boscoh

It really depends on what you're using it for. In single-threaded games at 1080p where you're not GPU bound, an OC'd 9700k/9900k has a small advantage (usually less than 10%) over the 3700x/3900x. At 4k, the processors perform very close most of the time because you become GPU bound. If you game at 4k (or possibly VR), you may not notice a difference between the two. The question at 4k is really longevity of the CPU and how long before you'll get to a GPU that needs a more powerful processor; will the Intel chip get you through one extra upgrade cycle? It's hard to say, as games may become more multi-threaded or more optimized for AMD over time - no one really knows the answer to that. Then it becomes a question of what else you do with your PC. If you run highly multi-threaded apps and creation software, it looks like the 3700x/3900x outperform Intel most of the time and sometimes by a large margin. I agree with the sentiment of most of the reviews I've read, on the whole the Ryzen 3000 series is a better all-around CPU, but in purely single-threaded applications the 9700k/9900k still have a small lead.

Just wanted to follow up on this. I've seen some comments from Wags and NineLine that you just have to leave it on align until it shows up. I know fully simulated INS and GPS are planned. Just wondering, is this a bug/not a bug/WIP? Thanks!

Ah, now we're getting to the reality of it. It all depends on what generations and what CPUs you compare, and what you consider to be a small difference. Price/performance is a big factor and the end decision is highly subjective based on what you're trying to accomplish. For the OP: with your new rig, you are GPU limited. 1080ti, 2070, or 2080/ti is what you should be running to take advantage of the rest of your rig for DCS. You didn't waste your money, you just bought a Porsche and put used minivan tires on it.

Not necessarily. "Instructions Per Clock" is a reference to how many instructions per clock cycle a processor executes. If, as a real world example, an i7 2600k and i7 6700k are clocked the same, the 6700k will perform better because Intel made IPC improvements between the generations. This should translate to better FPS in games compared on otherwise-identical systems and where the game is CPU-limited. Another example, AMD touts a 15% IPC increase for the new Ryzen 3k versus the Ryzen 2k. It's not always true that there is an IPC improvement between generations or versus competing CPU's, but you can't simply say 3.6ghz is always the same thing on every processor.

How does JSOW Auto Loft work? I played around with it tonight but could never get the weapon to release. What do the 45/30/15 sub-options do? Are these loft profiles in degrees that you must pull-up to in order to release the weapon?

That's the thing though. It never aligns until you do the workaround. The track doesn't show it, but I've sat for 10+ minutes without it aligning. I can do a complete reinstall and record a track that shows this, I just didn't think anyone would want to watch a 10+ minute track. Once you do the workaround, INS alignment is consistently achieved within about 90 seconds. Yes you do have to wait for some time after QUAL 0.5 OK, but it does work after the workaround. Are you saying that on a brand new install of OpenBeta, you're not able to reproduce the INS never aligning?

Are you talking about INS not aligning at all, until you perform the workaround? Or are you talking about it just not working before Mar 28 1994? I want to make sure the original reported issue isn't being muddled up with the 1994 finding.

The workaround doesn't work if the mission date is earlier than Mar 28 1994 so I would expect that.

It doesn't appear the server needs the workaround, just you. Try editing a mission per the steps then connect to your mp server and see if its fixed.

Have you tried the workaround? This might be a client-side fix, meaning it doesn't matter if the server has done it, it may only matter if you do it. Are you starting the game with no mods enabled?

That may very well be. I'd be interested to hear. I'm more hoping this helps the devs to find and fix the problem of INS never aligning since the workaround is at least related to it.

Thanks to this post I went and investigated further. I figured out how to semi-permanently resolve my INS and waypoint issues, as well as some additional info that may help tracking this down if it's reproducible. To resolve the issue (workaround): 1. Edit a mission where the INS does not work and waypoint distance is wrong. This mission should have a date that is relatively modern, the default ME date of June 1 2011 works fine. 2. Change the date of this mission to something earlier than 1994. I used 1988 when I initially fixed the issue. 3. Save. Fly. Verify the INS and waypoints are still broken. 4. Re-edit the mission, change the date to the current date. 5. Save. Fly. Verify the INS and waypoints work correctly. 6. Done. You should not have to modify any other missions, as long as the mission date is after March 28 1994 at 00:00:01. This works for both hot start and cold start missions. It is quicker to validate on a hot start. Note that currently the INS alignment takes some additional time after you get QUAL 0.5 OK. It seems variable but around 20-30sec additional before the map and position show up and you can move to NAV. (https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3943135#post3943135) I verified this issue and workaround on a clean build with no mods. More details: I narrowed down the magic date, for me it is 28 March 1994 at 00:00:00 time. A. Any mission date/time BEFORE this date, and INS and waypoints to not work properly. B. Any mission date/time AFTER this date, and INS and waypoints work fine. See the attached two tracks. INS -HOT START - 28MAR-94-00-00-00_not-working.trk - done at 28Mar 1994 with mission time set to 00:00:00, you can see INS is not working. INS -HOT START - 28MAR-94-00-00-01_working.trk - done at 28Mar 1994 with mission time set to 00:00:01, you can see INS works fine. Interestingly, if you start at 00:00:00, the problem does not resolve when the clock hits :01. You can very easily change the mission time in ME to before/after this date and see the problem clearly, which is what I did to capture these two tracks. I believe the above workaround should solve the issue completely, at least it did for me. However, if the mission date is 28 March 1994 @ 00:00:00 or earlier, INS will still not work. INS -HOT START - 28MAR-94-00-00-00_not-working.trk INS -HOT START - 28MAR-94-00-00-01_working.trk

Whether in CV or GND align modes, the actual alignment takes longer than once the system shows QUAL: 0.5 OK. I think (but can't confirm) that the expected behavior is for the moving map and position to show up once the system gets to this point. However the map and position show up between 20-45 seconds after getting to QUAL 0.5 OK. Until the map and position show up, your waypoint distances are incorrect. It seems like QUAL time just needs to be adjusted and is probably too fast. See attached track. QUAL happens at TIME: 25s; map and position show up at TIME: 54s. INS - qual time incorrect.trk

Thank you very much for this. Your suggestion fixed my problems. I'll update my bug report, hopefully this info leads to ED figuring this out quicker. Some additional info: I noticed my mission was already in year 2011. I edited it to 1988. Saved. Fly. It's still not working. Re-edited the mission, changed date to 2019. Saved. Fly. Fixed! Hot start is fixed right off. Cold start in the hornet takes +54 seconds after you get 0.5 OK before the coordinates update, map shows up, and waypoints have proper distances. At that point you can move to NAV. Interestingly, I haven't had to edit any other mission after doing this. Now all missions I have tried, even those with the default date of Jun 1 2011, work fine. I did some more narrowing down and it appears the magic date and time is 3/28/1994 at 00:00:00. Anything AFTER this date and time and INS works fine (once you fix it with the above steps). Anything before and including this time and it doesn't work. Yes, 3/28/94 at 00:00:00 doesn't work, but a mission time of 00:00:01 does work. If you start at 00:00:00 it does NOT start working once you hit 00:00:01. This was tested on PG and Caucasus, and the date/time is the same on both to trigger and fix the issue. In summary to fix the INS alignment, it appears you have to edit a single mission to have a start date pre-1994, save it. Fly. Re-edit to have a start date after Mar 28 1994 at 0:0:01, save. Fly. And your problem is fixed - as long as your mission doesn't have a start date before 3/28/94 0:0:01.

I have tried on Caucasus and PG.

None of those workarounds were successful for me, even after waiting for 10 minutes.

I posted tracks for these issues in a different thread: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=242579

There's two things going on here: Issue #1 - "INS - WAYPOINTS - HOT START.TRK" - the waypoint distance and altitude is incorrect. You can see it shows in thousands of miles away, and the altitude at 2000m. You can view in the mission editor and see the waypoint is very close and at ground level. This mission was created in this version of OB. I have also tested with missions from 2.4 to the same effect. Issue #2 - "INS - WAYPOINTS - COLD START.TRK" - Despite following checklist procedure for INS alignment, INS will align to 0.5 OK but never move past that. When you go into HSI > DATA > A/C, you'll see the INS has the correct info but for some reason your position on HSI while in alignment mode never updates from 0 degrees N/E. You also can never enable the moving map, probably because of this. It looks like actual INS works because your heading tape updates correctly with your aircraft. EDIT - added workaround - this worked for ME - if it doesn't work for you please let us know. Make sure you are working with a clean/repaired DCS and NO MODS running. To resolve the issue (workaround): 1. Edit a mission where the INS does not work and waypoint distance is wrong. This mission should have a date that is relatively modern, the default ME date of June 1 2011 works fine. 2. Change the date of this mission to something earlier than 1994. I used 1988 when I initially fixed the issue. 3. Save. Fly. Verify the INS and waypoints are still broken. 4. Re-edit the mission, change the date to the current date. 5. Save. Fly. Verify the INS and waypoints work correctly. 6. Done. You should not have to modify any other missions. However, any missions with a start date earlier than March 28 1994 at 00:00:01 will not have working INS. Further detail: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3943139&postcount=19 INS - WAYPOINTS - HOT START.trk INS - WAYPOINTS - COLD START.trk

Or software in general. Reference Microsoft Win10 updates the past 6+ months. I'm sure ED is doing the best they can with the resources they have.

T/O Trim (stab 12) for field takeoffs T/O Trim (stab 12) + trim stab to 16-18 depending on weight for carrier ops Flaps half FCS Reset then FCS Bit Test are part of startup procedure. I haven't noticed FCS Bit test having any impact on the game at all but do it anyways.

If cold start is what you guys want, just use JARs method as described (hot start from parking), and shutdown in the landing area using Win+End (auto shutdown), then have everyone start up together. We very rarely have mishaps doing this, and the mishaps are usually from guys parking too close and getting a lag warp into someone else's aircraft. With 12 aircraft you may need to send some folks to the bow. If you get too close to a cat you risk being spawned upon or delaying spawns. Hopefully will be better in the new carrier coming soon.

Same. Just use NAV.

Hopeful that at the very least we are able to IFF a contact in STT mode in next OB or hotfix. This is such a killer in a WVR fight. Can't wait for AZZEL!

General stability issues, but not this specific one. I5 4670K @ 3.4Ghz, 16GB RAM, SSD, 2080TI. Played for 3 hours tonight, and 4 crashes. No logs generated, just a close to desktop. Rarely have issues with other modules.

Try the F-14 Cat Launch training mission. It has wind, rough seas, and a pitching deck. It's much worse on this and downright difficult to taxi like it keeps getting stuck on the deck (versus the hornet which seemed to just not have any traction and slid all over the place). Even sitting at idle in these conditions, the plane will slowly move across the deck, not just side around in circles.