xracer

I just now saw the features of EDGE. One of the new features of EDGE is higher object count. What the heck are they thinking now...damn...get the slowdowns and major bugs in this sim fixed first before trashing our fps even more with all kinds of new stuff! Gotta soon move totally over to the ARMA guys to get a feeling of proffessionalism . What about multiplayer? That is the single thing they should focus on now. Nothing ever gets fixed more or less completely. Its just a big mess soon! All the sim has is good looks and good avionics thats it. Learn great userfeedback, fast fixes which works from the ARMA team. I've bought all their packages and enjoyed their professionalism for long and their ARMA 2 and 3 series is even far and away more advanced and complex than DCS. Come on ED!

Just found it on my PC today After i installed the software for my new graphics card, Nvidia had installed another useraccount on my system. Complete filestructure too for it...i hate stuff like that! Check this one out: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2479947

I wanted to check out Multiiplayer a little and regarding that i wanted to know if its possible to install DCS World only (basic) and set up a multiplayer mission using the free SU-25T only so that i can test the mission locally on my LAN. That is using me licensed DCS World (with modules) as a host on one computer and the free DCS World version on the other?

We got to understand a couple of things here. The field "MEMORY USED" is supposed to be the total main memory used (DCS+Windows w/apps) which you have at around 1.2 GB max. That is impossible since DCS alone take that amount. This should be above 2 GB unless something really strange is goin on. Also talking about CPU/GPU usage. There is Core usage and CPU usage. CPU usage when reading bottom of let say performance tab in task manager, when it shows 50% on a 4 core when running DCS then 2 cores is almost at their peak which is all that CPU will be able to deliver to DCS, Note that is in an ideal situation when no other apps get timeshare. So in general you wont see more than 50% there unless there is some other app hogging the system too. The value will most often be a a quite low percentage unless running things like SuperPI or IntelBurner stuff. The point is how maxed is the exact core in use. Also the reason you may see low GPU usage is that maybe the CPU cant supply enough data for the GPU (Benchmark.miz should be demanding) OR the GPU can push on (view straight up) should give GPU load when Vsync off. But someone else needs to verify that. There are some factors involved in trying to get a concise understanding of GPU usage, since u have GPU load and GPU utilization etc. "View up" will give load but little utilization. Try and learn and use HWInfo64 together with MSIA and Rivatuner SS if you havent (they can be connected all together). They will give you most answers about your systems use. Check attached values for me when running benchmark.miz. Values seems reasonable, with my less powerfull CPU. Remember this is also on a default DCS install. No mods :thumbup:

Yeah, also many games use HT also and i gain quite alot on that compared to the i5's plus it has VT-x and VT-d. An i7 is an i7...almost ..hehe. Now am looking for a cheap i7 950. They are great as they can go higher maybe 4.5 GHz, The 990X beats most modern CPU's still, but still VERY expensive. So this X58 board could still have some life left. Stable as a rock apart from that i overclocked the board so hard that one of the USB hubs is halfway gone.

VSync was working on my 5850 earlier today, but cant get to that setting now with the 780 installed, but in registry i have: DalAllowHSyncVSyncAdjustment = 1 (hex) as a leftover Drivers are 12.6 But generally your setting should be fine...

Hmm..I did set up some monitoring onscreen as i played using Rivatuner Statistics together with HWinfo64 and Afterburner to control my fan/temp on GPU, but setting up HWinfo64 with that is a bit of work. Can't explain that here, but i think there is a Youtube video on the setup for that. But that was ARMA 3 and DCS of course had to be special there too as i couldn't get the data as onscreen overlay there?? In fact its only Fraps i get to do that in DCS, but only FPS of course. HWInfo64 is the top of the line for logging though. You can fill you entire screen as overlay with all possible kinds of data with HWInfo64 and log it to a file at the same time. Can't you just run Afterburner logging to graph in background then just ALT-TAB to it and pause graph to check after? DeAttach the graph and full screen to see better? And yeah 2 GB should be plenty. Have you checked that VSync is not controlled (locked) by Catalyst Control Panel? Then its no use to set it off in DCS. Thats all i've used so can't help more.

Hi TZeer, probably alot of truth in what you say here, but i have a little new here. After a tivolitrip with the kids today i've just now installed the GTX-780 and it was a breeze to install. 25 min from start until i was into DCS. Absoultely fantastic card is all i can say! Even on my system. What i get with good settings on the benchmark is 37 fps. No tweaks either now in DCS. After putting on one after the other max setting until all on, full distances and whatever, i only dropped to 32. Love this stuff. Monster card! Guess am not used to high end stuff probably. Am using the 320.11 drivers now until they've sorted out their driverhickups. Haven't tweaked any yet either. All i can say to anyone who are looking to upgrade. If you have the funds and already have a CPU like mine or better and are going for a NEW card. Dont even think about a 770 or less for DCS! While i remember, I do have a Corsair 1000 W PSU in my comp so remember that part too. Quite some money for those too. It does look like i can do a bit on the CPU side, but i also know that i have some very slow settings on mem in BIOS (1046 MHz), plus some other things. I have had the 920 definately at the limit with my EK HFX-240 watercooling which was 4.3 GHz, but stable is around 4.1 only. So i will try to see what i get then on the 780. I just did a little testing regarding memory use on the GPU. I think at least i haven't got that right at all. The memory seems like its allocated and deallocated on the fly. That what it looks like let say if i press F11 all around. Anyway i did get one indication on 3990 MB used, but mostly its below 1 GB even with all settings to full. So this brings me to this. I never use the AERO DESKTOP. My desktop is as simple as it can be. I also have AERO disabled in DCS. Could it be that which play us a trick in the readings in the benchmark when ppl get 2-3...GB in use?? If you dont switch that one off in DCS maybe you waste alot of GPU mem which could have been used in DCS and even some lost performance. Just my 2 cents... AVG FPS: 34 (39 if OC CPU to ~4.0 GHz which is as far as it goes stable) MEMORY USED: 2808 MB GRAPHICS CARD: EVGA GTX-780 3GB CPU: Intel i7-920@ 3760 MHz MAIN MEMORY SIZE: 6 GB GPU MEM USED: 870 MB COMMENTS: All settings full except: No Heatblur, 512 MFD, 16x AA, No Civil Traffic, HDR Normal, 1920x1080 res. Low GPU mem use could be NO AERO, And just direct read in cockpit after planes are lined up (no 360 degree lookaround or other function buttons pressed).

As the other guys say, your system has a problem with the AMD CPU (note! that is if your system in general is optimized and thats alot to look at in that department too). But i think also that the 7850 could be holding things back GPU wise. In this test you need serious GPU upgrade to gain alot. What you should do is to do a small test. Increase your visuals in options slowly one by one until you start to get close to 2 GB used GPU. If you still get same fps its the 7850 which is maxed out at around 16 fps with that AMD u have. Do the tests to see if we can find out anything usefull. What i think is happening is that DCS shuffle all it can into GPU mem, then its mostly up to the 7850 to keep the fps up. Not so much the CPU in this benchtest.

The benchtest is really hard on GPU and looking at the below maybe there isn't much more fps to get for you by doing any work on getting yout CPU stable at higher speed. What you have (around 20 pfs) may be what to expect with the i7 920 with that card. Im in the process to install my GTX-780 so then we may see if there is anything left to get in the i7 920. Some scary stories about ppl installing the GTX-780 with the newest drivers 320.18, saying it has KILLED their CPU's!! Gotta read a little here before i do something. Also im going from AMD to Nvida so there is some drivers/regedits that need to be cleaned. Thanks for supplying the testdata. Its good for us to know what is wise to do when upgrading regarding DCS. No point wasting money if there is no useful gaining in it. The way i looked at it performance wise was that GTX-670, 680 and 770 more or less in the same group and GTX-780 and Titan in another. Then i thought ok i'll put in the money ( converted was $910 USD!!) to hopefully be a little ahead of time. The Titan for me would be only for those doing the combo with high resolution, high settings and multiple screens. I just hope that 3 GB mem is gonna be enough for a while. AVG FPS: 26 MEMORY USED: 2863 MB @2400mhz GRAPHICS CARD: NVidia GTX670 2GB CPU: Intel i7-3770K @ 3.9 GHz (stock) VRAM : 1150MB AVG GPU LOAD : 98% Notes : 1920x1200 WHQL 320.18, all high. no exception. 2nd pass OC to 4.8Ghz : AVG FPS : 26.

Obviously this benchmark was just made for you to get some kind of idea of what your current setup with its current settings would achive if the missions contain something like this in close proximity. Scary stuff..hehe. Of course to get a strict benchmark on this all should use the same settings, but i guess its relevant anyway as most have the settings the way they want for everyday use. Anyway from the results delivered so far, there is 2 which sticks out: AVG FPS : 43 MEMORY USED : 3,6 GB system memory, 1,8 GB Video Memory GRAPHICS CARD : 2x GTX Titan CPU : i7 3820 @ 4,6 GHz MAIN MEMORY SIZE : 16 GB AVG FPS: 42 MEMORY USED: 1523 MB GRAPHICS CARD: NVidia GTX580 3072 MB CPU: Intel i7-2600K @ 4.6 GHz MAIN MEMORY SIZE: 16 GB GPU MEM USED: N/A Something doesnt add up here. The 3820 is a better CPU than the 2600K. Same speed here, but 3820 has 10MB L3 cache and that usually is the main thing which makes it better with the same speed. Looking at the Titan SLI even a 3820 is not good enough to utilise a SLI setup with these cards on the DCS engine, it could even be that performance is lower with SLI for him than using a single Titan. Maybe he could comment on that? It looks like to use a SLI setup you have to be 100% sure that the CPU is more than capable for the spesic cards you want to use. For GKOver's setup it's different cause his SLI cards are alot weaker and he gets alot better performance cause his CPU is more than capable for his spesific cards. SLI is more to raise the low end of fps and stabilize fps overall and in most cases if the application supports it, a more than capable CPU will give you generally stable good fps with less peaks doesnt matter what resolution, ultra settings etc. As of that a strong reliable system fps wise. Obviously if the DCS on the 2600K is tweaked alot with LOD changes then its not even point in comparing. Btw. mention LODS. After all i've messed with this DCS sim I have a single conclusion for myself. There is a single main factor which has importance in DCS and that is: LOD AND COMPLEXITY OF SINGLE UNITS. The variation is HUGE on many units, and some like these in this benchmark will bring all but the best systems down. This is the cause of most big variations in fps. You cant really say its the drawdistance or the number of objects. An example would be the infantery man. Small and neat, but a huge resource hog cause of how its designed. There are units in the system which are way to detailed for current general systems.

Guess we weren't supposed to look at the stars while we did the test...:D

Yes i think you may be right in that, not my screenshots though:-) Just got a brand new EVGA GTX-780 in my hands now. Will see how that goes on a aging system...hehe

GkOver, will look at what u say here later, no time now. On the way to get a new card...

Regarding Obj, your sure you shoot this when all planes had completely stopped moving? then straight after a Num 5 and Num Enter? Another thing is that in one of the shoots you have indications on mirror use?

Check this out: RESULT AVG FPS : 13 MEMORY USED : 2693 mb GRAPHICS CARD : HIS HD-5850 1GB stock CPU : Core i7 920@ 3.8Ghz MAIN MEMORY SIZE : 6 GB GPU MEM USED : 980mb This was interresting Hey Waxi, could you try what you get with stock speed and if it can handle it, a higher clock on the CPU and tell what you get? Only difference of matter here is the graphics card and its onboard memory (4 GB ). The larger size you you have in main memory does nothing to the equation, in my opinion. 6 or even 4 GB is more than enough for this sim as long as the graphics card is good. Main thing here is that he even have a lot slower clock speed set on the same CPU, but still gets almost twice the fps. Maybe 2.66 -> 3.5 GHz gives alot, while 3.5 -> 5 GHz gives little. So could be money to save on the CPU side if on a budget. I mean the point is i also have a i7 2600@4.0 GHz syst available, and if i choose to use that and upgrade that to a i7 3770k and OC it, would gain me next to zero in this sim. Also the non-K versions of these have more advanced features than the K's. Thats why they cost the same or more still. They have something i actually use and thats full Vt-x and Vt-d enabled in which makes it possible among other things to run a child OS more effective inside another, but obviously for regular gaming the K wil be smartest to get. Anyway i just want to see if there is any real point in upgrading the CPU yet.

Thanks TZeer! then its time for a new card. What i was thinking was to first of all get a card with at least 2 GB on it. Btw. I have another machine with a i7 2600 non K which i managed to squeeze to 4 GHz stable. Maybe i should use that for gaming instead of music prod? It has 16 GB mem too. I was hesitate on that earlier cause the GHz is more or less the same and the cache on both are 8 mb too. I will also have to do alot of re-organising for that. Both have SSD's for data.

Hmm... misunderstanding. I explained badly. i did lower it too its original speed 2.66 Ghz too check this. The best it can do is 4 Ghz and my difference is 3 fps in a certain test. Its long since i've had it its original speed so i wanted to check the effect in DCS.

If i get an increase of 3 fps avg in DCS with my system if i raise the clock 1.5 Ghz on the CPU, is it a new graphics card i should buy first? I do have little mem on my card already too?

Exactly, i've also played around with sims for like since Geoff Crammonds GP2 came out. I've always loved racingsims if their as realistic as possible. And i still have most flight sims ever produced, but what i see is that everything feels just like a game if the smoothness isn't there. It's everytime i get a major stutter, its like a rock in my head kicking me out of the "bubble". I am sure i've wasted countless hours on this tweaking, and many of them aren't justified, but i realize now that i just have to upgrade for this sim to be even remotly smooth as long as the flight goes on. I remember the Falcon days, wasnt long before i could use the time to enjoy it. It had bugs but unsmoothness is the biggest bug there is for me. Keep it smooth then improve, then check again smoothness. But guess developers think differently. They need money understandable which means new content. But on the longer run unsmoothness will be their doom...Why is Falcon still after decades still played of alot of ppl? It's cause they have a fast good muliplayer, no choppy fps, great avionics, pretty good flightmodel. All which will keep ppl together and build a community which do what their supposed to do, not tweaking the crap out of the system. I tweak alot, but am soon through with this sim. Here its money which counts. New system!

Thanks alot. aussieboy for the info! Am starting to understand now why we have problems in gameplay with less than powerhouses of computers. Anyway i think its good to great with these fantastic models the modellers make, but i also think we need to keep the game acceptable smooth to get a nice game expericence at the current state of hardware. Anyway i also understand that the modellers want to show their best artwork and also for the simdevelopers that certain new features are nice also regarding tools, formats etc, which make it easier for them further ahead. I'm also interrested in if the EDGE engine is gonna do any good for the handling of the objects in the sim or if its mostly the terrain which gets more efficient. I mean if there in the future is gonna be large differences on modelcomplexity randomly placed around the map, are we still gonna struggle with fps variations? You think the hardware is gonna be lagging behind all the time?

So they are loaded into mem just as let say another object hits it? What about polygoncount in different models. Can an explosion effect be made too resource demaning for current off the shelf computersystems? More importantly is it up to the modeller how efficient this effect will be in realtime in the sim? Is reasons like this a factor for big variations in fps in the sim when you scan 360 degrees around the scenery? Are there any rules from ED about whats acceptable for details in an object?

Damn is it really that bad for me! I barely dare present the values... RESULT AVG FPS : 13 MEMORY USED : 2693 mb GRAPHICS CARD : HIS HD-5850 1GB stock CPU : Core i7 920@ 3.8Ghz MAIN MEMORY SIZE : 6 GB GPU MEM USED : 980mb !!!! damn maxed out?? COMMENTS: x4 AA, 1600x900 res, options low shadows, no heat etc. High distance, High scenes. Brutal system you have Mr! Thanks alot for the data :thumbup:

I am going to upgrade my computer maybe this week or as soon as i get some feedback here. I have way too much money on the account now. Soon I will have to get another account to get enough space...HAHA...HEHE. Yeah i know maybe wasted money, but i will get some better performance anyway am sure. Hope you will help me out with 5 mins of you time. I'm not sure how much am gonna use on this upgrade. SIMPLE BENCHMARK (Just object draw capability) Requirements: DCS WORLD 1.2.4 and A-10C installed as a module There is no flying involved here! 1. Run system as usual and turn off VSYNC 2. Load up attached miz file. 3. Press fly 4. Press RCTRL-PAUSE 2 times! (Simdata) 5. Wait until planes line up at runway entrance (CTRL-Z then SHIFT-Z to accellerate (use F2 zoom out to check) 6. Press F1, NUM 5 and NUM ENTER to get default view. 7. Present the following please: - AVG FPS (paranteses top left) - MEMORY USED (some lines below the FPS) - GRAPHICS CARD (BRAND, TYPE and MEMORYSIZE) - CPU (BRAND, TYPE and CURRENT GHz) - MAIN MEMORY SIZE Optional, but i would really like to know how much memory you graphics card uses max in this test. I use HWINFO64 which i reset first and later read off max used memory. This program probably use a little resources, and if you use it maybe mention it here. (great utility btw.) I know there are other factors into this like type of memory, motherboard etc..your options settings, mods but above is the bare minimum i would like to have. Only preparation i did was to use the "Repair DCS World" first cause i've messed alot with the files lately, but dont do this if you have optimized you system with file edits! In general give the info you have time for. The more the better. If i have forgotten anything crucial here, please notify me. Below is a template you can copy. RESULT AVG FPS : MEMORY USED : GRAPHICS CARD : CPU : MAIN MEMORY SIZE : GPU MEM USED : COMMENTS: Thanks in advance! benchmark.miz

Hi, I was wondering if any of you who knows how the EDM's containing collision detection works basically. I would especially like to know if these can be made effiecient or inefficeient or if there is just kind of standard way to do it. Is this part done the same way now and as efficient as in earlier versions of the sim. I understand there are more possibilites now, but are they as efficient (fast)? Will a large filesize EDM with collision detection be slower in the system? Are they loaded into memory ahead of time etc.