Aluminum Donkey

Thanks for the input everyone! Just for laughs I wiped both drives clean and put Windows 10 Home on the NVMe drive, along with the paging file. DCS is now on my SATA3 drive. For the life of me, I can't really tell the difference! Windows seems to boot a little faster. DCS loading times are pretty much the same as they always were. The biggest difference is that when re-loading a mission I've already flown, the loading time is reduced to dang near zilch! Other than that, it doesn't seem to matter that much, so I guess I'll leave Windows, the pagefile.sys, my various boot-time stuff and a couple games on the NVMe drive, and use SATA for DCS. It doesn't matter much, but Windows seems happier (slightly faster) on the NVMe. I don't do heavy media production on my rig, so I guess the NVMe drive just isn't that big of a deal. When I need a new SSD I'll probably just get a big, dumb, cheap SATA3 one. Thanks all, AD

I started reading your post and thought, "I wonder if he got the Hornet?" Glad you like it, the Hornet is one of the best modules in DCS simply because it's good for both roles and it's very well-rounded (although it's still incomplete, but they're working on it.) Anyway, since you're digging the F/A-18C, if you're wondering what module to get next, I can heartily recommend the A-10C II. Don't get the original A-10C module, make sure it's the II version. It's pretty kickass as well Peace and happy warfare AD

LucShep, thanks so much man, I'm starting to think I should just leave it alone and get a bigger SATA3 SSD for games and whatnot. Maybe getting the NVMe drive only for DCS was a good idea after all. AD

Thanks Qiou87, I'm still considering it because it seems to me that having Windows 10 (and the paging file) on the fastest drive is a great idea. My loading times in DCS (on the NVMe drive) are very good, my only concern is if the slower SATA3 drive will give noticeable stutter when actually flying the missions. I'm always hearing that SATA vs. NVMe makes little difference for gaming, and that the best use of the fast NVMe drive is for a quick boot, snappy response and ultra-fast paging file access in the OS, but not for games. Also, I'm running out of space for more DCS stuff on the 250 GB NVMe drive, and a new SATA drive is cheaper anyway. Gonna hafta think about this a bit

Greetings everyone, I have two SSDs, one is an NVMe (Samsung 960 EVO 250 GB) and the other is a SATA3 drive (Kingston V300 240GB.) I currently have Windows 10 on the SATA drive, and DCS on the NVMe drive (only thing on that drive.) Question is, would I be better off using the uber-fast NVMe drive for Windows and the SATA one for DCS, especially with the Windows paging file on the NVMe drive? Would I notice any improvement in how things run, or am I better off having DCS on the fast NVMe drive? Reason I'm wondering is that people say there's no improvement in gaming with an NVMe drive. I bought it for DCS to get around texture loading stutters, but everyone says it makes no difference. So, I'm considering putting Windows on it instead. What do you all think, is it worth the time and effort? Thanks so much! AD

Nvidia antialiasing settings, all of them, don't do jack in DCS World. It doesn't matter what you set them to in NVCP. Something to do with DCS World's method of deferred shading. The AA settings in DCS itself are all you have to go with, and that's it. The only exception is Nvidia DSR, which after flying for a while, causes crashing. AD

Never been a problem for me, I have a 2-stage trigger. Pulling to the first click fires the slug guns only, pulling all the way fires the guns and cannon together. AD

It's called DSR, or Dynamic Super Resolution. It looks really good, gives great framerates compared to other AA methods, uses an enormous amount of VRAM, and causes crashing. I find the built-in MSAA has gotten better in DCS, I can run 4x MSAA on my old 1080 Ti and FPS hardly drops down to the low 40s. AD

It's only a soul, you get it for free when you're born. It isn't useful for much so why not?

You should try flying in a real aircraft! AD

Try it and see! Pretty much what AnimalMother711 said. It's mostly for taking cool screenshots and serves little to no purpose in the actual game. AD

Speedy4GT, Looking good man! I bet that new 5600X processor kicks ass. Make sure you use FAST memory with it to get the very best performance out of it. The newest AMD processors need fast memory to run at their best performance--more than 3000 MHz memory is needed, I think 3200 to 3600+ is recommended. If your RAM has an XMP profile (high speed) make sure you enable it in BIOS so that CPU will really rip! The limiting factor here is your graphics card, which is woefully inadequate for DCS. I'd recommend keeping an eye out for a used GTX 1080 Ti (not the regular 1080, but the Ti version, 11 GB) which is an older card, but is still a beast, and DCS works well with it. Alternatively, hang in there and get either an RTX 3080, or an AMD 6800 XT when they become available. They won't be cheap, but at the same time, you won't be disappointed. Stay away from intermediate cards like RTX 20x0 series. They cost too much and don't deliver the performance for the buck. Save your cash and hang in there for the *really* good stuff to become available. AD

Your computer specs look pretty good! You forgot to tell us about your monitor, though. Does it have Freesync? It allows your monitor's refresh rate (screen update rate) to exactly match your graphics card's render rate (FPS). That way, the monitor refreshes its image on-screen with every frame produced by the GPU, instead of the two being independent. It eliminates a huge amount of stuttering and give much more fluid motion. Make sure it's enabled! Don't confuse Freesync with VSync. They're two entirely different features, and both should be enabled together for best results. VSync just prevents your GPU from producing more FPS than your monitor can display--Freesync (adaptive refresh) makes sure that your monitor updates the image exactly when your GPU tells it to--with each new frame produced. We also need to know the resolution of your monitor to recommend any settings. You'll do well to add a "signature" to your profile that describes every detail of your system, so that way we can always help you out without having to bog you down with questions Oh yeah--16 GB RAM is pretty good for most stuff. Since you have an 8 GB graphics card, you might want to go up to 32 GB of RAM in the future. Make sure it's fast memory, because the AMD Ryzen processors perform better with it. So, well over 3000 MHz memory is good. Finally, I find I get more consistent performance when disabling the Shader Cache in the graphics driver (control panel.) It takes longer to load missions, but once they're running, there's less stuttering when flying around. Peace and happy warfare! AD

That sounds like something the Russians would do deliberately, rather than a quality control issue. Westerners can say what they want about the Russkis--but they aren't stupid! AD

Actually I've great luck with the latest Studio Driver, 460.89. It's more stable and allows me to run my 1080 Ti full-tilt instead of downclocking, and it doesn't seem to crash anymore. Of course, only time will tell, but it seems pretty stable and has really good performance. Guess I'll find out eventually. AD

You'd probably like the Hornet. It's a very good A2A platform and very good for A2G as well. It's not the very best at either--but very good at both, which is why they built it The F-16 module is still very unfinished. The Hornet has more 'goodies' functioning. AD

Update--I'm back to getting yellow flashes with WW2 fighters. AD

Hi guys, just thought I'd share this since it happens from time to time. If you're using a Freesync monitor (like me) and experience sudden framerate drops combined with jittery/stuttery movement, remember to use CRU (Custom Resolution Utility) to lower your minimum Freesync range. Since Nvidia has supported Freesync for quite a while now, lots of people are using Freesync monitors with Nvidia cards--but, it's important to keep in mind that Freesync, by default, works from 48 Hz up to your monitor's maximum refresh rate (75 Hz for me, HP Omen 32".) So, use CRU to reduce your monitor's minimum Freesync/G-Sync range to 25 Hz or so, so that way, when DCS bogs your system hard and the framerate drops below 48 FPS, your monitor doesn't switch out of Freesync range and into "generic" Vsync, which will cause framerates to crash and lots of stuttering. I'm having good luck using the current Nvidia Studio Ready driver (460.89) with my Freesync monitor--but, only after editing/lowering the minimum Freesync rate to 25 Hz from the default 48 Hz, which was set when I installed the driver. Once you've done that everything runs nice and sweet Peace and happy warfare AD

Without too much jibba-jabba, YES, it's entirely normal for DCS to eat 16GB of RAM. Even if you have a graphics card with more than 8 GB of VRAM. Because of that, lots of people are now building their rigs with 32 GB of RAM. Try the Syria or Channel maps now that they're free to try. They're unreal--and will eat memory for breakfast, lunch and dinner. 11 GB on the graphics card is showing its limits (1080 Ti here), and it's only a matter of time before you need 64 GB on the board and a 16+ GB graphics card to play flight sims. Which, if you ask me, is actually kinda cool AD

Wow, looks like I created a monster when starting this thread Anyway, I'd prefer a complete module at release with fully-developed flight model, ONE decent skin, and a couple types of fully-developed air-to-air missiles, and a couple types of fully-developed A2G weapons with properly-working targeting system (if applicable.) Everything else can come after. Obviously if they're modelling an A2A-only version of the Typhoon then A2G systems need not apply. Just my own preference, instead of releasing a huge, half-baked pile of stuff that will never get finished. AD

Ok, I just updated to the latest Nvidia Studio-Ready driver, version 460.89, and deleted my fxo and metashaders2 folders. Now I get white and black flashes instead of yellow ones. Still have some experimenting to do... I've only flown the WW2 fighters on the Caucasus map and not Normandy yet. AD

It's frustrating because I like to use the HUD diamond to 'steer' the TGP toward a target on the ground, then use the cockpit display to fine-tune my aim before chucking something at it. I figure that's how it's supposed to be done anyway, but it's almost impossible with the current setup. It's much too inaccurate for that, I have no idea what I'm looking at on the TGP display when I plunk the HUD diamond on a ground target. It's way off. AD

Yeah, but you can watch kickass live shows on various video hosting websites, I'd rather not see them in my flight sim

That's good to hear, I will try playing with NVCP settings and the like to see if anything helps or gives any insight. BTW I'm not trying to rant. OK, I'm ranting. But, we love our sim and spend a small fortune on it, and this has been around for a while. You could just re-write the whole graphics engine to use Vulkan API, that might fix it AD I like big WW2 furballs with 32 planes in the air buzzing around like a swarm of hornets I'm surprised at how good the performance is overall, although there's a little stuttering that's tough to iron out. The flashing is like a light show at a rock concert. AD