BTTW-DratsaB

Facepalm: doesn't support 64bit games yet.

Wish no more! Some bloke has released a mod allowing you to force it through DirectX games. It works the same way ENB series bloom mod did, if your familiar with that. It will be interesting to see how it works with DCS:A10 and how many FPS I can gain using this rather than the in game MSAA. http://hotfile.com/dl/125590302/e5f69ee/injectFxaa_by_some_dude_3.7z.html

Exactly...and is it really that hard to just pretend its Afghanistan or some Iraqi Desert in 1991 / 2003? That's my plan anyway... I guess if you actually fly over the terrain in real life, then you might find it boring lol, but you wont get many sympathisers saying things like that on a forum for a flight simulator :megalol:

I am interested in this too. There are many games these days that have problems using AA and postprocess/HDR/Bloom affects. This sounds like a real nice new AA mode in terms of performance and compatibility. However it does not appear to be "forceable" yet, even with Inspector.

jeez, every time I see new footage of this it leaves me speechless.

Confirmed fixed Sorry for taking so long to reply to this, but I wanted to get a chance to test it properly. Now...Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! :D If you didn't guess I am rather grateful for your research into fixing this problem and I can confirm that it is indeed fixed. I have included a screen shot of a table containing the results of my own tests using this tweak. (Hopefully its not too confusing, if it is ask and I'll explain.) It has been a few DCS patches since I have tested current SLi performance in the sim so this was interesting for that too, as I discovered some oddities I had not seen before. Firstly, you can see by the table that SLI working does give a nice 10+ FPS boost to the sim. But damn, with both MAV & TGP active (or even singly) they really kill performance no matter what you do. SLI on or off, or 256 or 512 res make not a bit of difference. This surprises me, as I am sure that SLi was making a gain with these two sensors active last time I benchmarked. But anyway, compared to having to run 512 everyframe @26 fps..I'll take 34fps any day, and I still get a boost every where else thanks to the fact we now have fixed the need to run with the every frame setting. Good job and thanks again Quirk! I really hope that ED can do anything to further improve the performance of having these sensors active. 34FPS may sound like a lot, but this is the MAXIMUM and is before I have even gotten to the target area. Also while using TackIR you really want the FPS to be around 40 to stop any jittery/stuttery head panning. ps; I generated a quick mission where I start airborne to conduct the test. I have attached the test mission if anyone is interested. The graphics settings I use are in my sig (with the exception of MFCD res obviously) SLITest.miz

heh heh Sorry, funny thread, still chuckling :)

Heh heh sweet. You know that is the first time I have seen that video. I probably wasnt able to see it when I first got BOP because of not enough Chip Ram, you probably needed a whole 1 meg to see fancy intros like that :megalol: . I did get BOP again for my later, more powerful Amiga. But that was a less than legal version compressed onto 1 disk, so they most likely dumped the intro for that. Anyway thanks for that. Great sim it was!

All investigations and reports are useful so no offence is meant by this...But for me the thing that needs to be fixed with SLI is that we can't run a non Every frame setting without getting flicker on the TGP with SLI enabled. Having to run an Every Frame setting to fix the SLI problems counteracts any advantage that SLI is giving in the first place. If that makes sense. If you could have SLI enabled and run a non Every frame option you would get a large boost from SLI. You are running 2x Supersampling and 4x Anti-aliasing ( and a huge res) though, which is extremely hard on your GPU, so SLI is probably helping with that. But, running an EveryFrame option has always "fixed" SLI problems since DCS A10's release.

EA would probably disappointed if they didn't. It's great advertising and hype building for them

Interesting, but wouldn't you get the exact same effect just by doing steps 1-3? Eg: the difference you are invoking here is instead of usign Nvidia's custom MultiGPU rendering mode for BlackShark you are using Nvidia's default MultipGPU profile. Edit I looked at it inspector and doing the above is keeping the compatibility flags for BlackShark but changing some other SLI rendering settings. Ill have to try this out. With these kind of changes it is important to keep track of your FPS as some times you can seemingly fix a problem (like the flickering TGP) but end up disabling any FPS befits that SLI was giving any way. I'm pretty sure you can forego all the steps from 4 on and just use steps 1- 3 for this experiment though. Anyway, when I finally get 1.09 installed and running properly I'll have a play with this and report back. Interesting discovery though.

I have thought about this before. One of the worst things about the Clip is that crappy wire. I'm on my second TCP now because the wire always gets a breakage in it, my current one is now starting to go too. Additionally, it sucks feeling like you are tethered to some thing. For some reason even the headphones I wear (which are wired) don't feel as restrictive. After using Nvidia's 3D vision (wireless) active shutter glasses it made me wonder why Natural Point don't release a TCP powered the same way. A rechargeable Lithium-ion battery http://3dvision-blog.com/upgrading-the-rechargeable-battery-of-the-3d-vision-shutter-glasses/ For a home mod would these battery not be more pratical than using AA batteries? Or do LED use a lot more power? (I know little about such things so excuse any ignorance) Another crazy theory I had to lighten the power source for a wireless version was to use 1 led and some Fibre Optic cable to make three lights, would that work? I'm disappointed that there is not more innovation from Natural Point in this area. I too would like to see some pics of your work. Thanks

I hope is something very different. EG a ship or a tracked vehicle. DCS:M1A3 :megalol: DCS:T90 :tomato: DCS:Aegis cruiser :pirate: DCS:UAZ ? :P

I doubt it, I have have had at least one miss with AGM in 1.1.0.8

lol Im a drummer and never thought of doing this :doh: My biggest problem with the X52 is the way the base plate "grinds" and sticks when doing fine movements. At the moment I too use 2 cable ties to reduce the pressure, a Cymbal felt might do nicely to keep it smooth. Ty for the tip :)

Very surprised no one else is interested in this. I of course meant that this would be an additional map, no changes at all to the existing map. It would make no sense to break that up. If you could imagine one of the areas I highlighted as it's own map. We wouldn't need a new campaign or purpose built missions or anything, just make it available in the editor and the Quick Mission Builder. The kind of problems most people are having are to do with Stutter and choppiness. I figured that less terrain to calculate and less textures loaded/preloaded in memory would help with this, also far less world objects on the map. I don't think its fair to say that RoF isn't not as complex. If it's a sim surely that means if they have less avionics etc to simulate then they use more CPU to calculate other things more accurately (please don't hit me :) ) than DCS? Like the flight model/wind etc? That's how I always figured it anyway. Given that, I believe it would still make as big a difference to DCS to have a smaller map available for us to play with. I guess only a Developer could tell us for sure. I have yet to see a game (espeically a sim type game) that did not run a hell of a lot better in a smaller world. Eg: Rigs of Rods, Arma series, Race simulators, Il2, RoF etc etc.

Yes I know, I know. I was only in here a few months ago asking for a larger map with the current region and the old lockon Crimea region joined together. It is pretty obvious to me now this would not work... Idea: What I do think would be a good idea now though, is if we could have a smaller map. We are having quite a bit of performance/vs visual quality problems since release. A smaller map would let those of us with medium hardware (and especially those on lower end hardware) get much more enjoyment from the sim. Most of the time I fly missions I never really go that far, so 70% of the map may as well not be there. Other sims have done this smaller map option too with great success. A perfect example being Rise Of Flight. They released the game with one map, the "Western Front" which was quite big and inevitably caused problems for a large group of users. To allow all players enjoy nice graphics and smooth game play (and decent sized battles) they released a new much smaller map for Quick skirmishes. I used this map for a long time and was very grateful for it. Now, after a year or two my hardware is a bit better and the game has been further optimized so I can enjoy the big map too. So the advantage and possibilities of a smaller map are: 1. Players with medium to low hardware (eg: those without 4Ghz i7, a 580gtx and 12Gb) can enjoy a much better looking and performing sim. 2. Quicker loading map time (not such a big deal but a plus none the less) 3. Larger number of units/bigger battles/more wingmen (advantage even for those with very powerful PCs) What kind of map? I figure the new map could be one of two types. 1. Completely new, smaller map designed from scratch (as with RoF). 2. Basic chopped version of the map we have now. Eg current map chopped to say..1 quarter of it's current size. (See Image for examples) Given time constraints etc, I'm guessing that option 2 would be best. How hard would it be to do? I have no idea. ED? I do think this (If it works the same way it did for RoF) would be a major help to players struggling with performance problems and even those who are not. See the attached Image for possible candidates for a smaller map area. I think the Red or Pink areas would be good choices.

Yeah great shots, thanks KLaFaille. I too noticed the weathering and also the what appears to be poly filler canopy sill. :D I think its interesting to see this. So often you see this kind of thing only in Eastern pictures, with USA/West aircraft always all shiny. But I imagine this is more what a heavily used war bird looks like. I wonder if some one with the skills could make us a weathered DCS:A10c cockpit mod ? :) One question I have: How careful do they have to be about making sure rain doesnt get onto the various instrument panels? Are they made to be able to take it e.g. fully water proofed? Most of the weathering on that A10 looks like is due to rain (Left and Right panels) Anyway, again..nice pics ty

Ya, that last change is even better, looks so much better than the ED have it. I hope they take note. As far as I can see Noise1back has little effect on performance but massive effect on visual quality. I'd be interested to know the reasoning behind crippling it. Thanks again for investigating this and posting your findings! I was really bummed with the gfx changes in 1.07.

Thanks, I'd rep ya but it wont let me. :/

Nice, thanks again. Looking very sharp. I applied the Field settings to my medium.lua and it looks good again. I might try out some of your other settings in my Medium .Lua too. Or make a custom one, I believe you can do that now. What does "distanceLevel0 = #" do? Do you notice any FPS hit when using these settings?

How did I miss this thread:doh: Great work, this will be very useful for me. Not too please with how default DCS:A10 is looking since 1.07 myself.

Thank you, thank you. I'll be sure to give this a try. I was beginning to think I was the only one who noticed/ was bothered by this.

I could never play with labels on. But, I do use the map with unit icons liberally, it is still very hard to find some targets (you can pretend its Jstars :D ). You can also decide not use it and only rely on it when you get really stuck, which you can't do with labels. Interesting to see how others play.

fantastic pics, thanks! :thumbup: