Brisse

Don't worry. I can vouch for you. I remember reading the same thing :)

G-sync

V-sync isn't the same thing as a framerate limit, although it does cap the fps to the monitors refresh rate, but it also comes with other, potentially unwanted effects such as extreme stuttering when the sim fail to keep the same pace as the monitor. That's because the graphics card has to wait until the monitor is ready to receive another frame. With v-sync you also get more latency, because there is a frame buffer involved which means the frame you see on your monitor is actually 2 or 3 frames old depending on if it's double buffer or triple buffer. A frame-rate limiter is different. It only caps the frame-rate without actually buffering or synchronizing frames with your monitor. It means there will be tearing, but it also means no extra stuttering or latency. The best of all world is adaptive sync. Personally I use AMD Freesync which means my monitor's refresh rate is variable and controlled by my graphics card. The monitor refreshes whenever it receives a new frame. No tearing and no stuttering. You need both a compatible graphics card and monitor though, so not many have access to this method yet.

Big fluctuations in frame-rate can feel wierd, and capping it will take away the peaks wich means it is more stable, although the average is lower. It is also very beneficial for the power consumption of the PC.

Even with my 2560x1440 monitor, there is a lot of wasted space on this screen, and since plugging in a third controller, the scrolling gets very annoying. Better GUI scaling would be nice.

I consider the 5870 almost ancient by now. It was once a powerful card, but it is outdated, although better than what you have now. Also, it would make for a balanced system, as you current CPU is not great either and would bottleneck a modern high end card in most games. The GTX 760 is more modern and although it wasn't top of the line at it's release, it's still twice as fast ( source: http://www.sweclockers.com/test/18345-radeon-r9-290x-med-sapphire-tri-x-och-xfx-double-dissipation/7#content ) as the 5870, just because it is a more modern card. If I had to choose between these, I would definitely go for the GTX 760. It should be able to run DCS 1.5 with okay framerate, but don't expect to be able to max out the graphics settings. For that I think you would need a completely new rig, new CPU, motherboard and everything.

There's no other way to run 1.5 so you don't have to worry about it.

I know there was a driver problem that caused nvidia cards to die at some point earlier this year, or maybe last year but that was fixed long ago. You do have the latest drivers, do you not?

There's no way a game can kill your hardware. The drivers and hardware itself has failsafe features that will keep the temperatures in check at all times. It will even shut itself down if things are starting to get out of hand. This is the doing of either your graphics driver, or the hardware itself. You cannot blame DCS for this.

Oh my gosh, that is an ancient graphics card you have there. You CPU look decent though, and Vista does support DirectX11 so you should be able to fully enjoy a GTX 970. Just prepare yourself for an amazing performance increase, considering how old your current card is :) By the way, your Vista installation is the 64-bit version, right? DCS no longer support 32-bit you see.

Could you download and install CPU-Z and post a screenshot of the info it gives when you run it? It's a small program that gives you detailed information about your CPU. The reason I want to know more about your CPU, is that I believe it might not be worth pairing it with a decent graphics card. http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html

I think you will be fine. I'm on a multiplayer server right now in the back seat of the L-39 and DCS currently use 4,3gb according to my task manager. I have 16gb total, but not even half of that is being used even though I have a few extra programs running in the background.

Hey! When did the Tornado get such a nice 3d model? Did I miss this during a previous update, or is this new in 1.5 and someone forgot to mention it in the changelog?

I just realized there is a "full screen" checkbox in the graphics menu, but it doesn't seem to do anything when I toggle it. The sim defaults to borderless window regardless of the setting.

It's clear that it's easy to max out the settings and still have great framerate with much lesser cards, so there's no point in having a Fury X unless you run it at ridiculously high resolution. It does apparently work but you have to put the sim into exclusive fullscreen mode. It defaults to borderless window mode. Hit Lalt + Enter when you are inside the sim to make it fullscreen.

You are now my hero. This put the sim in fullscreen mode, and Freesync is now working. Ralt didn't work though, so I had to try Lalt, which worked. Maybe keybind is different depending on module or something?

Hello! This isn't really a bug, but it is a small issue I have. In most games I use AMD Freesync (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeSync) as a better alternative to good old v-sync. This works in any game that runs in exclusive full-screen mode and can make use of v-sync. It isn't working in DCS 1.5 however. Seems to me that 1.5 runs in border-less window mode, and if that is the case, then it's also the reason Freesync isn't working. Is it possible that we can have the option to run it in exclusive full-screen mode instead, so that we can make use of Freesync? A setting under the graphics menu would be very nice. Edit: I just realized there is a "full screen" checkbox in the graphics menu, but it doesn't seem to do anything when I toggle it. The sim defaults to borderless window regardless of the setting.

Amazing job ED. The previous rendering engine could barely produce playable framerates on my machine with FX-8350 and R9 290X. Now the framerate is through the roof with maxed out settings. Feels so much better now, and it's much easier to really enjoy the excellent flight models now that the framerate is smooth. Better graphics is also a nice bonus, and there are lots of other nice things about 1.5 so thank you so much!

1.5 open beta runs absolutely beautiful on my 290X with maxed out settings and 2560*1440 resolution. Performance is way better than I expected. What does this tell us? You won't need the most expensive card out there. You will have a great experience on a mid range card, like the 970 or R9 390. I'm so glad it also works well on AMD now. Previous versions of DCS were almost unplayable on my PC, with framerates ranging between 20-60 fps. Now it's a stable 60+ fps. :)

Finally !!!! Edit: It's around 8gb if anyone is wondering.

It most definitely is. As I said, it's roughly comparable to F-16 and MiG-21.

I did write "APPROXIMATE" so yes, take the numbers with a grain of salt. I used another source for the Gripen though, and I believe it is very reliable data. This document is from the Swedish Defence Research Agency, and I'm not revealing any new secrets here, because this document is already widespread on the internet, otherwise I wouldn't have posted it.

The M2000 frontal radar cross section is 3,3m2 according to this site that came up when I did a quick google search. 3,3m2 is similar to an F16, and much better than larger fighters like F-15 and Su-27. It's not as good as more modern fighters like Eurofighter, Rafale and Gripen though. http://defesasaereas.blogspot.se/2010/04/dassault-mirage-2000-5-mk-2-best-of.html Edit: For those of you who don't know the typical RCS of an object, here's a list of approximate RCS so that you can get an idea of where 3,3m2 is on the scale: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/stealth-aircraft-rcs.htm Some interesting comparisons are: F-15 25m2 Su-27 15m2 MiG-21 3m2 F-16 5m2 F-16C 1,2m2 F-18 1m2 Rafale 1m2 Gripen 0,1m2 F-22 0,0001m2

Don't forget now that ED seems to have done their part, it's our turn to get to work and find as many bugs as we can and report them to ED. That's what open betas are for.

It's not out yet though :)