Hadwell

nope you can't run DCS maxed out with constant 60 fps, not with full anti-aliasing and resolutions above 1080p, need a 15GHz CPU and a 4ghz GPU with 32GB of vram... though with a min of like 20 fps and a max of like 250 fps you can...

frames per second wise, The 1060 is roughly a 970 or RX480, which are all roughly an overclocked 780ti, the 1070 is roughly a 980ti. the 1080 and titan X pascal are the only cards that have no comparison... so, any of those cards make the 660 look like an ancient mayan artifact, and from that point of view, they're all good.

GTX1060

it's because if you put like 8 smoke pods on, you can cycle wich ones go on and off by hitting the button over and over till they're all on, or 2 or 3 or 5 or whatever are on, so if you only put 2 on, it still acts like you have 8, so you need to keep hitting the button

27" 2560x1440 144hz Gsync Asus

ok, well a bus can be held back by traffic, a train might have to slow for some reason too, maybe to heavily loaded and can't make it up a hill... breakdowns occur... forces beyond human control... just realizing eventually you will get to your destination and relaxing is better than getting impatient, throwing a tantrum and stressing out when you get held up... at least in my opinion...

it's kinda like waiting for a bus or a train... there may be a timetable, but the bus gets there when it gets there, and knowing what time it should be there won't make it get there any faster...

It will run good, but a K part overclocks much better, will last you longer.

It will work, if you can afford a 6600k thatd be better, but that build is good for less than 1k

I'll rephraise, the 2600k at 4.6 GHz is the same speed as a 6700k at 3.2 GHz. 2600k at 5ghz is the same speed as a 6700k at 3.6 ghz... Anyway the 2600k compared to the 6700k is today like what the amd FX chips were when the 2600k came out IPC wize

not really... the 2600K is like... 30% slower than a 6700K at the same MHz, that's not enough of an increase to justify an upgrade in my opinion...

well it depends on what resolution you play at, and DCS has too few LODs imho, but at 1440p, it looks right.

Well here's the other thing... people expect to be able to make out a number on the side of a plane at 10+ KM away, when in reality, at most it would be maybe 1KM... to make out a human sized object, the average person can see out to about 3-4km so DCS as it is, isn't too unrealistic... it's just that people are so used to shooting down planes with IFF and BVR, where you don't actually have to see what you're shooting at to know its an enemy in DCS, that they forget about the fact that human eyes just aren't THAT good... and yeah, monitor resolution does matter

SMT is what AMD uses because intel has ™'d the term hyper-threading.... single threaded performance > multi-threaded performance, for gaming... but yeah, if you're comparing a current AMD cpu with zen, it's a massive increase in IPC, and hopefully forces intel to actually release a CPU that's significantly faster than my 2600K... the reason I haven't upgraded yet.... I want a CPU significantly faster than the 6900K, in single-threaded, single core performance.

the FOV limit is how much you can zoom out, but you can still zoom in so it's not fisheyed...

The reason for integrity checks is for if you play multiplayer, so you can't use any custom anything that other people can't just set in the options menu... it's about everyones client and experience being relatively equal. if you're using non-standard monitor configurations, that's why. unfortunate fact of life, in order for everyone to be as equal as possible (still not equal at all, but as much as anyone can hope for), people can't always just do what they want. but you can still play single-player, because then it's not people, it's just person. also making the default FOV any wider would fish-eye on the normal monitor configuration that most people use.

The thing with DDR3 and PCIe 2.0 is... there aren't any GPUs that require the bandwidth of PCIe 3.0, so it only really makes a difference if you're running 3 or more GPUs... and although DDR4 is faster, unless you're running synthetic benchmarks, or on-board video that uses system ram for memory, faster DDR3 memory isn't noticeably slower... as i said before, anything anyone can say about currently non-existant retail hardware is subjective opinion. hard to find facts on hardware that doesn't yet exist. AMD hasn't released any info about publicly available hardware, nor have they compared their new hardware to any intel or AMD cpu part number.... they've only said part A is some random percent as fast as part B, without naming either part... nowhere does it say a fully utilized 6900K, just a fixed frequency 3GHz broadwell-E, and they happened to use a 6900K for that fixed frequency... who here runs their intel sandy or later CPU at 3GHz? also lets not forget the 5960X is faster than the 6900K the 6000 series actually has slighly less IPC than even the 4000 series... so yeah... wait till a part you can stick in your computer at home comes out, and you can compare a fully overclocked AMD part to a fully overclocked intel part with an actual model number for each of them... that's my objective opinion.... and yeah I really liked the nForce2 MCP-T chipset with my athalonXP 3200+, back when AMD was king...

The mig-15s top speed is 1050 kph IAS, not because the plane couldn't go faster with hydrolically assisted ailerons and elevators... over 900kph, the pilot in real life wouldn't have the muscle strength to keep the plane from going inverted and nosediving into the ground... just have the airbrakes mapped to an easy to reach button, and never let your speed over 1050... at 900kph you'll notice the controls start to lock up, but you can still keep it in control. it's an attempt at simulating the fact that the mig-15 is totally human controlled, no fly by wire, no hydrolics, just muscle, levers, linkages and cables... https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/planes/mig15bis/?PAGEN_1=3

I don't think anyone's going to be able to say anything but subjective rumors until some retail CPUs get in reviewers and overclockers hands... as far as im concerned, AMD makes middle (RX480 = GTX1060/970) of the line parts for slightly cheaper than competitors, until they prove otherwise, with parts I can build a computer around today, that's what they do... fans of any hardware need to stay objective, and instead, disregarding who makes it, look at what something tangible is and how it compares to other tangible things...

Need another gunship like the KA-50... maybe a KA-52, hind, cobra, apache, A129, comanche, eurocopter tiger... the huey, MI-8 and gazelle are not really that great as attack/support platforms...

but he was saying he can have a 4 cylender engine produce the same power as an 8 cylender engine.... you can't make a GPU with half the amount of transistors produce the same amount of polygons per second as a Gpu with twice as many transistors in the same game... the two things just aren't the same... and it makes no sense at all... or maybe you can find any kind of CPU or GPU with half the transistor count that runs as fast as a CPU or GPU with twice as many transistors... and sure you can add a super/turbocharger, a phsyical piece of gear to a engine to make it produce more power, you can change its timings, or edit its ECM can you bolt on a piece of gear (other than a heatsink) to a GPU to make it run faster? and the closest thing to editing its ECM is something like MSI afterburner or EVGA percision X... As an example, the GTX1080 has 7.2 billion transistors, and the GPU with half the amount of transistors is the GTX680(roughly) 3.5 billion.... show me how to make a 680 have the same performance as a 1080? how about half the performance?

I'm not talking about those people, I'm talking about the people who try to do both... VR isn't there yet...

the problem with VR is, when you're playing against other people that actually can see stuff on a 2D monitor, while you're sitting there with all this immersion, but blind as a bat... getting teamkills just because you want to use a VR headset is as unacceptable as getting teamkills because you don't want to learn how to IFF, or don't have the patience to get close enough to ID, or just don't care who or what you're shooting at, just wanna see explosions... a flat panel monitor lets you actually see whats outside the cockpit other than ground and sky... and no ammount of immersion makes up for being as blind as this guy [ame] [/ame]

I use a GTX780 and have not noticed any performance issues, but then it's hard to tell in DCS, since the min and max FPS for me is like 50 min, 225 max....

If you ever decide to use a TV as a computer monitor, make sure you look at input lag, the time it takes for the picture to get from the videocard, to when the frame finally gets displayed on the screen... monitors are designed to minimize this, TVs aren't... even if you say "I don't notice any input lag" try a 144hz G-sync monitor, then try a TV, THEN you can tell me you don't notice any lag... seriously, g-sync/freesync and 144hz will change your life. a big super high res, slow monitor, with lots of lag, ghosting, and image tearing isn't as good as a smaller high res screen with a high refresh rate, minimal latency, no image tearing, no blur, and minimal ghosting...