind, the doppler BWR AAM came later, the D variant with the Mirage 2000C.

Thans for your replies. Here are two screen shot, first with the Global Illumination OFF, then ON, there is a difference, but look at the aircraft I fly the most, the Mirage 2000C.

Just to say, if we had a -5 or Mk 2, you wouldn't have this BVR issue flying a Mirage 2000 vs the variants of F-16/F-18 available in this game, at this point of their respective evolution in upgrades and available weapons, the MICAs does the job pretty well and the -5F can launch them in TWS mode. Meteor was conceived to counter the lastest generation of BVR weapons, not that used on the US fighters of the time which are <> in MICA category, don't underestimate MICA, especially because MBDA is working on its NG variant since 2018. Increased AAM range, better seekers, this should make any Mirage 2000-5F/Mk2 happy... When we are graced with one that is. So, OK, the actual 2000C is at a clear disadvantage as it is now but if it was pitted vs the equivalent F-16/18 blocks of the time, the situation would be reversed, the variant that should be pitted vs the actual DCS US fighters truely are the -5F and Mk2, that's the situation and what we got, until someone upgrade it to put it level with the US fighters. No Meteor though...

I'm surprised that you have this issue with an Intel i9 9900k and since I'm not an Intel player for some times I have limited knowledge of this generation of Intel CPUs. It would help to have data and figure the difference between CPUs and configurations, I personally use a little applet called Timer Resolution to try to maximize my Windows-built latency. Timer Resolution October 28th, 2020 One might say it is a pain to have to start an app every time you want to play DCS but I have to start JoyToKey, MSI Afterburner, Ryzen Master, then turn on my G2 and make sure Steam VR isn't playing on me and works properly, that is if I don't plan to use FPSVR and VoiceAttack on top, so an extra little app don't bother me too much. I forgot, minimize the amount of apps running in the background, they can affect frame time.

So OK, I can use this training mission at the range but once the bombs are gone, where can I land, refuel and rearm to continue the mission? Any tip will be apreciated. Thanks!

Everyone knows that RAM help but there are two things that we also know: DCS is GPU hungry, especially the VRAM, so I would have upgraded the GPU in priority. Then the CPU, your choice of the Ryzen 5 5600x, planning to O.C it already isn't necessarily the best option with a Zen 3 unless you use Ryzen Master and simply uses its safe potential, you're not limited by its speed but by your GPU. The Ryzen 5 5600x is not as much responding to RAM speed than the number of RAM stick as opposed to Ryzen 2 CPUs, DDR4 3200 would do just as well as DDR4 3600 and save you money. With Ryzen 3 CPUs, a 4X 8GB kit would be better than a 2 X 16 and preferably from the same tested and guaranteed RAM kit as manufacturers can use different chips for the same RAM from a batch to another, as G-Skill support pointed out to me, there might have different integrated circuit (IC) between two kits. I noticed that not once you mentioned cooling, pay attention to it, or you might find yourself thermally limited especially if you OC your CPU/GPUs, same for your PSU, you need to guaranty a continuous output to your system, 750W continous is a safe minimum for your last configuration in view of a GPU upgrade. Your last configuration has a GPU bottleneck and it won't be running well and smooth at medium to high graphic settings as it is, what you could do is to find a second had 1080 Ti 11GB and use it O.C with safe setting with Afterburner, it will be far better than what you have and guaranty you a reasonable FPS at medium graphic settings. Anything higher than medium graphic settings and you'll need 2080 Ti, RTX 3060 Ti, RTX 3070, RX 6800 or RX 6800XT. Personally I'd go for the all AMD or all Intel solution, the only reason why I mixed makers for my actual configuration is because my 1080Ti 11GB was for sale second hand at CEX (UK) in a quasy new state and coming with two years guanranty.

I saw them flying in Bretagne, Les monts d'Arree, they were doing some limited aerobatics just over the village where I was living, but in any case, I always could hear them taking off from Landivisiau, from the top of the mountains on a clear day we could see the coast... The F-8 have been my favourite fighter for as long as I played Strike fighter II with some interresting settings, like unlimited amo, no missiles (guns only) with tons of Mig-17, 19 and 21 to take down, I am not sure its flight envelop and characteristics were accurate in Strike fighter II but flown as it should, you can yoyo Mig 17s easily and take them down. I'll add this one to my collection for sure, hope we have a French Navy version too...

I see people mentioning the amount of money spent on DCS but imagine having to pay monthly only to play in premium like is the case for War Gaming... Leaving W.G allowed me to spend this money on a new system, then I spent some limited amount of money into modules, I don't have the most expensive but I'm happy with what I got now, gone from 2D to VR with a G2 is something I couldn't have done if DCS had been as expensive to play in the long term as W.G is if you want to be competitive... It's a classic, an aircraft I always look at when I feel like I have the budget to buy a new module. Didn't happen yet but it will, like I will get an F-8 and Mirage F1.

Well, lag is to be expected for those like us who doesn't have strong GPUs and play DCS, it's normal, we don't have the luxury of quality + FPS, perhaps the future game engine is going to help a bit but for the time being it's what we got, so compromise is a must. The good thing about this kind of hardship is that it get us to learn about how to optimize our systems, something top gears doesn't necessary push people to do because they have a lot less issues to get both a good FPS and a good picture from stock. I was mentioning the Mirage 2000C because of the promotion, but it is by no mean in concurence with the F-16 and F-18, for that we would need the -5 or Mk2 variants because as it is now, it just is equivalent to an early F-16/18 model with limited BVR capabilities and you'll struggle against the Vipers and Hornets. On the other hand it remains one of the best simulated modules in DCS (reason for the French Air Force to use them for complement training at Squadron level) and is a demanding aircraft to fly well, so it teaches you a lot about flying and fighting before getting into something more capable. L’Armée de l’Air Française s’équipe de DSC World – Mirage 2000 https://stormbirds.blog/2018/05/04/razbam-details-unprecedented-with-armee-de-lair/ F-86/Mig-15 seems like a good idea, personally, coming from Jane's simulation games and Strike fighters II, I've always been a great fan of the F-8 Crusader and the Vietnam era.

Number of available SATA after using an M2 depends on your motherboard, if you have 6 SATA it should leave you with 4 available with any good motherboard. It's a question of speed. Your O.S is better off on a separate SSD to DCS and page files (and optimized for gaming), so if you installed it on a SATA, it makes sense to install an M2 SSD and have DCS and page files on it, especially DCS which is perhaps the slower part of this because its engine is not yet optimized, over the next few years I believe it will improve but for now, it's a case of giving DCS the best environment to work in. Storage space is up to you, but 500GB is the minimum for an M2 especially if you intend to run DCS World on it, you still will have space for DCS Open Beta and page files, the maker also is up to you, just make sure you don't go over the transfer speed of your motherboard speed unless you intend to upgrade, it's money spent on a bottleneck when it's the case. Yes I believe this SSD is a good buy but mostly it was one that made the most sense to me considering my other specs, MSI B450 GAMING PLUS MAX, available SATA and other SSDs, I have two more and two extra useable SATA right now, it was cheap (£95.00 at the time) and I got what I needed.

Your MSI Tomahawk MAX has one M2 sockest that can take an SSDs running at anything from 3,500 MB/sec, compared to a SATA limited to 530/500 MB/s. You would loose two SATA ports but you can replace those by a larger capacity and much faster M2 SSD. Mine is a 500GB, I run DCS World and DCS Open Beta plus page files on it. Page files size are: Min 32768Mb Max 49152Mb on D drive, with Min 16Mb Max 16Mb on C drive for 32 GB or RAM. Install DCS and set your page files on this Socket M2 SSD, both will run a lot faster. Change your actual RAM for a 2 X 16GB Cl16 3200 RAM, without twicking it is what runs the fastest with the Ryzen 5 3600. Just adding the RAM to what you already have might or not work, since manufacturers uses different chips with different integrated circuit (IC) from a batch to another. If you're unlucky it will be slower and you might encounter other issues as well. Alternatively if you find out which IC your RAM has and get the same from the same batch it's also OK. Your GPU can be O.C without risks using Afterburner. Even with the Ryzen 5 3600, GPU can become the problem in DCS because the game is inherently GPU hungry. Yours is faster than my 1080Ti so it helps but using Afterburner is always going to give you this little bit extra performances. Set ups in NVIDIA Control Panel can have a positive effect as well, sometimes they are more efficient than the game settings, it's up to you to try and test them to figure the best options for you. My tip: SSD 970 EVO Plus

In my humble opinion, if you have a M2 socket on your motherboard, don't bother with low capacity SSD and go for something like the SAMSUNG V-NAND SSD 970 EVO Plus. When it comes to speed it will run circles around SATA SSDs but you might loose one to two SATA sockets (it is the case for my B450), so the best is to go for a minimum of 500GB as I did and install DCS and set your set files on it, both will greatly beneficiate from the much higher speed, last thing, speed/capacity for cost they are also a lot better buy than SATA. SSD 970 EVO Plus

Thanks mate!