aleader

I think everyone's also overlooking the fact that desert terrains are a lot easier to pump out than rocky/treed areas, and are a lot easier on the FPS I'm assuming. You see this in a lot of games, not just DCS. If they have made one desert map, you can guarantee in short order you're going to get a bunch more. It's just easy to justify as most of the conflict is happening in the Middle East these days...yes, it's the oil.

I am new to this, just got my Cougar MFDs and set them up on a 2nd monitor (1680x1050) with the A10C virtual cockpit server (bit shift site). I got it to work for the MFDs (last night) after editing my A10C Virtual Cockpit.lua file, changing the resolution under 'Centre' to 1920x1080 and aspect ratio back to 1.777778 (from 3600x1080 and 3.333333...these are still the settings that show up in the game settings). That's all good now, but I'd like to add the RWR in the middle of the MFDs. I've read tons of threads now, and get the impression that we only use Helios if we have a touch screen? If not, do I just go back to the first post from 2011 here and try to follow that? Is that still relevant in 2.5.3?

I've had A10C for a while now and recently bought a pair of the Cougar MFDs. They work perfectly and DCS maps them automatically. DCS also runs perfectly (latest build - 2.5.3). My main display is a 24" 1080p and my 2nd monitor is a 22" 1680x1050 LCD. Win 7 64, GTX 1070. I'd like to stick the MFDs in the corners with velcro tape and have the screens underneath them. I know there's a million threads on this, but I can't get it to work. I first tried the DCS Virtual Cockpit server site (Bit Shift Software). I made an lua file with it, but when I start the game, the screen is stretched over both screens. The MFDs (exports) are perfectly where they should be on the 2nd monitor and work fine, but the game screen is running underneath them (i.e. it isn't black around the MFD's on the 2nd monitor). I read the Dummies Guide for MonitorSetup.lua (PeterP from 2012) and in game settings seem to be what they should be (3600x1080 resolution, 3.333 aspect ratio). Any idea what's wrong? I don't think Helios is what I'm looking for, and Ultra MFCD doesn't work (it crashes DCS). Any help appreciated! EDIT: I figured it out myself if anyone's interested. Had to go into the A10C Virtual Cockpit.lua and set the 'Center' resolution to 1920x1080 and aspect to 1.777778 manually. It still shows 3600x1080 and 3.33333 in the game settings, but it works now. I'm not sure why it automatically set it like that when the file was generated. Now I need to figure out how to add more to it (RWR, etc).

A laptop probably won't do it, but a real issue you have there is your system RAM. I was hesitant to buy more RAM until I saw some actual proof as most (99%) of games do just fine with 8GB, but DCS 2.5 needs 16GB. 1.5.8 works perfect with 8GB, but it does push the limit on high settings. I upgraded to 16GB and the performance (smoothness - less stuttering) improved significantly. As for VRAM, I don't even use half the 3GB on my GTX 1060 in 2.5.

What resolution are you running it at? I assume as you list an Oculus, this is VR? Your Vid Card is only slightly slower than mine (GTX 1060), and I run the game pretty much maxed (w/o MSAA, FXAA thru Nvidia CP instead) and have the opposite issue. CPU maxed and vid card less than 50% used. I'm running in 1080p though. From what I've read, I don't know that a 480 is sufficient for VR. I doubt you want to upgrade a vid card right now at the obscene prices. You can literally take a Hawaii vacation right now for the same cost as a 1080.:ranting:

Yah, I'm also hoping by the time they release they will have ironed out all the performance issues, although it took a while to get to 1.5.8. It seems that certain objects may be causing some of the stutters as well.

Yah, I've read the passmark bench stuff, but it doesn't generally correspond to actual game performance. Most of the game benchmarks show very little benefit from upgrading a CPU. The benefits are almost always from the video card. If someone on here with an i3 or i5 (not a K version) could relate their experience with DCS, that would be more helpful. Your vid card is equivalent to mine, but you're using CPU that cost about 8 times what mine did. What CPU would you recommend then? (don't say i7);) Let me put it this way, if I upgraded to an i3 4170 ($203 CDN) or an i5 4460 ($262CDN), what kind of performance bump would I expect in DCS? I think I'll start with an SSD as I was going to get another one anyways, see if that helps.

Min/Recommended specs mean nothing in reality, they're just guidelines. By those specs I can't even run it, which is hogwash. Why suggest an i5+ when the game doesn't even support quad core? The G3258 is a DUAL core O/C beast, and at 4.2GHz runs about the same as an i5 4460 from the video benchmarks I've seen (obviously not as well in games written for more than 2 cores, but those are very few at present). 4.2Ghz is quite a bit higher than most of the CPUs out there, but I'm just wondering if there are some other instructions in the CPU that are inherently slower on games like DCS. As I said, performance in all other games is stellar, even in poorly-optimized, CPU-hungry ARMA 3. I was expecting to see higher usage of my VRAM as everyone right away assumes 3GB isn't enough. I was also expecting that RAM usage when I put 16GB in would completely eliminate any stutters. Why doesn't it use all my available RAM before going to the HDD? I was thinking of an SSD, but I was also told that for 1.5.8 stutters, and it was in fact a total reinstall that I required, not an SSD or more RAM. Wiped everything and reinstalled, no more stutters. I will experiment with visibility distance and trees as I think that may be where the issues are coming from as I have those jacked to max. The stutters aren't bad, just annoying when they happen. It would be nice to get an answer with some actual evidence of performance, not just speculation. That's why it would be beneficial to have someone post that doesn't have a GTX 1080ti and i7 with a kajillion GB RAM. I should hope after all that cash outlay it runs well. It better wash my car and take the dog out for that kind of $ ;) Ideally advice on SSD or CPU upgrade and what is the minimum upgrade of CPU to eliminate all stuttering?

I'd love to see some benchmarks with realistic hardware (i3, GTX 1060...the most popular card on Steam...for example). Some of us see this as nothing more than a hobby and are not willing to spend 5 mortgage payments on playing a single PC game ;) I am running DCS 2.5 very well now after the latest patch (single player), but still get some stuttering/HDD thrashing when looking outside the cockpit, and during fly-bys in external. I run FXAA through Nvidia CP instead of MSAA, full trees, Ultra Visibility, 8X Anisotropic, Med Shadows/Flat terrain shadows, High water and textures. Oddly, no stuttering at all down low in the trees. I followed the recommendations from another thread and they really were spot on. I get 60-100fps, but I understand it's the frame latency, not the FPS that matters. I get a solid 12GB of RAM use, and never over 45% on the GPU, so I'm thinking it's the CPU? But isn't 4.2GHz enough? Maybe I need to install on an SSD? I don't want to upgrade something unless it's actually going to help, and I'm not going from a 3258 to an i7 just because everyone else here does. Any info out there? Thanks!

There's also no shame in being smart with your cash. Unless you can show some evidence that paying 62% more for a CPU and quadruple the price for the 300 MB gives an equivalent boost to performance, I don't know why you wouldn't just go with an i3. Do you work for Intel or something?;)

Right, but only in DCS correct? Why does multiplayer use so much more than a large, object-rich SP mission? Does a simliar game environment like ARMA 3 also require huge amounts of RAM? Just asking, haven't played ARMA 3 multi. This is an excellent thread that has really helped me tune 2.5 to my system, but something is still a problem. I have enough RAM and my GPU seems underutilized (in this game), so it may be my CPU? I get anywhere from 60 - 100fps, but still have stuttering when looking around (Trackhat) and external fly-bys. The HDD is thrashing when the stutters happen. As I said before though, neither my RAM or GPU are being fully utilized. Why does the game not attempt to use system RAM fully before switching to the HDD? Could an SSD install actually help here? I've seen benchmark videos of O/C G3258 like mine that have simliar performance to an i5. I know DCS doesn't use more than 2 cores, so isn't the CPU just limited by the raw speed (4.2GHz)?

Could you explain why? I recently put 16GB in my system to improve performance in 2.5 (8GB was sufficient in 1.5.8 at 1080p) as I was seeing 'Committed' usage of just under 12GB in 2.5 ...rarely over 7.5GB in 1.5.8. This is using Performance Monitor (not task manager) as it seems to give more accurate info. Task manager never showed usage over 4GB, which I don't believe. No matter what settings or scenarios I throw at it (SP), the committed bytes remains at 12GB...which is obviously not even full usage of the 16GB. Under what usage would you need over 16GB of system RAM? From my testing, DCS is the only game that I have (over 140 games now) that even approaches the 8GB. I am still seeing some stuttering (HDD usage when the stutters happen). VRAM never goes over 49%. Mostly high settings (Extreme vis) and 4X MSAA. I'm going to try and turn it to FXAA as suggested in this post and see what happens as I suspect I will need to turn some things down to compensate for my system.

So you won't be able to just pick 1.5.8 in the 'properties' tab? This will leave you with 2 installs then correct? I've noticed an improvement with the latest 2.5 patch, but it still looks as though it's using more than 8GB system ram (around 12GB on mine), which means I'd have to toss my 8GB and get 16 (DDR3, only two slots). Not sure if I'm willing to do that for only one game.

Yah, thanks, that's kinda what I'm looking for. It would be nice to pick a spot like in a youtube video, but this will work. I'd read that speeding it up too much can corrupt the track?

Yikes. That's not what I'm saying at all. It's simply bad timing. Obviously they had no control over it. It would be ridiculous to suggest otherwise. And I run several of the latest and greatest games in 'FULL' glory with a 1060 I bought over 2 years ago...no upgrade required. DCS 2.5 needs to be better optimized and according to the developers, it will be, as they are working on it.

Is there any other way to do it?

Thanks, didn't realize that. Would recording it instead in Fraps allow more playback flexibility? Can you still freely move the camera, or is it locked to whatever you recorded?

I tried all that renaming shaders and switching shaders stuff to no avail when I was seeing neon green trees. The only thing that helped was a complete wiping of DCS from every area of my PC I could find (I did not have any mods installed, and it was a very recent reinstall of DCS). When I did that, no more stuttering in 1.5.8 (runs at a stable 60-100fps) and the neon green trees were fixed (with deferred shading enabled). However, the stuttering remained in 2.5. The FPS is still about 45 - 60, but horrible stuttering. This may be because I have 8GB RAM, but I'm waiting until there are some patches to the engine before I go upgrading. I was also told the stuttering in 1.5.8 was caused by RAM or not having it installed on an SSD...that was wrong advice. RAM prices are almost as stupid as vid card prices right now. I don't think it's the 3GB on the vid card as 1.5.8 rarely uses more than 39% of it now, but I'll test when they release. Bad timing for DCS to upgrade an engine if it forces users to upgrade vid cards...most aren't going to do it right now. Luckily I think we can stay at 1.5.8 if needed (yes, I know we won't be able to do multiplayer...doesn't bother me at present). I'm kicking myself for not buying about 10 GTX 1070's when I upgraded a few years ago. But I have a wife and kids, so that was never going to happen ;) I run 1.5.8 at 1080p with everything maxed/on except trees (at about 16,000) My specs: Win 7/64 Pentium G3258 @4.2 Ghz 8GB Ram GTX 1060 3GB 1TB WD Blue HDD (system on SSD) Saitek X45 Hotas Trackhat

Playback on Tracks This may have been answered already, but I couldn't find it here or on Steam. Is there any way to fast forward/rewind a track? I'd like to watch my landings without having to go through the entire track every time. I like being able to watch it in-game (so you can switch to different camera views, etc), I'd just like some more options on viewing. I'm using 1.5.8. Thanks!

No, I should be more clear. The 'label' that says '1.5.8 final' beside DCS World in the list disappears, but probably because I'm only running 1.5.8 now. It also switches back to 'opt out' in the Beta list. I assume that once 2.5 is out when you switch to 1.5.8 final, it should stay at that instead of automatically d/l 2.5.

Yah, thanks, I see that in there (1.5.8 Final). When you choose it now, it shows up in the left side games panel (beside DCS World) but changes back each time you log out of Steam. Hopefully that changes once 2.5 is officially released.

I'd also like to know if this will be possible. From what I can see, Steam only allows you to delay updates until the next launch of the game. You can't disable updates anymore?

Also, how do you show the fps in LOMAC? I used to know how to do it, but I can't seem to find the method, even through a google search.

Ok, I'm a moron :doh: I was looking for that file in the Tree Shader mod, not the ground pounder mod. I saw the file in temptextures of course, but not in Modman when I had the tree shader mod selected. One other thing, I get errors that 'the file size (256 x 256) does not match the original (or something - 128 x 128 so they've been installed to temptextures'. This is normal right? First time I've seen that error even after installing and uninstalling it a few times now.

Bear with me because I'm still not getting this. I see where 'file by file' mode is checked. I do that, and it installs each .vs tree file separately. Ok, but it doesn't show each of the files going into the directories, just shows them as 'green' when they're installed. So now do I just go into explorer (the temptextures directory) and delete the R_FOR_T.tga file from there? Does this mean it will default back to the old file, or I simply won't have any tree bases?