PicklePicklePickle

Unfortunately, one of the only messups during this whole endeavor was that I expected the BIOS profile to be around after I changed CPU's. I should have saved it before, the 10900K profile got blasted due to the required BIOS update for the 11th gen. However, I can tell you what I remember and how I arrived at it, it is nothing special. I started with defaults, and then tuning the CPU first, and then did the memory last. Otherwise, it is hard to tell if it is crashing due to memory or CPU, and profiling the memory is a bit ambiguous. I used HWMonitor and CPUZ, as well as prime95. As I said, prime95 with the smallFFT is pretty much the most stress you can put on a CPU and it doesn't model how DCS runs. I find it is a useful tool to learn where the threshold is where prime95 starts throttling, but for a DCS-optimized system I am pretty much guaranteed prime95 SmallFFT will hit 100C and throttle. I set (Asus BIOS): All fans to full speed, note I upgraded the fans on the 360mm water cooler which made a significant difference in temperatures. MCE to enabled Hyperthreading off Load-line calibration to level 4 CPU Core ratio: Sync all cores and ratio to 54 - This is what I ended up with, but I started at 49 and slowly increased. In retrospect, what we want is 1 core to run fast for DCS, and the others for the rest of the background stuff. However, I wasn't sure how to assign DCS to a specific core reliably so I just sync'ed all of them. If we could assign DCS to one core reliably, then we could potentially run 1 core higher, maybe 5.5GHz with the same cooling. CPU Voltage to manual and started with something like 1.3V - This is what I started with, I can't remember where i left it but essentially increase it very slightly if it crashes. Be aware of the voltage limits, I believe you can fry the CPU with this setting. It is also my understanding that too high a voltage here can lead to shortening the life of the CPU, but in my case with this system all I care is running DCS well so the CPU is sorta consumable anyway. I'm pretty sure I ended somewhere around 1.45V. I used HWMonitor to look at the CPU temperatures while stressing with CPUZ and DCS, and aimed to keep it <=90C which is 10 degrees below throttling, but it ended well below that. The stopper was the voltage. When I tried going to 5.5Ghz it looked like I had to increase the voltage quite a lot to avoid crashing and it was getting to the level where a lot of folks thought it would reduce the life of the CPU. For the memory, with the GSkill memory I have, it is supposed to run at 4000MHz, so i started by loading the XMP profile. However, it crashed and so I reduced the speed to 2666MHz and slowly worked my way up. I found that it ended up at 3800MHz. So the memory does not meet the advertised speed but I didn't feel like returning it. I'm probably missing stuff but that is the general procedure I followed.

Hello, I recently did some testing with the i9-11900K and i9-10900K. To keep things as consistent as possible, I used a fixed test case of starting F-16C free flight in Persian Gulf map. The controls are not touched and the VR headset is always in the same place. In this state the aircraft flies in a descent for ~2 minutes and then crashes(into a race track!), so it gives a relatively repeatable test. Of course there are still some variations from the random locations of clouds, etc, but this is assumed to be small. I tested 2 configurations with each processor: a baseline with BIOS defaults and the 'best' overclock configuration that I found for DCS. I should caveat that I am not an 'expert' overclocker, I'm just sharing what I have found and the few things that have (slightly) improved DCS VR performance. I used fpsVR to capture the metrics over each 2 minute test run, and am using the average FPS reported in the fpsVR History Viewer. I did 5 repeated tests for each of the main configurations to confirm repeatability of the results. General Observations/Notes: Since this is a 'relative' test, I figured my specific DCS/VR settings are not super critical as long as the HMD frame rate is not being maxed out in the test case(otherwise FPS metric would be 'clipped'). I am using my personal preference settings which is 200% SteamVR on the Index and PD1.0 in DCS with all DCS AA off. The mother board BIOS support for 11900K is beta (Asus BIOS 0704) so my results might be affected by bugs bad optimization for Z590 chipset. Hyper threading off consistently gives about 3 fps in DCS. On the Index, the 90fps setting gives higher FPS than 80Hz(-9fps), 120Hz(-25fps) or 144hz(-18 fps). I do not understand this, as I would expect 80Hz to give the most consistent performance since the system has the longest time to output a frame. The 11900K is better than 10900K in the BIOS default state, but about equal to the 10900K when overclocked, and the 11900K is less consistent. The overclocked 10900K is very consistent. Repeated runs yield the same FPS to within <1fps. The 11900K has very different behavior in almost all regards(overclocking, etc) and was far less consistent in repeated runs giving a 4-5fps spread The 10900K overclocks in an 'intuitive' way, meaning higher clocks give better performance and reducing the number of cores(since DCS only uses 1-2) gives an expected reduction in heat, etc. The limit is when the heat gets close to 90-100C and/or the voltages are getting too high. On the 10900K, the best DCS-only overclock I have found is to reduce to 4 cores, and max out clock rate as allowed by voltage/heat(5.4Ghz in my case). With the 11900K, it ran 30 degrees colder than the 10900K and doesn't seem to go beyond that. Higher clocks does not equal more performance. It is almost as if it is throttling internally, but the tools(HWInfo, CPUZ, etc) do not show throttling and a static clock. Also, reducing the number of cores unintuitively seems to reduce single-core performance. Due to the above, on the 11900K the best DCS overclock I found was just to disable hyperthreading and set a higher ratio limit of 5.4Ghz, leaving everything else in default. I should note that my 'best' DCS overclock overheats/throttles with the prime95 small FFT test. My machine is dedicated to DCS so I am overclocking specifically for DCS VR and nothing else, and as long as only DCS is run it runs stable(10900K tested stable over months), but this is DCS stability not general stability. Results: i9-10900K Default: 70-74fps Overclock: 85fps i9-11900K Default: 80-81fps Overclock: 83-86fps Hardware Specifications: Motherboard: Asus Maximus XIII Hero (Z590) RAM: 128GB G.Skill (F4-4000C18Q-128GTZR) GPU: MSI Ventus RTX3090 CPU AIO: Cooler Master ML360 (3x 3000RPM Noctua NF-F12 fans at full speed) PS: 1.5kW Corsair AX1500i SSD: Samsung 980Pro 2TB HMD: Valve Index x4 base stations So my take away is that at least at this point, the 11900K isn't really a worthwhile upgrade. However, it is very early so it is possible that someone finds a good overclocking strategy or perhaps some BIOS bugs are addressed that improves performance.

Yes it is not looking good. My only hope is that DCS is single-threaded so the standard benchmarks are not a good model, and maybe there will be something gained when it is overclocked plus the pcie 4.0. But yes I probably just got a paperweight. Maybe should have built an AMD system.

Thanks! I found the function...should be an interesting project for this weekend. Probably will end in disappointment.

Hello, I'm about to swap out my 10900K for the 11900K and want to have some consistent DCS data before and after to see any impact to DCS performance. I expect not only a change from the CPU itself, but also from the fact that the 11th gen CPU enables PCIe 4.0 so theoretically my SSD should run twice as fast, which might have an impact on DCS. I thought a good way to do this was to just start a free-flight configuration over some challenging map, maybe Syria and record a plot of the FPS without any control input such that it is exactly the same between both runs. Does anyone know a way to record FPS (to a text file or whatever) over time using DCS/fpsVR or some other tool? Besides writing it down with a stopwatch I mean. I'd like to load them into excel for comparison, post here, etc. It seems DCS has some metrics built-in, maybe this feature exists already? Thanks!

Hello, So I just purchased a used TM Cougar to complement my FSSB-R3 stick for the F-16C module (i'm just using the throttle on the Cougar). I have gotten all the switches and knobs working, and the last question I have is regrading the OFF/IDLE detent on the low end. On the high end, I am able to lineup the physical afterburner detent with the location in DCS so it works well. However, on the low end the Cougar does not seem to have a switch to signal 'OFF' to power off the engines as with the TM warthog. How does everyone set this up? Do you live with the non-functional region below the OFF/IDLE detent? Or do you remove the mechanical detent and use the rest of the lower range for MIL throttle? ideally, I would like for the engines to shut off when you go below the low detent(i believe this is the accurate behavior), but i can't see a way to make that happen... Thanks in advance

Do you have frustum culling in your DCS autoexec? I have heard this causes issues at night time with things not rendering in one eye. DCS has a very basic bug in the way it draws things in VR. For some reason, it will decide to draw something in one eye and not the other, something that should never happen. This happens in all headsets. Often I see objects like clouds at the edge of the 'visbility radius' pop in and out in one eye or the other. This type of problem has a simple fix, simply put if the decision is made to render anything, it should be rendered to both eyes. There should also be a tolerance region around the (tiny) range of movement for the player's head where it does not affect rendering decisions i.e. things don't just appear/disappear because you moved your head, like every other VR app out there. Not sure if this effect is what you are seeing, what you describe sounds worse.

I received the FSSB-R3 and F16SGRH and am loving it! The construction is top notch, and the software is great(imagine that). The precision is incredible. The number of options in the software can be daunting at first, but I've also learned some things I never even heard about such as the NASA roll/pitch sensitivity. Can't wait to see a throttle from these folks. I guess I'm just going to try and find a cougar throttle for now.

Thanks for the information. I found a video review of the FSSB-R3 on you tube, which showed the small travel as well....perfect for the Viper! The author of the video was using the warthog stick which seems to have an issue in that it is not built to be tugged on a forced sensing base, and eventually gets loose. The guy was using a lego piece as a shim, funny. RealSimulator shipped my complete order the next business day, incredible service so far. I really like this idea of exchangeable throttle grips. I was actually pondering whether something similar could be done for the TM warthog throttle, as in a replacement grip to replace the A-10 throttle. There are already face plates for the TM throttle for the F-16, I wonder how difficult attaching a custom grip would be....I'm assuming the number of control channels on the grip is sufficient for the F-16...haven't counted them.

I also just ordered their F-16 F16SGRH stick and the FSSB-R3 base. I have been using the Thrustmaster warthog for the F-16C and the huge travel on the stick(really intended to model the A-10) was really bothering me. I was looking for a stick that modelled the force-sensing F-16 stick more closely, and was very glad to find this option. They are super responsive, they even immediately emailed me back on a weekend to make sure I understood the F-16 angle adapter did not work with the F16SGRH. Clearly very dedicated folks. One thing I didn't see anywhere in the RealSimulator specs is how much the stick moves. On the real f-16 they settled on a very small amount of deflection, i'm curious if the RealSimulator device moves at all, but I expect it will still be closer to the real thing than the huge travel on the TM warthog I asked them about the F-16 throttle but they only sell it as part of an entire professional sim pit installation. It is so amazing to me, that the F-16 is the most common fighter in existence, yet there isn't a single F-16 throttle option out there other than hunting for a used Cougar.

I'm going to be in the minority now, my experience is evolving every day. I have Index/G2/Pimax 8KX/8K+. I like many things about the G2 and until recently I was convinced it was the headset to get hands down. However, while the G2 was getting repaired I played the Index for a month. After I got the G2 back, yes the sharpness is as amazing as I remember, but the narrow field of view is absolutely jarring now. I have been consistently going back to the Index because I miss it so much. At first I hated the Index base stations, but now that I have the G2 and Index side by side, the Index tracking looks pretty amazing. I now see a lot of little twitches in the G2 tracking that I did not notice before I had the Index. The Index tracking is practically flawless, I can even get up walk around and when I sit back down my head is in the same place in the cockpit. But the G2 tracking is still very good, and not having base stations can indeed be a huge advantage. If I were buying one headset today, it would definitely be between the Index and the G2 though. it would be a toss between the sharpest images and beautiful detailed gauges, or a wider FOV that, in my opnion, makes the air combat experience better. I should add a disclaimer that I am not good enough to play on servers without labels, so maybe once I get there I will find the G2 indispensable. I have to agree with others that in the current state DCS is never going to be a perfect experience with 'Ultra' settings if you have the 'right' machine, like most other games. I threw everything the market has at it short of phase change or liquid nitrogen, and i still have to disable/lower a lot of settings. I get 90fps a lot of the time under the right conditions such as free flight with few AI or above caucasus mountains which for some reason makes everything smoother. But it still micro-stutters and sometimes it really gets framey still. But, hey I preordered an 11900K and that is going to fix everything. Gotta keep chasing that DCS dragon...

F-16 if you fight with your brain. F-14 if you fight with your heart.

HARM alinc codes here like Steel Falcon.

I finally received my 'repaired' G2 from HP, it looks like they just sent me a new headset and cable. I finally got to try it for the first time with a proper system rather than the laptop I originally had when I had to return it. I can confirm that bignewy's settings work for me, at 54%-60% SteamVR resolution and PD 1.0 I get solid 90fps in single player and no stuttering. However, after playing with the Index for 1month+ while I waited for the reverb, i'm sorta split now. On one hand the screen door effect and pixel density is much better on the reverb, however the FOV feels severely limited now compared to the Index(I adjust the lenses as close as I can get them on the Index). On the Index I get the same 90fps performance in single player if I set it to 150% in Steam VR, seems to be equivalent to the G2 setting of 60% or so. Better sharpness or better FOV for combat...hmm....I know where all the switches are so I don't need to read them...but I definitely need to see that mig behind me.....

Well as it happens for the first time on the server last night I actually saw the 'filled in' data link symbols for a group of MIg-29S! I was able to select all of them in TWS and cycle through them, worked pretty nice! I wonder if the server got updated because I had never seen that actually work online, I barely even got any contacts for bogeys on TWS. Learned something new, thanks!

This is really excellent information, thanks Bunny and Machalot!

Amazing information! This is exactly what my question was, thank you. Ok, so the Viper without TGP does the TDC and ground stabilitization with no optical sensors, that is impressive. Without the TGP(no laser, no optical sensors), the ranging must be from the radar as you have said, much like the A-G gun STRF mode....very cool. I'm amazed that a GPS/INS is so precise that it can keep ground track even while the aircraft flies around. I do agree it didn't make sense that once firing, the next maverick would not just slew to the TDC...i don't know what the real aircraft does but it seems logical. I have to also admit, I don't understand why the maverick boresighting is not automated in the real aircraft. If you have the TGP loaded, it should be easy for software to aim the laser and have the system boresight each mavericks very precisely. If the system can keep a ground track so effectively without a TGP, with a TGP it should be easy to automate it. But there seems to be wide evidence from real pilots that the manual procedure is how it works, and it seems to be done across multiple aircraft types like the A-10.... Anyway, thanks again!

Same here on the Index. Of the now 4 headsets I have purchased, the Index is the only one still running and it has been rock solid, no hardware issues at all. The main must-have I would look for in an Index 2 for DCS is to get rid of the screen door effect while mantaining a mura-free image. Nice to haves would be more resolution and an option to use camera tracking without base stations.

Thanks, but i'm aware about that procedure if I have the TGP on the plane. I'm talking about the case where I don't have a TGP on the plane, just the mavericks. The TDC still points to a different location and there is no TGP.

Hello, I gave up on using the TGP with the mavericks, since they seem to work fine without it. Carrying 6 is pretty useful. I set A-G, push back on TMS to lock the TDC to the flight path indicator, slew near target, TMS forward and then use the ground stabilized maverick to lock and fire. However, I have 2 questions: Is there a way to do a rapid follow-up maverick without having to re-do the entire process above? I find my self firing and then relocking the TDC to the flight path, and starting again. Some of these targets are near each other so if I could just have the next maverick aiming at the TDC, that would be much better...the TDC appears to stay on the spot on the ground after I fire, which brings me to my next question.... I have some confusion on what the TDC represents. Even without the TGP equipped on the plane, I can slew the TDC and then ground stabilize it...however when I SOI the maverick there is the HUD circle(separate from TDC) which is aiming at a slightly different place representing the Maverick seeker head....so what exactly is the TDC? Is it a sensor on the F-16 without the TGP? It seems to be aiming at a different place than the maverick. I'm wondering if the TDC shouldn't be there without the TGP loaded, and this is just the current state of early access... Thanks in advance!

I am having similar TWS issues to the OP, although my issues seem to be mostly in multiplayer. Most of the time I get almost no radar contacts even though I have the azimuth/elevation set exactly to match what AWACS and the F10 map say. I might get a sporadic single search target white dot but the it goes away in the next radar sweep. Exorcet pointed out something I didn't know, I didn't realize that 'filled in' data link icons mean that the data has been correlated with internal sensors, which I imagine this means the on-board radar(?) If those filled in datalink icons are correlated with the radar then why are there no white search target/track target symbol on top? I imagine you can't lock onto just a filled in datalink symbol...

Ha! Yes this is my first time posting a track so i should do some more reading on how it works. In the track folder there are a lot of files for all the MP sessions, but many are the same size (around 2MB) which I thought looked weird. Not surprising it is not what I thought it was. Once I had the problem, i left the server, quit DCS and grabbed the file. Not sure why it doesn't have the data in it... Unfortunately I don't have the issues in SP at all, only MP.

I went back and tested both the radar and datalink in SP and they work fine. I started to see TWS targets showing up in the middle of the 120 mile page on the FCR and was able to get system targets on all and cycle through them. I have attached a track of the issue on the server. On this mission I attacked some ground targets first and then went for the enemy F-15's. They mostly don't show up on FCR(only a few sporadic dots) as I described before, and then I get shot down immediately after getting into ACM range So pretty clearly it is a server problem of some sort. Thanks for your help! Official_Training_Mission_V168 Winter Night-20210312-110529.trk

I am having this issue as well. Previously I flew the F-14 and the trim always worked to level the aircraft in any configuration. On the F-16 it seems to work in discrete 'steps', or at least that's what it feels like...for most of the time after firing at least one weapon, I am never able to get a setting that levels the aircraft and it is always rolling slowly. Another issue that I have noticed is that when I use the slew on the maverick with the tiny joystick on the warthog throttle, even though it is an axis joystick it seems to move at one speed. I tried limiting the saturation in the axis tune but I can't seem to slow it down. It makes it really hard to lock on targets even when ground stabilized, at least for me.

Thanks for the feedback! That is exactly what I'm seeing with the datalink. I just happen to use the 162nd servers (usually the Training ones) a lot because they have such low ping times and usually have a lot of players on them. I will try other servers. The datalink definitely works fine in SP for me. Regarding radar, from what I reacall it works much better in SP but I will check again. The SP missions I have played recently all have bogeys relatively close, so i'm not sure I have recently looked at how it works BVR in SP. Just last night I was on the 162nd server for a long time. I downed 13 airplanes and for every one I had to go up to their face and use ACM mode, because again I -maybe- only get a momentary white dot for one airplane in the group and on the next scan of the radar it disappears. Azimuth set exactly to cover the altitude reported by AWACS. None of them even makes it to a system file. On the plus side, it is making me better at ACM. I need to grab a track, I will try to do this I have never done it before.