Boosterdog

Thanks Rusky. So , to be clear, If I were trying to measure it in Riva, I wouldnt see any difference in the amount of VRAM or RAM being used. I ask this because Im not. Syria eats 30GB of RAM even in a basic quick flight mission and maxes the VRAM unless the preload is set below 30000 regardless of symbolic links. Thats really quite depressing. A vitually Empty SP mission in Syra takes all the RAM I have. So as well as a £1500 GPU I also need another £240 of RAM to have anywhere approching headroom. I can see why flight simming is niche.

I agree in the main. I think my words were overly harsh and should have been more "not able at this point". If you have a finite resource you need to focus it where the overall difference matters. I get that. These boards are not jammed full of people screaming about performance loss so this particular issue must sit in line. However, that this issue has not been replicated within ED, I just find hard to understand (and yes this is based soley on the fact that Ive scored 3/3 in replication over 3 machines). It appears harder to replicate impalors results that it does the loss and, frankly I prefer DCS not look like Minecraft. The best shadows I can run with the minimal amount of jaggles are an essential for me and there is a bar within my settings, albeit not what I consider to be a very high one (2X MSAA, Default terrain shadows, Medium Shadows, Textures and view distance, High ground textures, Medium Water, no civilian traffic, Forest 85%, everything else off) that DCS should be (and was pre 2.7.7) acheiving and now isnt at 1080P on my rig. Immersion can be aheived without VR if the 2D scene is immersive enough. 2.7.7 fails massively in that respect for me for seemingly no graphical or technical gain and its not something I can redress without outlaying the best part of £1500 at this time (having already spent £800 going Ryzen). I will take BIGNEWY's advice. I will wait for MC and Vulkan as I have no choice.

If you dont mind using Moose and a little script (copy and paste mainly) the SAR helo is a decent way of freeing up the single landing decks as it just tracks the boat and stays out of the way. Once it runs low on gas, it lands, despawns and another takes over using (i think) the same unit with its settings as the first.

Bodes well for my 2 400GB installs! Thank for the reply. I have a stable and beta install so I can try one of each flavour and see I guess.

Hello Pravus, Thank you The video is pretty much a blur for me sadly. I take it you are using the sybolic link method of linking the terrains/Syria/Surface folder within the root to its namesake sitting outside of the Game's install drive? Ive followed this thread ....and the solution given by @RuskyV. Here through the files (the entire DCS root folder) are not moved between hard drives but to a symlink folder sitting on the same drive so Im curious to understand why and if this step is necessary. Now I could go and link the Syrian surface folder from the symlink set to my C drive but I dont even know if linking to link from a link is even a thing or if it would harm the performance with the additonal step. Additionally, what happens in an update? does new files find there wat to the symlink folder or do they end up in the original folder? Sorry for all the questions

@Limaro your perseverence is a credit to you. There was some mention of 2.7.7> locking out the the flat shadows remove mod from accesing the shaders. If something has changed there that affects the other shadows perhaps it would make sense. As I say , went home and got it its baseball bat. Either way, Ill enjoy what I can in DCS but no more investment in hardware or product at this time.

This is my go to as well. It appears to reduce the distracting internal reflections quite a lot for some reason. Well executed too.

...and thats how it starts. Flame war right there! Where is the data? And whats is based on? A King Penguin, a Northern Rockhopper, The African Penguin (I know, I didnt either)? And what about the different (ice) Blocks? If you can track down the NATOPS (Naval Air Training and Oh sooo cute Penguin Shenanigans) there is no reference to drag at all (surprising for a Naval publication I thought) . All it says is "he's a really cute fella but cant absorb a .50cal for sh..)

One patch cycle in every three.

I hadnt realised just how much an impact global cockpit lighting had. Its something I switched off after a few flights in the spitfire years ago and never thought to enable again. @1080P 2X MSAA 2.2 does tend to spring out the ailiasing a little more but spottng is easier that a lower gammas. 1.6 in 2.7 is definately too dark for me though. I swing between 1.9 and 2.2.

Endless debate about unrealistic flight models I suspect.....

...............and its not stopping the transmission - there is an action for that and it does stop the transmission. But when it starts again the signal comes from the original location. The only way around it seems (ME numpty) is to name each transmission uniquely. But even if you update once a minute thats 120 lines in the triggered actions every hour! I dont know about the more advanced functions like flag increase etc but it seems to me that once a signal not eminating from a unit is set--its set in space. Im sure its not beyond the wit of man to extend the transmit options to ships. Seems odd that it hasnt by this stage. Well it would be good for man overboard as it stands!

It seems the transmission remains wherever it first started. Ive tried using the old Tacan workaround with flags to activate and deactivate it but the the result is the same - signal remains static once activated. It also doesnt seem to update when reactivated presumably because there is no "stop transmission" command. Hope you have better luck Bailey

No worries - if you stuggle (I doubt you will) just PM me or quote me to let me know and Ill be happy to help.

its perfect but this workaround from Bailey may give you some ideas I havent tried it yet myself - i was looking for a similar solution. THe only bugbear in this is the presence of a helo on the ship already if its a single landing deck. The other thng that I think may work is using the SAR MOOSE script to have a helo track the boat and set the broadcast from the helo. I guess both may only work of the boat is able to accomodate a helo though. EDIT - tested with an AI UH60 taking off from the Ticonderoga then broadcasting on a 21.5 FM frequency (so R828 redfor homing radio). Then hopped into an MI8 and sucessfully tuned the 828/ARK UD into the signal to get a bearing and went to crash on the rear deck of the ship. Sadly I guess it means whatever ship you wanted to track would need either capability to lauch a helo or be in the company of such. The Seawise Giant Tanker can also operate as a host for this and the helo tracks the boat fine. If you sailed it the close company with other civilian craft the helo could also just land and continue to broadcast. And thanks - I think finding the boat in the murk and side slipping onto the Giant in high seas is now my new favorite Hip activity!

Being very unscientific, my view is that whatever DCS used to cain the CPU with has gone home and fetched its baseball bat. Everything takes just that little bit more. I dont think its settings, or a golden ratio. I cant spend any more time on it. Its something we cant effect in a GUI in any meaningful way and the CPU use is certainly different. I havent seen the matching effect remember. I still had the differential throughout. One that actually increased. Only ED knows what got changed under the hood and they dont seemed to be that bothered to find out. To be honest, I cant say I blame them. There are more people spouting off at Heatblur for missing a Viggen update and not painting a boat to their liking than there are complaining about performance loss. If you have to drop a plate now and then pick one with the least food on it.

My PC was changed - from an I5 6600K running meh Corsair 3000hz LPX 4X8GB to stupidly expensive 2X16GB Sammy B Die 3600 16 16 16 32 dual stack stuff all tied up to Ryzen's infinate whatnot - if it has an effect it, along with the undervolted 5600X,reduces the lows in heavy scenes but it doesnt alter the highs save for a few frames. That was last month's £800.

I dont think I need to fear capping my frames at 120 or even 60 for that matter! TBH, Im pretty dejected with the whole thing. There is a problem. 2.7 eats FPS like Elvis on a toilet but noone seems to care. Less so now - even the ED mods havent made an appearance this time around to grunt exasperatedly at us daring not to accept that this particular parrot has been snuffed out under a "reported" sign. I put aside £800 this month to go towards a new GPU at christmas - its now turned into a Deering Banjo. Next months will likely turn into another Tele (the number of telecasters you need is precisely one more telecaster than you have - fact). The Apache my missues was buying me as a birthday gift has turned into a snazzy strap and some strings. All decisions I may come to regret when Im asked to play "that Burt Reynolds song" for the nth time or when multicore hits but there's an increasng trend towards jam tomorrow at present which i frankly dont have the patience for or the faith in.

@impalor @Limaro difference remains for me with or with out the custom settings (changed the screen res to my native 1080P) and ran the straight free flight mission 2.7.6 Frames: 7559 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 125.983 - Min: 49 - Max: 169 2.7.8 Frames: 7003 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 116.717 - Min: 112 - Max: 120 The min FR differences can be accounted for having to alt tab in the old stable to get fraps to register the game screen There is less of a difference but equally less stain on the GPU which I could hear with the lower fan noise. I did observe odd behaviour with Fraps in that, without alt/Enter being used it would fixate on a figure and stick with it regrdless of what was going on. This produced very similar results if not altered but these where in the low 60s and not the higher frames seen elswhere so i duount its a factor in anyone elses figures. I then went and took the same settings into the Mi24 weapons range mission 2.7.6 Frames: 8091 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 134.850 - Min: 134 - Max: 136 2.7.8 Frames: 6119 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 101.983 - Min: 100 - Max: 103 Go figure.

As I say I do not know the VR software or how it works. From the FPS VR1.21 charts you linked I saw that Reprojection was noted at somewhere between 36% and 59% in the tests and so assumed that reprojection is a factor. Not sure what you mean by your config but, as Im not VR savvy, I dont know if what your are setting in one place is being overridden by another program (Steam VR?) There was also a figure in there of 45 (second line down) which appears to be a target FPS. Overall my limited knoweldge is my limiting factor here. The differening lengths of the runs from build to build also add to my confusion. Whithout any description of methodology its all assumtion on my part. At the end of the day, you have nothing to prove to me. If you feel your tests are accurate and represent a true comparison of the builds without external interference its all good and goes to show not everyone is affected.

You will understand the data impalor provided much better than I. From what limited understanding I have of the VR world however it appears to me his results are affected by such witchcraft.

From what I can see from the data, and my very limited (read zero) understanding of VR, your system is getting cained pre and post 2.7.7/8. Steam VR is doing its "magic" and reprojecting- a lot- to present even the minimum 1/2 rate of 45 fps to you. Not sure if you change the repro manually or its automatic, I assume its automatic. If thats correct, its the VR equivalent of me and my flatscreen with vstink running say 55 fps in 2.7.6 and 40 fps in 2.7.7/8. In both cases the vsync software will change down a gear to half refresh rate (30 fps) because my system cant produce the 60 fps vsync requires just as yours it half stepping to the 45 fps.- as such my perceived performance will not have changed in the same way yours hasnt. I'd be getting 30 fps like i always did. In reality however the loss is there, I just cant see it cos Im already at a low state and I wont see until I cant make 30 fps. Difference here is that Stream VR has further tricks up it sleeve in the shape of reprojection to help keep things bearable. What Im saying is that you cant make a meaningful comparison with fps alone in such circumstances as there there are more factors, external to DCS, at play. As an Analogy, you cant tell a Fiat Punto (2.7.8) has an overall slower top speed than an Ferarri (2.7.6) by driving them both at a speed limit of 45 mph (half rate) with cruise control (Steam VR) on. Thats why we switch off vsync when comparing. In your case I think you are in that ballpark where the perfomance difference is "soaked up" by an already choked output. If you pushed up your settings so stream VR algorithms couldnt cope or were previously on the cusp, I'd venture you'd experience a difference. Forgive if Im wrong but I suspect your set up is masking the lost performance at this time. As it probably is for many others and likely the reason why "where the F has my performance gone" posts tend to drip into the forums and not tsunami as each player hits that magic mark in their own time.

Taz1004 seems have hit tje nail on the head

If you wanted a like for like you only really need the base game for the purpose of a comparison. You dont even need a module. Given you seem to have wiped your modules, its probably a great time to just install Stable 2.7.6 base and OB 2.7.8 base afresh. If you want to be extra careful, before you download the second install, temporarilty rename the first installed game's root folder (ie DCS World to DCS World-temp). This is ensure common files are not copied from one to another. After the install is finished - revert the naming.

Olive branch - yup- your right. Im an over sensitive little pixie. But I will raise you a "TIR is great" for a " VR is god" We are on the same team in this matter. Lets do as Limaro says and make a new thread with the data to prove the point. If nothing else it avoids the issue being wrote off as the problem of a few. S!!