TZeer

You would be looking at stable 60 FPS then with the proper settings. Do it.. do it.... DO IT!!! ;)

as title

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=107551

That's a really nice find!

Do you have mirrors on by any chance?

Have a look in this thread :) http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=107551

I'll rep your for your awesome increased visual range mod ;) Edit: LOL, I cant' rep you. I have to spread some reps around. Haha.

As requested :) Here is the default one, you can see the radar is active and they are painting me good. Here is your requested test, as you can see, no radars are painting me :) Both showing the same amount of FPS. No performance hit due to radars :)

I was waiting for this one ;) Yes, the FM and avionics still need CPU power, but not in the quantity that some people think. But we can look at it like a glass of water. If you have an old and slow CPU, the glass is already 3/4 full, before adding the tanks. If you have new and fast CPU, the glass is maybe only 1/5 full, before adding the tanks. When the glass is full, the glass is full, it will not matter what's in the glass, but we know it's not able to contain any more. So for people with old CPU's, yes the FM and avionics might take up much of their CPU. But I'm leaning more towards the actual cockpit taking the resources, since going external boosts my FPS up to 300..... But I will rewrite that part so people don't get confused. Regarding the SAM. Negative. I have done this with multiple other objects with same results. The difference is that the SAM is easy accessible in the editor, and one of the models with the most objects. It's radar has no impact, as I should have had a significant FPS drop entering it's radar coverage, which I don't. I could have used other models with similar objects, but those are static objects from the game world, and would need people to move EDM files and renaming them to get them into the editor. And since I saw no difference between the Kub and a static object, I decided to use the Kub so people didn't have to start moving around files, renaming, and maybe breaking something in the process. Thanks for the feedback :)

It has no missiles, it's a radar.

After a lot of hours with testing and trying out different settings, I want to make this guide to help all of you out there who are looking to get the most out of your DCS World installation. PS: I will not cover the broad specter of mods out there that deal with optmizing, since that is a whole chapter for itself. This will simply be about getting the the most out of your game with a default installation. This should then give you a good foundation to build upon if you so wish. Before we dive into the actual settings and parameters I want to touch on the subject about GPU's and SLI/Crossfire. There is a lot of people asking this on a regular basis, and the answers they get range from no to yes. Many of the answers are pure guessing and rumors that someone picked up from some uncles cousins sister, if you know what I mean :) - SLI Yes, yes and yes. It works. I have had 2 x GTX 580, and now 2 x GTX Titan in SLI. In both setups I have been able to make SLI work without any problems. I'm in the process of testing out the GTX 690 with a friend, and will update when this is done. So, if you are looking for a new card or maybe multiple GPU's, I have no problems recommending a SLI setup. - Crossfire I have yet to see anyone posting evidence of crossfire working @ 100%. With evidence I mean a screenshot that shows both GPU's working at more then 90% or around that area. Alot of crossfire users have reported better performance with only 1 card activated in DCS. And there have been some people that have reported working crossfire, but the performance has not been what to be expected. I'm not saying AMD cards are bad, but not my first choice if I where going for multiple GPU's. Testing your FPS When people are testing their FPS, many do the mistake of doing it in the middle of citys, airports etc. I'm not saying it's wrong. But it's not the first place you want to test. There are so many things that can interfere with your results, and you can never know for sure if it's your GPU or the CPU that is holding you back by just looking at FPS. - Your maximum FPS possible To test this you need to do your testing far, far, far away from anything that can resemble a building, road, tree etc. To do this you want to place your aircraft of choice somewhere to the north where you are "outside" of the modeled world. Reason we do this is to be sure we are not restricted by the CPU. 3d models consists of multiple number of objects, the number of those objects determines how much load you will get on your CPU, see this thread for a more in depth investigation on objects and their influence on FPS http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=101491 Another thing to do is to turn off your vsync in game and in the control panel of your GPU. This removes the lock that is put in place for the FPS to not go over the refresh rate of you monitor. If it is active, your FPS will never go above 60 FPS (for 60Hz monitors). And if the scene is easy to render, your GPU will be strolling along with 40-50% GPU usage, and only using what it needs to give out those 60 FPS. Thats not what we are interested in. We want to find out what your maximum FPS is when we are not restricted by the CPU or other stuff. This is also a good way to test your SLI/crossfire setup. You also want to go into your graphic.lua file to line 185 (if you are using notepad++) and change the maximum FPS to 400, or something. Below you can see me running one card and the GPU usage in that scenario. As you can see, my GPU is running at close to 100% and my FPS is ~105 FPS Second screen you can see me running my GPU's in SLI, and my FPS is now 181, with both GPU's running at >90% Reason we get these good FPS numbers is that the CPU has almost nothing to do, and is not a bottleneck for the performance. So in other words, the FM or avionics are not the massive resource hogs that some people think. This does not mean they don't use resources. But if you are running a newer CPU like i7, i5 or something, FM and avionics is not the reason for bad performance. Important: DCS World is not able to make use of multiple cores. In it's current state it uses 2 cores. 1 for sound, and 1 for the rest. So an i7 2600k @ 4GHz, will be better then a 6 core Sandy Bridge-E clocked at 3,7GHz for example. Now we have established your maximum achievable FPS. Now is the time to start playing with your settings like cockpit shadows, TSSAA, MSAA, etc. You will now be able to see how much each option affects your performance. My settings for the tests above was the following . NB: There is a few options that will not be any point in testing at this location, like trees, visibility range. Since you have no trees and no buildings, roads etc to render at this point. If you have a second monitor it's almost a must to have some sort of monitoring software running on that one. This will give you live data on the performance of your components. I'm running nvidia inspector to monitor my GPU usage while testing. I really like this software as it gives live info with no lag in feedback. If you don't have a second monitor, use some sort of logging function and look at the data between each test. Testing your CPU: We will do this at the same spot in the editor. Only change now is that we will check and see how a good model versus a bad model will interfere with your FPS. For this we will first use ground vehicles. We will use 2 types to show you the difference between optimized 3d model and a old non-optimized model. First you can start placing this unit, SAM SA-6 Kub STR 9S91 radar on the map. Place like 10 of them and check your FPS and object count (to see your object count, hit ctrl+pause/break two times). You should have about 700 objects in that scene now. Now go back to the editor and add some more units and monitor your FPS and object counter. Now we can test out an optimized and well made 3d model. The M1A2 abraham. Change all your Kub radars to the M1A2. Now enter the game, check your FPS and number of objects. Number of vehicles is the same, and the M1A2 is also a lot nicer then the Kub. But it's giving us a lot better FPS :) At the end of both tests place a A-10C or any other aircraft of your choice on a direct approach to the vehicles. Now you can check your performance in cockpit in the two different scenarios. (After some feedback I'd like to point out that the radar on the Kub etc, has nothing to do with the FPS drop we get. I have tested this with multiple models. And my reason for using the Kub, is that this model has one of the highest number of objects of what's available in the editor. I could change to a static 3d model, but it would mean you would have to find the EDM file, move to a different folder, rename it, back up the original file you are replacing, and the reverse it when you are done. As I saw no difference in the performance, I saw no point in complicating things.) Bad model, giving us 75 FPS. Good model giving us 150 FPS. So there you have it. Difference between a good model and a bad model :) Playing around with all of this will give you a rough estimate of what your rig is capable of. Graphic options: I wont go into every option in the settings, but I will touch on a few that can really impact your performance. - Visib Range: This decides how far out buildings and other stuff start popping up. Longer view = more 3d models = more objects = lower FPS - Res. Of Cockpit Displays: Alot of people are running this at 1024 every frame. Not necessary. And it takes alot of performance. Personally I'm running it at 512. In the scenario above with 20 M1A2 I'm getting ~120 FPS with the TGP on the tanks on a flyover. If I change to 1024 every frame this drops to 75 FPS if I go with the black hot/white hot mode. - MSAA: Some people like to take this to the max. I have taken 2 screen shots. One with MSAA at 4x and one at 16Q. Not much difference between them is it? Except 170 FPS versus 88 FPS..... - TSSAA: This also takes a lot of performance. People has to decide if it's worth it. Here I have a screenshot of a flyover with the TGP on the tanks. I have turned on TSSAA, MSAA 16Q and 1024 every frame. My FPS is now down to 52 FPS. Do I really gain anything by turning that stuff that high? And the last one I have switched on cockpit floodlights. I'm now down to 34 FPS. What I'm trying to show here is that even if you have the fastest GPU on the market, you can still kill the performance if you are not careful with your settings. Turning everything to the max doesn't alway give great returns in quality when you compare to the reduced performance. Hope this helps a little on how to test your system and find your sweet spot when it comes to performance and eye candy :) Cheers

Haswell is coming out in less than week. If it's not urgent, I would wait for benchmarks, then decide.

I have a smooth flying experience 90%+ of the time :) Yes, 60 FPS stable.

Thanks :) Don't think it will have any effect. DCS has no support for PHYSX, so your primary GPU will be the one working with DCS. I would set your 460 to physx only, as there is no way for those two cards to work together at the same time in any other way, like SLI for example.

In general I would recommend Nvidia, simply by the fact that SLI works without a hitch. I have had 2x GTX 580 in SLI, and now running 2x GTX Titan in SLI, and in both occasions the SLI is working without a problem.

Found a small typo in the Read Me: Should be "RAlt+Num0" Cheers

Some info for you: Clouds: Very intensive, even my GTX Titan is working 100% when there is cloud-layers that I have to pass through. Dropping down to 30-40 FPS. Smoke: Sometimes it can hit you good, other times it gives me no issue. Cockpit Floodlight: Cut my FPS by 30 if I have vsync off. From ~120 down to 90. Mix them into the whole thing with a lot of objects, and you can never be sure if it's the GPU that is struggling or the CPU.

Change this: Civ Traffic: Off Cockpit Display: 512 ( Not every frame!) Water: Low TSSAA: Off Cockpit Shadows: Off Tree Shadows: Off And report back if you have any luck with this.

I would guess it's a mix of different bottlenecks. One moment it's your CPU, next moment you CPU is doing okayish, but the GPU is struggling. Hard to say without doing proper tests with software to monitor your GPU and CPU usage on a second monitor.

Not much you can do actually, except reducing the visible range. Even my CPU is only working at maybe 30% at maximum in average when playing DCS, but 1 core is doing almost all the work. The second core that is used by DCS is only handling the sound. Every 3d model in the game consists of multiple objects. So the longer your visible range, the more models = more objects. Or in the future, get a new CPU and overclock that bastard to the max :) You can have a look in this thread. My complete research on how the number of objects affect the CPU load and FPS. Also a few high object count models that you can rename to make them go away in the map. Specially around Novo area. That is a very heavy object area. Default over 2000!!! By removing the containers, some small boats and the cranes you can cut it down to about 600-800... http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=101491

Ok, I think I know what your problem is. Object numbers. Looking to the left gives you 860 objects. If you place 2x A-10C on your left side, they will add about 100 objects each. You will then be over 1000 objects. I'm running an i7-3820@4,6 GHz, and somewhere around 1000-1200 objects is the max I can have in any scene before my CPU is all clogged up and FPS goes down the drain. Quick test: Place your A-10C in the same spot in the editor, first alone. Then add an empty or AI controlled A-10C on your left side. Check performance after each time. Then just add a few planes and keep monitor your performance. If I'm right you should see the same behavior as in the MP. And the more planes you add, the worse your FPS will be.

When you look to your left and right. Could you provide a screenshot of what you see? Also enable the FPS and object counter. You should get a more detailed thing popping up in your left top corner. This will tell you FPS, number of objects and triangles in the scene.

This means: The F-15C will come with an AFM, but with the same cockpit, 3D model etc, as the F-15C in FC3. At a later date, they will improve and upgrade the standalone F-15C and Su-27 to a high fidelity, like the A-10C. And before someone takes thing out of context here, just because you buy a F-15C with an AFM, does not mean you will get the high fidelity for free later... Just saying. Source: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=105800

With "base" I think he mean that it's easier to make and implement the UH-1 and Mi-8 first to gain experience, then diving straight into a more complex platform as the AH-1 and Mi-24.