shazam253

I tried firing it in all three modes (DIR, COO, LOS). In DIR mode I tried designation through either radar (SEA1) or TGP (which is not on my default, but mentioned during the mission). However, the missiles just fly past the ship and explode mid-air. A turning point is also not given from within the mission and needs to be added manually during the briefing. I tried modifying the mission myself, to no avail. After manufacturing a simple test mission with just the JF-17, two C-802 AK and a single ship, everything worked fine and expected. I skipped the mission as there seem also some odd triggers in there as well related to rockets being fired. please fix the mission, or redo it. It seems there is some strange behavior with no apparent reason in my opinion. Even trying several modifications to the mission did not change this behavior.

I can't finish mission #7. As soon as I destroy the leaving vehicles, it states that the column vanished, mission fails and I get kicked after 15 seconds. Usually I'd fix that stuff myself, but the mission is locked...

Also from a less heated point: I fly a Georgian hammer mission today and I was able to make out ground units that were behind trees. After seeing the SPI in the HUD and then slewing the TGP to it, I only see trees. So in my opinion the dots shouldn't do this, but I can see that it requires more computional effort. As for spotting in general, I'm also using a G2 and have the issue that the dots are larger at a distance than when the airplane starts to be resolved. My proposed solution to this: don't make the dots larger than the aircraft. Also, the rough color should match, not just a dark dot. I can replicate the issue easily when going to F2 view and zooming out. At some point the aircraft becomes a larger big spot than it was when still resolved. Different LOD settings didn't have an effect. Interestingly enough, in the Syria hot start with the Apache, I can zoom out and see the Apache and F16s as large dots, while the static cargo aircraftb already disappeared.

Yep, I agree, we should test it out. I think in general, you want to limit the FPS though. It started somewhere that if you're CPU bound that DLSS will not be off much help. With allowance for unlimited FPS you'll likely end up CPU bound at some point. So limiting it will likely also help with stutters, as you maintain some overhead for trickier scenes. BTW, with a 4090 limited to 50 FPS are rarely dropped below that limit in any scenario. However, my science will have to wait till next week, when I'm back home ^^

I wasn't able to try out it yet, but for those experiencing reduction in FPS, stutters and such: I would recommend to do a slow repair of your DCS install and disable any community mods. If that still fails, move your save game folder and start fresh. If it helps, gradually put the old pieces back to see where it breaks. Potentially this will also help the devs, as you uncover where it is coming from.

interesting. but has it been fixed? If it were only 2 mirages, then you could handle them with the PL10s, but four is a bit too tricky, even if you load the plane up with 4 PL10s...

Awesome, thanks!

Sorry for digging out the old topic, but wouldn't it be possible to put it as a script in the user files, instead of going to overwrite it every update?

Sorry. Yeah specs 7950x3d with RAM at 6 GHz and CL 32. Graphics card is a 4090. Before the bios update, I didn't use XMP/DOCP and RAM was at 4.2 GHz and CL 40. I fly DCS in VR with a G2, but currently feel I'm GPU bound according to oopenxr-toolki. so I use 70-75% of the resolution with FSR enabled and medium visibility to practically always stay below 11ms frame time. CPU frame time is somewhere between 4-9 ms depending on the scenario. But I found maps like Mariana, Normandy and Syria quite demanding in scenery rich areas. If it were Caucusus only, I would go 85% resolution and high visibility. Then again, no hard science, I just took off with the F16 bunch of times from the Mariana got start map to tune out my settings. I wonder if DLSS will be better performing than the FSR tweak from openxr-toolkit. At 85% resolution I don't see a picture degradation, but at 70% it's noticable.

Short remark, after the stable BIOS update came out for the ASUS TUF x670e plus, I decided to give DOCP tweaked as well as PBO in enhanced mode level 2. In the 3D Mark, I managed to get 9% more, 8.7% are from the DOCP tweaked - it ramped my RAM from 4.2 to 6 Ghz. Interestingly enough, the graphic score went up by 5% itself, and the CPU score by 20%. I know its not DCS, but I'd say 'doing the OC' will be difficult to measure, but I would assume somewhere between 3-5%. I guess you should ensure proper cooling, all my components stayed below 80 degrees while using an 240mm AIO watercooler for the CPU.

just some comments: I can confirm the point of power consumption and the potential heat issues. With my i9900k, air cooling was insufficient (mild OC 5Ghz). I haven't OCed my 7950x3d yet, but I usually do this as an intermediate step before upgrading. I ran tons of stress tests now including DCS and the CPU never got past 70 degrees and the GPU (4090) never past 80 degrees. I use an arctic "AIO" water cooler, basically two fans on a radiator with a pump on the CPU, made for 'dummies' to install. After enabling the turbo mode in openxr and using FSR @85% resolution, I can fly at 80-90 FPS in most situations while having everything on high, visibility on ultra, but clouds on standard. I'm rather satisfied with that, with i9900k I 'only' got to 60-70 FPS, and what I did also see is that the graphics card benefited from the faster memory interface (PCIE 3 vs 4). as for the Intel vs AMD - I would say we are in a luxurious position to pick either and be well off. The benchmarks you find online seem to be head-to-head in most scenarios. I decided to go AMD after some 20 years of intel, simply to support them a bit. Kinda like bigger airlines flying Boing and Airbus to keep up a healthy competition As for the motherboard issues, I also have an ASUS, but decided to wait until a stable release is out, as said, everything stable and cool here. I will OC and XMP in a year, when DCS has more features added and the FPS go down again

Not sure what to make of ASUS right now. I just got my 7950x3D yesterday with an ASUS TUF board and it runs stable so far. I haven't tried too much yet, but I also refrained from overclocking or XMPing the board/RAM yet. In DCS, I saw an improvement of roughly 20 FPS (80) on average over an i9900K(60) while using a 4090 RTX card. However, it seems the bottleneck in VR (G2) is still the graphics card. Also the 1% percentile didn't change too much, I tested it with the hot start of the AH64 in Syria. Just on a side note, in 3DMark, it not only improved the CPU score, but also somewhat the GPU score, which I assume comes somewhat from the faster memory. Sorry for not giving you an exact science, but in my opinion, for VR, we are still GPU bound. The current processors and DCS in MT mode seem to do just fine for now.

At the very beginning, you'll see that two different DCS version were used. The AMD run is on a slightly newer version than the Intel run. There's an updated video, however, it arrives at the same results. I would guess that DCS is actually benefiting from the more cores on the Intel 12900k. Would be interesting to see, how it fares against the 7950x3d

Good work! I managed to pass this mission as well. It is really a bit buggy as well. On my first attempt, the F5 never took off ... On the second attempt, I was lucky. All targets except the Hueys were bombed. I got those with the guns, so I brought back a Flanker full of bombs and rockets. In my opinion, it can't be that serious to fix this mission. I would assume that likely after some map update the elevation of the Hueys doesn't match, so therefore simply re-placing them in the Mission Editor should work, granted to can access them. I also couldn't work the mission through the editor, but I guess we have a work around for the mission!

Well, I am wondering if they did some tests. Often times, there is little difference between hyper threading on or off, since the number of physical cores is the same. The added overhead to split work may even lead to a slight decrease in performance. Has anyone tested this for the MT version?

I've had the issue with the Reverb G2 initially as well. Doing a full/slow repair along with cleaning shader caches and restrung the headset worked...

I've experienced some crashes flying around in the DCS A10 Sturnovik mission where you try it the guided missiles (a small SP mission). The issue is less that MT is unstable, but the graphics card started to run hot and crashed due to more heat produced by the CPUs, but also the removed CPU bound, now being GPU bound. I cut back a little on the overclock of my graphics card, ran stable for a good year before. Therefore this side note, as A) the CPUs now run hotter, B) potentially more input comes to the graphics card And the combination may lead to an overheated and unstable system. Just to be cautious when sending 'bug' reports to check your system before for this. Specs for reference: i9900k/3080ti/64GB/Reverb G2 @ 85% resolution through openxr-toolkit and capped at 45 FPS I had it balanced out before that the system was equally shortly before CPU/GPU bound for the ST version.

Me too! I've found a video of the mission with DCS 1.5: It seems that you've to wait until everything is bombed. I did this, but never got the RTB message either. I will carry a/g weapons on the next attempt, to see if something isn't destroyed and therefore not triggered.