OG84

... but it could also be a cpu bottleneck. i think 30% is the overall across all cores. could be that one certain thread is hitting the limit.

No guys, that's how VR works. Your 1080ti/7700k cannot keep up with the 120Hz (fps). The VR driver then falls back to 60fps and duplicates the frames to send 120 to the headset. Because of that your gpu/cpu has a lot of power left. In VR you cannot have any FPS number between 0 and 120. You can only have multiples of the Headset's Hz. Try a lower Hz setting and see if that improves your FPS. You have to find the sweetspot.

Integrated benchmark would be really helpful to filter out so much noise over in the performance subforums. output of the benchmark could be a little text snippet with fps, frametime etc, which we can then post in the forum. On the other hand this would make possible performance regressions more obvious when updates come out. Not sure if that is a desired thing as a company.

Second attempt: Takeoff - 08:00:10 Max ALT - 57,490 Landing - 08:14:08 Total flight time - 13:58 beta :smilewink: trk exceeds 5mb for attachment. But I uploaded it somewhere else: https://easyupload.io/syzuxy

I have made another discovery. Created a new mission with just the F16 in parking position with engines running. I get about 90 FPS. Then I override gear handle and raise it while on the ground. Frames drop to 9 FPS GPU workload drops significantly but CPU workload stays the same on each core (around 20%) So maybe also some physics, damage model bottleneck. Thats with a valve index, 2080ti, 7700k 5ghz

+1

I have to say dcs is a benchmark in flight sims. I don't have any problems whatsoever with patch 2.5.6. (but it's a clean non-modded install due to the rollback stuff etc.). But it is looking phenomenal in VR (vive index). So many new things i didn't notice before or at least they weren't looking as good as far as i remember. Especially the lighting in f16 and 18. Really really kudos to the devs. It's going in the right direction. Also the new colored f16 mfds are nice!

I don't see why releasing the sdk would undermine the business model. I mean lastly integrating the modules or mods should be up to ED, to have final QA, like apple for the app store. But in the end i think releasing the sdk (or whatever is needed to create new modules) would lead to more modules (also high quality stuff). I mean if you first need to sign contracts or found a company prior to creating stuff and see how the development process is like, then we'll maybe miss out on a lot of talented guys who don't get started with content creation in the first place.

1GB for me on steam.

:thumbup:

are you sure that A5 in the video is a historical accurate restauration?

This has been solved. take a look in the bugs section. it is not a bug, but rather an operating error from pilot :)

hhm i mean index has much higher resolution, so 1million pixels more for your gpu. I have a vive pro (same resolution as index), and get 45+ fps with my 2080ti. So 30fps with lowest settings sounds a bit low for your 2080ti). for 1080ti it sounds reasonable. try turning motion smoothing off.

i wouldn't mind if we had a monthly subscription model, if it speeds up development. I mean why paying for netflix and not for dcs, as it is equally entertaining :) Core development is much more expensive, so fine for me. But would be sad to loose pilots due to the monthly fee. So they have to find a model which makes most of us happy.

Fun fact, i found an official doc from the manufacturer where it says: "Starting from july '44 all planes of the A8 series will be set up with an increased emergency power setting. 1.42 ata -> 1.58 ata below 3.3km 1.42 ata -> 1.65 ata above This should give us an extra 25km/h when fighting the Mustang :)

yep guys that's it. I just tested this on burning skies, and the undercarriage is working fine as long as you follow the above steps.

and regarding the undercarriage, it has to be completely in before 280km/h and only after the gear is in, flaps should be retracted. and brakes have to be gently applied before raising the gear. (just reading through some official manuals for the A1 :) 1. brakes 2. gear 10sec. 3. flaps 14 sec. i will try that now...

the manual says: "Give an interval of at least 3 seconds before flipping the second switch after you flip the first. The aircraft's system is capable of recharging only four weapons simultaneously." and "Before re-enabling the failed system, you must wait a few seconds to cool the elements of the circuit breaker." (haven't read it either :) So then it probably is not a bug. But haven't found anything regarding the undercarriage. We need to ask a real FW190 pilot how it was behaving back then...

If you have a mainboard with M.2 slots, then you can get a M.2 SSD. That will increase read speed by factor 7 compared to "old" ssd drives and 70 times faster than your hdd. They are almost the size of an usb stick and you just plug them directly into the mainboard. E.g. samsung 970 evo plus 500GB is 89coins where i live. Then you get 3.5GB per sec readspeed. So if there are no other limiting factors loading a mission should take about 10 seconds. Gesendet von meinem SM-G960F mit Tapatalk

If i'm not mistaken, then making the lower bar smaller won't be of any benefit, because you would also have to lower the hood, and then then modeling workaround fun would start... Gesendet von meinem SM-G960F mit Tapatalk

Our local Anton 8 also has white glass. more pictures

If they would Limit VR Position, then we (VR users) would most likely throw up on the desk. The bounds are hit pretty easily, especially in ww2 fighters. So if the view would get stuck, even just for a short time, that is not a very pleasant feeling. You got the resolution advantage, we the movement [emoji14] Gesendet von meinem SM-G960F mit Tapatalk

Maybe you could go for a 28" 4k. They are bit more expensive (200+) but it makes a difference, if your GPU can handle DCS in 4k. Imo 28" is still ok for regular office stuff, size wise.

i guess because non-VR users don't have any performance issues. And they are the vast majority :)

I guess "Vulkan API" is some kind of implementation detail which should be up to the developers. Because a badly implemented Vulkan Engine is not any better than an optimized DirectX one. So let's call it "Improved VR performance".