Hiob

that is bad news…. Was it handcrafted or sourced somewhere? Is it a matter of money?

Maybe it‘s not so impactful as I remembered. Back when I did my controlled benchmarks it was one of the more impactful settings - along with water and shadows. But that was two years ago or so….

AWESOME, guys!

Only thing that comes to my mind is the camera position and zoom factor.

I think you can only disable the pilot entirely by shift+p

The latter. The draw distance for scenery details. That is quite impactful for fps beyond high.

roger

Actually DCS has a habit of freaking out when the FPS approach 300. Try to limit the FPS to 180 and see if that helps with consistent frametimes. Maybe you simply got better fps with the update and hit the treshold.

As I said above. The efficiency has doubled since the 3000er generation. They certainly are "cool" cards!

The GPU temp is irrelevant for the room temp - only the amount of watts it draws. Lower GPU temp only means the power is transferred to the room more efficiently.

Make sure that the viewing distance (draw distance - I don't no the exact label from the top of my head) isn't set too high. With your GPU you might profit from the use of DLSS. In the gameplay options you might want to turn off wake turbulence. Water is another thing to reduce if performance is not sufficient. Last but not least try to test different (lower) settings for pixel density. Welcome to the forum!

make that 12 fans and 3 pumps...... Peanuts compared to the CPU/GPU

My system produces about 500W of waste heat. That is indeed a quarter of an electric heating oven..... Unfortunately it also does this in the summer......

Indeed..... other export scripts (winwing) have caused issues in the past. That's all I wanted to say (perhaps in a clumsy way) - blaming DCS-updates and not investigating further for other possible culprits just doesn't cut it.

on a side note - in another thread sombody solved his stutter issues from the last patch by deactivating/deleting unofficial mods.....

I don't think so. There so many settings that can be adjusted to suit lower tier hardware. I feel that it is more often the unsolvable problem to min-max fidelity vs. performnance and the reluctance to accept that you can't have high fidelity with lower hardware. What bugs me is, that here in the forum one could get the impression that is only DCS that is so hardware hungry and that only ED is incapable or unwilling to do something about it. Which simply isn't true. Have you seen the forums of the "unnamed big civil flight-sim" and the myriad of youtube videos on how to tweak perfromance for it? Or the "recommended" hardware specs for its successor? There may be temporary issues that are introduced by updated like (e.g.) terrain streaming issues, or unintended loads by AI-computing, or bugs in the MT-scheduler...whatever, but they will be squashed eventually. I don't get why some people always expect the worst (or even ill intend)... Though - having said that - of course, eventually, existing hardware will be outpaced by software developements. That has always been the case.

Hi, I didn't mean you specifically. You were merely the trigger for the statement. And I'm certainly not wrong in that issues like that usually don't affect ALL DCS-users. Which makes it pretty unlikely that changes in DCS are the sole culprit. I'm not trying to let ED off the hook here. I certainly expect them to improve performance continously for various reasons (some selfish, some not). But I would strongly encourage people to dive in the nuts and bolts of their system to make the most out of the hardware-hungry edge-cases that are flight-sims (DCS is not alone in that for sure!).

True, even though a X8 slot doesn't limit performance as much as you might expect. (Especially for a card that is only meant to supplement the load) But to be perfectly clear - I have no idea how this "Vulcan-SLI" is supposed to work.....

Why do people never take into account that the problem may originate somewhere else than DCS? If it was only(!) DCS that would cause those issues, everybody would experience them. Which is certainly not the case. More likely culprits like GPU-drivers, windows, windows-updates, windows-settings, other hardware/drivers etc. (maybe in conjunction with DCS, maybe not) are never looked at..... Windows is a general purpose OS that has a ton of stuff going on that is completely unrelated to gaming, but can affect it a lot (negatively) Personally I skipped the last NVIDIA-GPU driver updates, because there were reports of them causing issues (in general, not specific to DCS) - wether that spared me troubles I don't know. But it cerrtainly didn't cause any.

Actually it's a misconception that the 4090 is very energy hungry. Sure there are freak versions that apply 600W to get 3% more fps (which is insane and far beyond the peak of the efficieny curve). But in reality my 4090 (in DCS that is ) uses the exact same 300-330W my previous 3080 did, except it delivers roughly two times the performance. (strictly talking "relative" here. Absolutely, the energy consumption of a high-end gaming PC nowadays is ridicoulous!)

Yes. We flew it yesterday. And as far as I'm aware of, nothing is broken so far (apart from the original bugs I assume)

what about a 3080 with a 4090?

Yes that would interest me too. I still have my „old“ GPU here, if there was a way to profit from it (even if it’s just theoretical right now), I‘d love to hear about.

It‘s a fun helo for sure. I‘d say the FM is en par with the average of all the other helos in DCS. Some aspects perhaps make it bit easier to fly. What really sets it apart for me is the way they enabled single players to properly(!) work a multicrew aircraft. The AI „co-pilot“ is just so great for this purpose. Wether the visuals are good or not or important lays in the eye of the beholder. If you have a soft spot for helicopters, I won’t skip this one.

This module really is a marvel.