hughlb

I've been tooling around in 1.5 Beta for the first time, having spent this year in 2.0 Alpha. I've configured my setting to the same as the Alpha, but I'm getting framerate drops from 60+ to 30-45 when low down near villages. Something's amiss, as even over Vegas in 2.0 I'm getting pretty stable 55-60+fps. I've heard there is a tree shadow mod for 1.5, could this help? Or is the T3 map technology currently being used simply struggling - should I hold off trying to solve it until the map is re-released with the Nevada tech? Sorry, I'm just trying to get my head around what might be causing the slow down.

Thank you Chizh and the ED team! The L-39 is a superb module, I'm very pleased it too was one of the winners :)

Latest build. Banner makes sense now. :music_whistling:

Thanks for your hard work Nick and team :thumbup:

The framerate tanking may have more to do with the API rather than hardware specifically. Plenty of reports of GPU underutilisation. NTTR is highly intensive around Vegas, but I dont have a lot of complaints when taking into account the number of assets on screen, and shadows etc. Biggest issue is stuttering with EDGE, thats been my experience at least.

In order of feverish excitement F/A-18c Tomcat A/B Attack Helicopter (Apache?) Viggen F-5 Spitfire Eurofighter

I wouldn't be too worried about the radio silence. I get the distinct impression that the Viggen was always intended to just be 'dropped' on the community when it was essentially complete. I'm not sure why LNS took this approach with this module, but boy would it have been exciting if it came out of nowhere! The leak kind of changed everything, we suddenly started expecting updates because we knew it existed, and now we're getting concerned if we don't hear anything. I think LNS are sticking to their guns; getting it near perfect before revealing. Not dissimilar to Belsimtek with the F-5

Afghanistan would be timely and appropriate, given some of the modules we have to play with. It would suit a future Apache module, if such a thing were to exist. As well as the F-18 and F-14 modules. Iraq is another obvious choice, and would make excellent F-117 missions ;) The only thing is, with Nevada and Hormuz, we have a healthy amount of arid environments to play with - it might be nice to see something different - Bosnia and Herzegovina? I guess that's very similar to the Caucasus in geography and environment.

The Nevada map is a real step forward in flight sim environments. I thought I'd take a few shots, map only, no aircraft, to honour the guys that worked so hard on it. :thumbup:

Brilliant, thanks QuiGon and RaXha for your feedback. It's certainly one of the more unusual and interesting fast jets.

Excellent! I was hoping it was in the AS role. Is it optimised for low-level flight? I understand the ground radar would be of use, but was the airframe/engine also designed for a higher performance at low altitude, like the Tornado?

Ah I see. So it was a compromised but necessary choice. What advantages does it have, generally, as an attack aircraft in a mid-90's battlespace?

I guessed it might be. Why did the AJS upgrade take place in light of superior aircraft like the Hornet? Was it a means of keeping the fleet going in the absence of a replacement airframe (Gripen)?

How does the AJS-37 stack up against the F/A-18C in the attack role? Both attack aircraft, both 1990's variants, but their initial conception is at least a decade apart.

According to the latest updates on the The Battle Simulator, it seems like the AH-64 is already in development. It may never come to DCS, but I'd be choosing the AH-64 from the list, as it seems a more realistic option than the others, at this point in time. http://www.thebattlesim.com/new/

I wouldn't be stressing too much about the Viggen, we're all familiar with Cobra's comments in the mini-update from a month ago, which detailed what was happening with the Viggen over the next few weeks. We have only just exited May, but you can guess from that statement that the team is entering a sort of 'final push' to get the module completed. Yes a month-long crunch could turn into a three-month long crunch, but there are a lot of positives to be taken away from that statement. It perhaps suggests the aircraft is approaching release soon enough. The other thing to consider relates to VEAO developer Ells228's comment from yesterday. Module releases, as we might expect, need to fit into a release schedule with other developers. Leatherneck may do it their own way, but if ED's site banner is anything to go by, we are squarely in F-5 release territory at the moment.

There are lots of factors in answering your question, I've attached an image that appeared in another thread. I don't know the original source, or how accurate the information is, but it might give you some idea about the relative turn performance of some third and fourth generation fighter aircraft. With the F-5, fundamentally, it lacks the thrust of the F-14, and even more so, the F-15, so don't expect to out-climb those aircraft. It's noted for its turn performance and agility, being such a light airframe, and it's really hard to spot, being so small. Subjectively, it seems to retain energy pretty well, like an F-16 (but obviously not THAT well!) [ATTACH]141886[/ATTACH]

"Talk to me, moose"

Given that the 1070 appears to beat the 980 Ti in benchmarks, and is two tiers below (Ti>80>70), then I think the 1070 offers the better price/performance/generation choice. As stock remains and demand for the 980 Ti goes down, yes I'd expect reductions, but I never recall the Ti cards dropping all that much. Also, those two extra gigs of video memory on the 1070 is appealing.

So how will the RX480 stack up against the 1070? For DCS?

It's just the nature of being on the cusp of a generation change from 9-series to 10-series. The 980 Ti is a super high end model in the 9-series, and is therefore in a high price bracket. The 1070 should be a similar price to the 970, the 1080/980 etc. When a 1080 Ti is released, it will also be up around $700. So all that considered, this is why you don't buy a 980 Ti at this priec when the 1070/80 is about to be released. Prices may drop as the 10-series becomes more accessible.

Memory is something I don't fully understand, and perhaps the community can shed some light. I have the G.SKILL TridentX Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR3 1600 7-8-8-24 When I purchased it last year, it seemed like the timing (latency?) was low, and I thought this was a good thing. According to CPU-Z, my DRAM frequency is also low - 666mhz, but this is apparently not such a good thing. The 2016 performance benchmark thread shows the clock speed or RAM is quite important. So this all raises questions: Is it worth getting faster DDR3 RAM - eg. 3200? Is there a difference between DDR3 and DDR4 in DCS? (My motherboard only supports DDR3) Could RAM contribute to stuttering? I appreciate that 16GB is better than 8GB for DCS, but everything else starts to get confusing.

http://www.pcgamer.com/geforce-gtx-1070-performance-preview/?utm_content=bufferb75bb&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=buffer_pcgamer I realise there's a thread related to the 1080, however, much was the case with the 970 (memory allocation aside), the 1070 may very well be the more interesting of the new cards, when price-point is considered. The aggregate benchmark above doesn't necessarily translate to comparable DCS performance, but it suggests a substantial improvement over the card it is directly replacing. In fact, I'm curious to hear what 970 users think about the 1080p performance increase in this benchmark - didn't expect the gains to be so great at 1080p. Those using a single 970 might get something out of upgrading to a 1070, in EDGE. Having said that, most 970 owners are running high+ graphics settings in-game, and perhaps are more hampered by CPU performance. Anyway, I was pleasantly surprised by the relatively small performance contrast between the 1080 and 1070, (in this early benchmark at least) and thought it was worth a discussion. How does this all stack up with ATI's 2016 plans?