Mr_sukebe

Not easy. I'm hoping that maybe we can bury that into here: Instead of trying to play guesswork when someone opens a new thread to ask what has already been asked many times before, that we can direct them to a single post that provides key guidance, as against having to repeat the same process of Q&A.

Sorry, I don’t know enough about data exports to understand how you’d match up their precise timings with your render time info. Regardless of that, it was very easy to see that maxing out any of those resources results in a significant degrade to fps. The interesting bit is how to turn this understanding into a rough guideline on recommended settings for people with different rigs.

I thought that all 3080s had 10GB of VRAM?

Some interesting results. One thought about the stats is that you’ve not included GPU and CPU usage. Whilst reviewing the performance over Germany what I’ve found is that: - RAM usage is high, easily over 40GB - GPU usage with similar settings to yours have been around 70-80% with 72fps most of the time - VRAM seems to be mostly aircraft dependent. The Apache was pushing nearly 12GB, the FC3 Mig29 just 5GB. That’s promising as your testing of preload radius implies that maxing it out will only increase it by 1GB, which I have spare, and may have marginal gains elsewhere - the killer has been CPU usage. I tried adding SAM sites at 31 of the idendified sites and that resulted in at least one CPU core being maxed out. That was enough to drop my fps down to the mid 30s. I removed probably 30% of the SAM units such that the CPU was not completely maxed out and sure enough, back to 72fps, lovely and smooth. My learning point was that if I’m targeting 72fps, ensure that I’m not fully maxing out any of the CPU cores, the GPU, VRAM or RAM. Maxing out any of them results in a bottleneck.

One point I read recently is that the DCS warbird AI will happily use WEP (or the German equivalent) and has fewer restrictions than a DCS player. The suggested workaround was to use Restrict Afterburner as a setting in the mission editor, which apparently prevents this.

All fair comments guys. I was just guessing that the A10c with dumb weapons would be closer (from a flight perspective) to a full fidelity A10A than the FC3 version that we have.

From a quick check, both the A10A and A10C can carry the AGM-65D. Doesn't that mean that the methodology used in the A10C will be the full fidelity version?

I went with the assumption that the military bases used TACANs for NATO and RSBNs for Soviet.

Did you have any water left? The Harrier starts by default with 500lbs. If you've used it already, then you're out of luck. There's a counter in the display in the top right of your front panel.

Can’t you just fly the C without the JCHMS, targeting pods and guided weapons? IIRC the airframe and engines weren’t upgraded.

Google maps? Maybe they’ve got lost after using the Doppler navigation.

On their mobile phones?

Just to clarify, by longer times, I wasn't referring to DCS generally, rather the load time for the Germany map when compared to most of the other maps.

I've just done some more testing. With SAMs at 31 of the identified sites and additional smaller units at some of the airfields (e.g. Sa6s) and the mission is basically unplayable on my PC. The GPU is fine. The CPU is simply flattened. I've just tried running the same mission on a dedicated server and then logging in, it was no better. So I'm going to be sticking with the slimmed down version that I've uploaded earlier (v.3 and newer).

No, just longer than normal load times. Most probably due to the fact that it's loading more into RAM.

I can't comment about "all", but I found at least two Soviet tank grounds whilst trying to work out what was where. If you take a scan in this thread: That is really good thread collating locations for SAM sites. I've attached my current sandbox mission into there, within which I marked locations for 4 of the Soviet armoured groups, at least 2 of which appear to have tank training areas.

OK, I've tried to get all of the above into my sandbox mission (attached). That mission has: SAM sites, as above Additional local airfield SAMs 1985 period(ish) aircraft for both sides. They'll need to have newer weapons and things like JCHMS made unavailable I've tried correctly name at least the Soviet air groups based upon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Soviet_military_sites_in_Germany A NATO carrier group in the Baltics I've started adding location markers for known tank units from the Soviet side CSAR/CTLD It's far from finished or perfect, but might save someone a lot of time getting to this point. =========================== Update: The v.2 version of the mission was simply too complex, and really stuffed my frame rate. Not a GPU issue. It was my 7800x3d running out of steam. I've thinned out the number of SAM sites to avoid CPU bottlenecks and have made other enhancements. See later in this thread for new versions.

One thought, the SA5s have massive engagement ranges. Plonking them in as is may well result in them shooting at western aircraft over west Germany. Personally I've set them to late activation, and have set them to only wake up if a western coalition aircraft goes into the eastern zone.

Great thread idea, my thanks. The location of the Wittstock is UV20 Other locations that I've found are: PC93 - SA3? PC93 - SA3? Unfortunately I don't know what would really be sited there, just guestimating. The SA5 sites are clearly different in their design.

DCS now provides the info on not just VRAM reserved, but also VRAM in use. If you open the FPS counter in DCS, it's visible in the more detailed box. To date, I've yet to see more than 12GB of VRAM in use.

No issues yesterday, 72fps most of the time in the F1 in VR. That was with a Quest Pro, quad views. 7800x3d, 5080 and 64GB of ram. Task manager was suggesting the following usage (note that this includes me also running Simshaker and Roon audio player): - 48GB of RAM - GPU around 70% - CPU use was primarily across 4 cores (all 8 in use), with those 4 cores around 80%, so not much headroom left in that area DCS was saying under 10GB of VRAM used Overall, didn’t seem much different to most other newish maps.

Please take a scan here:

Orbx have stated that their planned introduction of the new airfields didn't make it into the update. It happens.

That's a lovely piece of understatement.

This week I've been working through all of my modules to sanity check, overhaul and enhance my keyboards for aircraft controls. Today was the i16, which meant taking it out for a flight. Wow, had forgotten how antiquated it felt, even when compared to other warbirds. I use a jetseat and FFB stick, and it was like cycling on a cobbled road. If I didn't know better, I'd also think that someone has overhauled the audio, as I'm sure the engine sounds even more nasal. Don't take any of the above as a criticism of the module, quite the contrary, it makes it amazingly immersive. Great fun!