statrekmike

The AI has always been a significant factor. It makes sense that AI assets would cause performance drops on one level or another. The issue we are trying to get to the bottom of here is why the Supercarrier itself (separate from any other AI or static objects) has such a massive performance impact.

What do you mean?

Assuming it is indeed the antenna that is causing the problem, I don't think they will need to get rid of it. Perhaps they need only tweak it so that it doesn't create such a nonproportional hit on performance.

To be blunt, it is indeed the antenna and its particular way of casting shadows that is causing the 50%+ drop in overall performance (regardless of how playable it is for various systems after such a hit), it really needs to be changed so that it still looks okay but isn't as taxing. It would be such a small, nearly insignificant cost compared to the performance that we would get in return. To be even more blunt, even if I were in the subset of players that has a 1080ti or a 2070+ GPU, I would still be hammering on this issue as hard as I have been. Maybe it would help if ED (or ED's community managers) could help us understand what exactly it is that is happening under the hood that is creating such a sudden, massive performance drop because as thing stand, it looks like this is a graphics issue and it is probably one that can be fixed (or at least mostly fixed) by adjusting some aspects of the superstructure model. Losing 50% of one's performance just by looking at the Superstructure doesn't seem intentional. Raising the system requirements doesn't really seem like a solution and it doesn't really acknowledge the reality that a good chunk of your playerbase now has to turn off important graphics settings just to get decent performance on one of your most anticipated modules. Again. I don't like being this harsh. I really do always try to see things from ED's perspective and tend not to react harshly to bugs and such. It is just that this one really is a big one and while some (those with high-end GPU's) may not notice the hit very much, it exists none the less and measures should aggressively be taken to mitigate that impact as much as possible for those that easily fall into the recommended requirements for "high" graphics settings.

I really do think that ED should take a very close look at where they can reduce shadow complexity on the superstructure specifically. If anything, if it does turn out that they can get it to run well on anything less than a 1080ti or a 2080+, they should find a way to provide a option for those with GPU's that "only" have 8 gigs or RAM or so.

That is odd, you would think there would be some (even minor) performance impact.

To be honest, while I agree that the system requirements (across the board) need to be adjusted upward, I do not think that doing it just for the Supercarrier is the right move. I mean, I know that a GTX 1070 isn't exactly a top of the line card or anything but a 50% drop in framerate just from looking at the carrier's Superstructure (again, on a empty deck) seems excessive to say the least. If this were a CPU load issue, I would probably be more understanding but since this is a GPU issue, I suspect that there are graphical aspects that could be downscaled to increase performance SIGNIFICANTLY while not really impacting the overall user-experience. If anything, it might be worth creating a alternate "skin" that can be enabled in the special options (or in the mission editor) that would cut some of the texture resolutions in half. Even that might make a dent in the framerate problem. A lot of us are aware that DCS is a beast to optimize due to the aging engine it is built on top of. We get that it makes things difficult in terms of the performance/visuals balance but unless ED is willing to make a RTX 20 series card the minimum requirement for "high" settings (and any shadows at all), it might be a good idea to explore other ways to ease the burden on systems even if that means lowering some graphical details when possible/practical on the carrier itself (and perhaps even the deck crew and deck assets as well). DCS and its component modules should still run okay on a 10 series card. It isn't so old a card that it should already be entirely out of the picture DCS-wise.

When I turned off vsync, my overall framerates when up a good bit. That being said, it is not ideal since I now have awful screen tearing and the framerate isn't steady.

So everyone who is having through, can you do me a favor? Try turning off vsync and see what happens. This may help us collectively narrow down the problem.

I appreciate the direct response and I also appreciate the difficulty involved in striking a balance between visual fidelity and economical use of system resources. That being said, I don't think it would be terribly wrong for me to presume that quite a few players are running 1060's, 1070's, and the like. It isn't like we are trying to squeeze high settings out of GTX 960's and 970's, the 10 series cards are still quite popular and capable. If the Supercarrier can't run with reasonable settings (as in, not turning off major effects like shadows or at least some low anti-aliasing settings) with a 1070, there is something wrong that needs to be fixed. Maybe there is some bug somewhere that is sucking up a lot of resources. Either way, the vibe I am getting here is that if we want to maintain the settings we can more than comfortably use in all other parts of the sim, we should expect to plunk down $500+ for a new video card. That seems kinda extreme to me. To be blunt, the Supercarrier isn't so visually elaborate as to justify the sudden framerate drop. Likewise, since the framerates only drop when you look at the superstructure, I suspect there is something going on with the graphics of that superstructure. Outside of graphics, perhaps this is a issue not unlike what we saw when the Harrier first released and all the various targeting pod, DMT, and other sensor images were rendering at once even when the pages were not selected. It could be something along those lines where there is some sort of supercarrier feature that is hogging up resources even when it is not used. Again, I really hate to be blunt but this massive performance drop seems like it is more due to some kind of bug than it is simply a matter of the Supercarrier being more resource intensive. As it stands, if someone wants to get as much out of the Supercarrier as they get out of DCS without it (in terms of graphics and performance), they will need a system that is better than even the recommended system requirements for "high" settings (outside of VR). This can't be intentional.

This is my feeling as well. I can understand that it will perform in proportion to its level of detail in the same way that older modules with lower resolution cockpits (like the Huey) tend to run a bit better than newer modules with much more complex cockpits. Still, even then, it is not a big difference. Right now, the performance drop I am seeing doesn't really seem proportional to the added model/texture complexity. It is too drastic and to specific to the superstructure to be a simple matter of not having a good enough computer (as if a i7 6700k, 32 gigs of RAM, and a GTX 1070 shouldn't be good enough anyway). Since shadow settings seem to have the biggest impact, I suspect that there is something going wrong in that department. Hopefully ED figures out a solution soon because as thing stand right now, the Supercarrier requires a significant, frankly unacceptable drop in settings in order to run even remotely well. This would be a bit more understandable if EVERYTHING else in the sim didn't run fantastic without dropping any settings at all. I am sorry for being so harsh. It is just a bummer to wait for something only to find that you can't really enjoy it due to a rather odd and unexplained performance drop-off. I am hardly one of those people that freaks out when something runs at 55 FPS rather than 60. I tend to be pretty forgiving in that regard. That said, something is clearly happening that goes beyond not having a good enough system. There is some kind of bug or issue that is making the shadows so costly on the Supercarrier.

Yeah, I have had the same experience. If I even have shadows set to low, I have SEVERE framerate issues when looking in the general direction of the carrier's superstructure. Even with all types of anti-aliasing off, I still encounter massive framerate drops. When I turn shadows off or turn them to flat (which is pretty much the same as having them off), the sim looks awful but I get a significant performance boost and it is playable even with my usual 1.5 SSAA enabled (to remove the distracting jaggies). The issue here seems to be shadows. As I said before, I think that this might have something to do with some of the parts of the superstructure where you have a lot of thin, almost "wire mesh" looking parts (like one of the spinning antenna's and some of the walkways). Those create very complex shadows and while I am sure it looks great for people with VERY high-end graphics cards, it may be a big reason why the Supercarrier hits systems with even GTX 1070's way too hard. For what it is worth, here is my suggestion. If it is possible, try to find a way to reduce the complexity of certain parts of the Supercarrier where you get that "wire mesh" look (again, one of the spinning antenna dishes and some of the walkways). Perhaps by having them cast simple shadows (as if they were a solid piece and not a bunch of relatively thin pieces of metal put together), we might see better framerates without seriously compromising the graphical quality of the carrier itself. Heck, perhaps even find a way to provide a "flat shadows for Supercarrier" option that will set only the shadows cast by the various parts of the Supercarrier to flat while the rest of the shadows run as usual. It wouldn't look as great but it would potentially solve the issue. I could be wrong about this but it is the only thing I can think of.

I just tried that, it didn't seem to do anything to overall performance.

I really hope the solution doesn't just become "if you are experiencing massive FPS loss, turn off shadows" because DCS looks pretty bad without shadows (and flat shadows for that matter). I don't really get how I could be a member of a minority here. My computer is not exactly a unusual build. I have a hard time believing that this is not a issue that effects everyone but perhaps having a very high-end computer helps brute force through the problem without much notice. That being said, I have put a lot of money into upgrades as DCS has come along over the years but I am not plunking down $800+ on a high-end GPU just so that the Supercarrier and ONLY the Supercarrier can run as well as the rest of the sim. My GTX 1070 should be enough to not see such a drastic drop in performance.

So I just spent some time messing with settings again. As said before, it runs okay when you turn shadows off or run only flat shadows. The moment you turn on low shadows or above, the framerate (specifically when you look at the superstructure) goes down quite massively. I have a theory about this. When looking at the carrier model in detail, there are a lot of railings, cables, and even some of the antenna that really stack up the shadow rendering count. Perhaps some of these shadows could be removed and perhaps the antenna shadow casting ability could be simplified. I know that might bother some but it is a VERY small price to pay for reasonable performance on even rather decent systems. At the risk of sounding like I am pestering. Was this something that came up during the extensive testing? I can't imagine that everyone doing testing is running a bleeding edge gaming rig with at least a 2080 under the hood. This issue isn't exactly subtle and makes itself VERY visible even on systems that can otherwise run DCS like a champ. To put it bluntly. There is clearly something wrong. It is one thing if performance were to take a big hit with a VERY busy deck with lots of Tomcats or something but even on a empty deck, the performance takes a MASSIVE hit when you look at the general superstructure area of the ship. This can't be by design, it is far too drastic.

Unfortunately, for anyone still using a 1080p monitor (not a insignificant amount of DCS players I would wager), some kind of anti-aliasing is required because DCS looks pretty rough without it. I am sure this is less of a issue on 2k and 4k monitors but turning off anti-aliasing isn't a solution as much as it is a rather drastic band-aid over a sucking chest wound.

I can concur when it comes to shadows. When I turn them off, my framerates shoot straight up. Since turning off shadows isn't a real option (since it makes the sim look outright awful), it might be worth looking into finding ways to simplify the shadows or reduce them wherever possible. If anything, this may allow the Supercarrier to run well on systems that normally fit well inside the recommended requirements for "high settings". I hate to be such a bummer about this. I don't like being this forceful but this is a big deal. While people shouldn't expect great results with a GTX 960 or some other outdated card, they should expect at least reasonably decent results with a better card like a 1070 or similar. A GTX 2080 should not be the minimum requirement to run the supercarrier even remotely as well as one runs the rest of the sim.

Nobody is debating that the Supercarrier has a higher graphical detail level, higher resolution textures, and a generally more complex model. That is obvious. Likewise, it is obvious that even in the best possible scenario, the Supercarrier would not run as well as the older ones. Again, nobody is debating this on a basic level. What we are debating is whether or not the rather dramatic performance hit we are seeing is ONLY the result of more complex models and textures or if there is something else dragging performance down. Beyond all that, we REALLY need to move past using those with 9 series GTX cards as the ONLY example. I have a GTX 1070 that I run on a 1080p monitor. By all rights, I should see at least reasonably decent performance with the Supercarrier with my current setup because the rest of DCS runs fantastic for me. Sadly, I do not. My performance is cut down more than half and to be bluntly honest, I can't really see why that is. I know that the models and textures are better than the original carriers but are they so much better that I should be seeing less than half my usual performance? If this is the kind of performance that ED desired and intended, the minimum system requirements for the Supercarrier module should shift DRAMATICALLY upward and that will sadly create even more hurdles for new players with systems that would normally run DCS perfectly fine. The performance we are getting now is not really okay. I don't normally get like this about DCS and usually I am quite quick to forgive their technical issues but the idea that people with GTX 10 series cards should just shut up and get 2080's is absurd to the highest degree and does NOTHING to confront and hopefully solve the issue.

Some on this thread keep saying this but it doesn't really tackle the real issue we are talking about. Saying "You need a 2080+" to get the supercarrier to run as well as EVERYTHING ELSE in DCS doesn't really make any sense. The performance issues we are seeing here are not reasonable and saying "just get the newest possible hardware" (or something to that effect) will only make it harder to actually discuss the issue. People who are getting good performance in ALL OTHER parts of the sim should not be told to get better hardware just to get this one, singular aspect to work even nearly as well.

Turning off the shadows makes the sim look awful. You are correct that it is a good way to get performance back but it is not a real solution considering the visual cost.

My point before was that maybe some of those high res textures could be dropped down. As it stands, there is a unacceptable difference in performance between using the supercarrier and not using it. There really shouldn't be that huge of a performance gap. We all expected a minor hit due to the higher detail models and such but this is a MASSIVE hit and with the system requirements for DCS already quite high (and the rather beefy systems people are running in the DCS fanbase as we speak), the hit we are seeing is just too much. If this is a issue of too many high resolution textures, they should either offer lower resolution alternatives for those that wish to use them or create a specific setting to use lower res alternatives. The goal here really needs to be a relatively consistent performance experience with or without the supercarrier. Right now, the difference is massive and undeniable.

That was the first thing I did and performance was still significantly lower on the supercarrier when compared to anything else in DCS right now. There has to be more going on here than simply "get a better computer" or something to that effect.

I agree that comparing it to the older Stennis model is silly but comparing supercarrier performance to performance without it should probably be the focus here and right now, it isn't looking very good. To be honest, I gotta wonder if this is a issue where there is TOO MUCH going on with the supercarrier. Perhaps some options to downscale the textures would help?

My PC is not low-end and the performance hit I am taking by simply spawning on a empty supercarrier deck is pretty severe. The problem here isn't the specs that people are running, it is the MASSIVE performance hit regardless of specs. It is one thing if we lost a few frames here and there but it seems like there is some kind of major optimization issue or even a bug that is causing the performance hit we are seeing here. Seriously, I can do ANYTHING ELSE in DCS and get fantastic framerates but the moment I spawn on a empty supercarrier, my framerate nosedives. That can't possibly be what was intended.

Yeah, I am running a i7 6700k, 32 gigs of RAM, a GTX 1070 (at 1080p through a monitor) and I am seeing a rather massive drop in overall performance overall. Heck, I am seeing a significant drop when it is only the Supercarrier with a empty deck (save for a single player aircraft that I am occupying) and nothing else in the mission. This must be a bug or something. There is more going on here than simply not having the right hardware. If anything, they may need to offer a option to downscale some of the detail in order to offer acceptable performance on a wider variety of systems. As of right now, even high-end systems are getting hit pretty hard to say the least.