uri_ba

all they need is to implement a more aggressive "smart scaling" when in VR. there is already an algorithem in place that allows you to play with that. it just need another setting called "VR" above high.

I think you are CPU bound there, right click the CPU graph in task manager, and select logical could display. I think you'll see one of the cores pegged at 100%. From my experience, turning off all the shadows helps a lot. Have a look here https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=189873

why would I want to not have a proper controls? besides, I like XP11's concept better

It's pretty straight forward question, Is/Would it be possible to create and additional view port, using monitorsetup.lua (or any other VR related lua for that matter) to tie an external view point to the position of a tracked object (Vive controller/VIve tracker). and will for that matter allow use to do "Mixed reality" stuff. Yeah, it will cost us in Framerate (because of the additional viewport) and will require an external capture computer to do all the merge (because of CPU limitations, but creative options are always welcomed :)

There are some graphic features that are CPU bound while others are GPU bound. For example, shadows is very much CPU while pixel density and Anti-Aliasing is GPU. In general term, Minimum FPS is CPU while max FPS is GPU. With a 1080ti you can probably bump up PD without any noticable difference compared to 1080 (which I can run with PD1.7 and MSAA x8. I cannot however turn on shadows as I only have a 2600K which just can't keep up)

I'm still waiting for the Orion SDK to be implemented in DCS :)

People like to bash Vista... it wasn't as large of a disaster Windows ME was... anyway, Win10 is very good OS, however you need to remember that it's also the biggest spyware to date, so bare in mind you need to turn off pretty much every telemetry option possible if you like to gain some of your privacy back.

I think it all depends on you CPU. some folks here report performance, that to me equals to the beauty of Unicorns.. I believe them, but I have never seen it :) Unless you have an OC'ed 7700K, you will probably won't see any noticeable difference in the frame rates as far as min and AVG FPS. you will however be able to push graphics settings a bit higher. Personally I have tried PD of 2.5 on my rig. it was the most beautiful thing I've seen in DCS in VR (add maximum shadows on top of that). however, it all went away when I unpaused the game :) jumping from 970 to 1080 had made a difference for me, but the game also optimized at that time frame, so the actual gains might have been smaller. regardless. a 1080TI should allow you to bump up PD. as it is mostly GFX card workload (it does not affect minimum FPS as that is usually CPU constraint). I found that my 1080 is peaked at about PD of 1.7-1.8 (I can't really go up to 2.0 and maintain 90 fps in any scenario).

In steamVR it's called "asynchronous reprojection", And it's enabled by default :) it does not "magically" increase frame rates. just make the lower frame-rates tolerable.. I've already have a bunch of videos with a bunch of different settings.. I still need to draw my conclusions of them. but from what I've seen, it seems that in my rig, the CPU is bounding at PD1.5 but from 2.0 and up it's going into GPU limit territory. with "VR" preset, increased Textures to High, shadows OFF and x8 MSAA (hadn't tried more) and PD1.5 I get exceptable frame rates. (lows at about 30, most of the time on 45 and 60/90 at higher altitudes)

Is your 2600k OC'ed? I'm running same CPU with 1080, and it seems that shadows (any type of) are massive FPS killers. Try turning off shadows (it sucks I know) and deffered shading (or whatever it's called). See if that helps..

looking at this vid made me smile :) it's exactly how I look around in my pit when flying VR. right down to pushing myself off the ICP. (plus the G and the real aircraft around him that I don't have. :)) F-18s have hand rails on the cockpit bow, the also use that. i figured the right arm is on the stick.. I think you meant left arm on right glareshield :)

thanks, i've missed that thread... I'll try and make some comparing. any chance you can post all the missions on your thread? just to avoid any wierd variations? Uri

And 1800x and my poor little 2600k get 2000 on single core performance... That is exactly the point of this whole thing. Not in any point I said I'm stressed over budget, not that the purchase will be done "in an imminamnt date". The purpose of this discussion as far as I see it. It trying to establish some basic "footing" on what is required on the HW side, in order to achieve the magic 90fps on a VR rig. For regular screen, all this stuff is really not needed, as everything above 5 is completely fine and no one will never notice a dip down to 30 here and there.. So far, I've seen multiple settings suggestions, you see folks with 1080Ti complain about poor performance in VR, while others with 970s and 980s will say they hit 90 and sit there nearly all the time, and even post their settings, and dialing those exact settings will yield nothing to the other guy.... I'm trying to establish some sort of base line we can then use. For example. My i7-2600k has pretty much the same single core performance of an R7 (they all OC up to 3.9 where they all show same performance anyways). So is it safe to assume that an R7 will yield the same performance as I have, hitting the same CPU bottleneck? Answer is "no".. yes, it's the logical assumption, but we don't know, because we all mesure things differently. This is the first time I used SteamVR timing data like this. Have anyone with "90 fps all the time" had mesured these things. Could it be that ryzen will have an edge? For example, my CPU will boost up to 5.0GHz on a single core when the rest is idle That deffinatly skews the data "in favor" of my chip. While an R7 will get that performance on all threads. Not just one. So what I'm trying to establish is what testing should be done to get a proper baseline for VR performance comparison... 7700k stock is 30% stronger per core then my 2600k at stock. But I OC it by 800mhz, which are about 25% of stock clock speed. Does that make it as capable as a stock 7700k? (No, it does not BTW, but it does close the gap taking the 5.0 boost thing into account just as a reference. to show how bad the VR situation is. I've disabled VR in the options, and relaunched the game. without changing anything in the settings. FPS went up from 24 to 135... and I'm using a 4K screen. bumped up shadows to HIGH, asn still got 70 FPS at the same spot on the runway... something is weird... as the resolution is almost twice that of the HMD.. could it be the two view ports required by VR that is demanding on the CPU? (two frames to be rendered at the same time)

I don't think I will... I would take the 7700K on a Z270 board anyday over this i3. even if it means to save for another month or two.... yes, in a very small budget it's a reasonable option... but when you go up to a system this expensive (VR, HOTAS, High end GFX card). skimping on CPU and MOBO seems a little.. redundant... and because passMark keeps getting mentioned here... http://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2874&cmp[]=2930&cmp[]=868 and I'm "aiming" to the 8700K with "z370" board. unless someone can put up some evidace that the 1700/1700x can preform in VR scenario in DCS.

yeah :( Let's hope that at some point (the sooner the better), DCS will be able to utilize more smaller threads. however, the problem is that the master thread is still the blocking one (usually), and it will wait for all it's "children" to return results. but no matter how many threads you have, unless you spawn all the child processes in an Async way and then wait for them at the end. you will still need raw single thread performance to chug down the serial line. have no idea which way DCS is designed built, we just know that current release does not scale in performance beyond 4 cores. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2624490&postcount=2

Just to be clear, CPU is no problem in any other VR game i have, as 99% of VR games have a relatively small world with low asset counts. It's DCS that kills me.. and it's the only reason I got into VR (had a round on a friend's DK2 long time ago and I got hooked). So based on your comments so far it seems that ryzen is not ideal for VR in DCS, guess I'll be waiting to see what the "8700k" would have to offer. (Probably 7700K performance per core but with 6 of them). I'll post the low settings stuff, and might try HT off and slightly higher OC on the CPU.

Using cinabench 15, I get 170/715 for single/all cores. Single core performance is decent, and is very close to that of the ryzen 1700x. It's down about 20-25% off the 7700K performance (for single thread) Naturally, in full out they both stomp the 2600k. The both have total score of 1500+. However, if single core performance is King. How does a ryzen holds up in VR? As it feels like it will not hold, even bumped up to 3.9Ghz. but that will not make sense.. I'll try running a similar run tonight with some variations. Ending with "Low" preset with PD at 1.0. we'll see how it affects stuff. Btw, NTTR is pretty much same performance, they optimized the engine a bit, and then dumped a bunch of new shaders on it.. and I dread the new damage engine promised.... Sounds like hell of a lot of additional CPU cycles.

Hi folks, I've been bashing my head for the past few months with VR performance issues in DCS on my rig. I've been following whatever tips I could find and Ended up belly up all the time. I will not put it as "un-playable" but in some scenarios it's definitely not very "stomach friendly" I've not very prone to motion sickness, so I can "deal with it". I'm experiencing framerates as low as 18 in airports (Mirage 2000, instant action, takeoff) going up to 90 above 15k over the sea. going over land will give me 60. low altitude is 30-45. lowing everything to minimum definaly makes frame rate go up, but immersion plummets as I can't read gauges, or feel anything close to real life. (I "need" x1.5 PD, HDR and (at least) "flat" shadows). which is what I get for the framerates above. My spec is as follows: i7-2600K @ 4.2 24GB RAM (2*4+2*8) GTX1080 (which goes up to 2Ghz) and I have a secondary GTX750 I use for some extra monitors and NVENC video encoding). I've recorded a 12 minute clip of a quick flight, (M2K, takeoff from IA). with the Steam VR frame timing on top the OSD wasn't recorded, but sitting on the runway (with 18-25 fps) my GPU load was 40%. also looking at the timing data, it seems that I'm very much CPU bottlenecked. SteanVR timing data from their developer wiki: https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/SteamVR/Frame_Timing Can someone have a second look before I start saving up and working on approval from upper management? :) I'll be waiting a month or so for the Gen 8 Intels first anyway. and if someone can post another frame timing data from SteamVR or a rift with a better CPU for comparison, it would be greatly appreciated. (attached my current graphics settings - pretty much "VR" preset with high textures. and my PD is set to 1.5) if someone can think of a better or additional tests to preform (call it "DCS VR benchmark guidelines"). feel free to suggest. Cheers, Uri === Update 1 === It seems that MSAA (and AA) are not an issue in this scenario, as both seem to be GPU only workload and in my case, had minor effect. Shadows on the other had, had a major impact. And with shadows off, FPS very rarely dropped below 45fps while not directly in the airport. HT enabled or disabled seem to have little effect. But I'll need to look at that more closely. === Update 2 === I've ran a second round with all shadows off. frame rates were noticeably higher. (same exact settings, just without shadows) but flying low with no shadows feels weird.. but if that is the price to pay.. :( bottle neck is definitely CPU.. now it's time to wait and see what intels comes up with. is there anyone here with a ryzen that can post similar video? just to see how it handles VR? Next Up.. bumping up PD to 2.0 as this is pure GPU load, and mine "just sits there"...

and how many 1080TIs will be required to push this up to 120fps? current 1080Ti SLI cannot push triple-4K to 60fps (and that is "just" 25MP)

1. I just rest my Vive on my ICP housing (F-16 Pit). and the view is centered enough for me to work the main menu while looking at the screen (setting up controls and whatever). 2. mouse lock? or "use mouse"? one just keeps the cursor contained withing the game window. the other dockes the cursor to the middle of you view. and you can bind "right click" and "left click" to allow you to operate the cockpit without mouse (IIRC it's a Rift SDK "requirement"). without it the mouse works "as expected" within VR (IMHO, better for cramped pits, where you cant really put a specific switch in the center of your vision) 3. Pixel density does a lot. It will be noticeable in trying to read small text (like M2K radar or A10 Hud). it does affect performace, as you need to render higher pixel count frame and down size it. 1.5 is a good place to start, if you see no performance impact. congratulations, you can bump it up even more. 5&6 - sounds like you are missing a button. maybe on the right side of the menu (for controls) and on the left for exit debriefing.... I have none of those issues, menus are very straight forward. 4&7 - I can't help, I'm with Vive. but you will probably find some "sound mirroring" option in the Oculus tool to allow the sound to be sent via HDMI to the headset. (same as with any other oculus game.)

https://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=497 Controllers are "decorative" at this point.. most aircrafts have a pilot model you can turn on. that might give you the added immersion you seek. whan people say "operate switches" the usually refer to real switches in home pits (which you can't see). no problem operation the pit itself.... for "hardcore mode" strap a trackball to you kneeboard,.

Hi Andre, I've been seeing a log of CPU with the Simshaker for Aviators. what is the CPU load I should be expecting (I currently see CPU at about 100% of one core/thread)

Only problem is that IRIAF F-14s are TF-30, HB are doing hte A+/B which are the F110 upgrade. so the flight dynamics will be "all wrong"

all correct. however, for most of us, TIR always runs in the background, if you fly with VR HMD and your normal headphones, which might or might not have a TIR clip on them. or with leap motion controller mounted for reasons. and all can be turned off, disabled or shut down. but why just not have a checkbox that will remain saved, and you will not need to go over all those "checklists" to get it working properly? the temporary solutions are of course known

You can say a lot of things about comparability, and you are correct, you cannot extrapolate performance. However, aerodynamic behavior is something else completely. However, comparing f4 to f16 and m3 to m2k is not the same. Using M3 to predict airframe behavior of the m2k is more along the lines of predicting how the KAI T-50 will behave compared to the F-16. Wing and fuselage design is similar enough to say "the F-16 has issues in this part of the envelope, the T-50 should have a weakness there too" It does not directly predicts performance. Same applies. M3 has difficulty in maintaining speed at a tight turn. It can be mitigated by increased wing area and more engine power, but the aerodynamic characteristics that case it still exist in the form of the delta wing.