Boosterdog

Thank you - I still want your babys.....

Selfish and ignorant question - Does this mod "stow" its blades if used as a static on a carrier deck?

Do you experience the stutter in every mission or just some? I only ask because some times the trigger of flags/AI etc in a mission can have a big impact (especially if you are close to limit of what youd see a a drop). Human nuture I guess, but we fixate on problems and sometimes ignore the obvious. Have you established that its not 1 specific mission causing you isses? Have you run a simple blank mission with nothing in it but the aircraft that you are using? Does that behave in the same way?

I recommend you buy a torch and some string to help you find your way around whichever rabbit hole you go down and that you never look at your bank account again. BTW - youre gonna need some decent outboard too.....ah.....theres another grand gone... But steal yourself because, for all the frustrations and expense, it can be a very absobing and very entertaining adventure.

One whole day where a VR-er doesnt make a general issue all about them.

After an 8th month self imposed hiatus I was tempted back by the Hind. Having done the usual (oooo and cor, shoot stuff, learning not to crash) I found myself drifting back to Hip. For a module I resisted for so many years (on the grounds it looks like a tadpole - so very logical and scientific ones) , its had magical hold over me since the day I finally relented in one of the sales. In spite of the lack of love it receives these days (save for someone polishing the cockpit to a ridiculous mirror shine), its relative simplicity and its bugz, once I get going, all that stuff just doesnt matter. Hours lost in noodling about in ever most challenging scerarious of my own doing. It has something that no other module including the big hitters like the F14, F18 and Hind have and I really dont know what it is. It just draws me in. And the shake and shimmer never grows old. Of course Id love to see it brought up to date and its certainly worthy but, at the same time, I worry that a certain something (and a good deal of fps) would be lost in the process. Right , off to to perch precariously on a mountain top shack, balancing on only one wheel for absolutley no reason whatsoever.....

That comment has made my day a much happier one!

I was referring to the many who posted but didnt back it up with data. Apologies for not being clear about that.

The main thread got locked because of a large number of irrelevant posts. BIGNEWY asked those seeing a drop to start their own independent threads in the 2.7 Performance Bugs section. Limaro and myself have done ours but noone else has to date. We both done a comparison to the 2.7.6 Stable but I think the usual logs, trks and dxdiags from the 2.7.7 OB are really what ED want.

Thanks Grimes, Thats useful to know and explains some of the hits in that there seem to be a number of vehicle and personel routes triggered however, the initial stuuter appears to start with nothing more than the mortor flag notification and time from flag triggered event. I think, from what I can remember looking at it a couple of weeks ago, all the units are present at mission start awating activation. I guess its just overall demand on the system fpor that one. Perfomance hungry hinds, lots of scenery destriction, weather, and AI tasks all running together.

I dont know if ED still want logs and dxdiags from those affected but I dont think it would hurt to start a thread with them posted as ED requested last week. Theres been a lot of chimfin but relatively few have provided the info ED ask for

or, in extreme emergencies: MMMMMOOOOOOAAAAARRRRR PPPPOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWRRRRRRR

Woman - Listen, watch, note ,apply Man - POWER - crash

Missions with triggers/actions affect the smooth flow of the game in a seemingly disproportionate manner. In recent patches where performance has decreased for me, this is becoming more and more noticable as the CPU spikes that impact upon the gpu can bring the game to a shuddering halt. Whether its triggering a sound file or AI task triggers there appears to be a big demand placed on the cpu. This means I need a quite considerable performance overhead (20 or 30 fps in the bag above the vsync floor) to accomodate which isnt always possible. The worst culpit out of the stock missions Ive tried so far is the Mi24 Distaster Releif mission on the PG map in the Instant Action section. Even on very conservative settings, the mission stops and jutters alone from the get go. This mission also takes considerably longer to close that an others to. The problem is largly most apparent at low level and espeically in helo missions obviously. Most Jet missions have sufficient headroom to cope without much effect. Is there anything obvious that Im missing that may be causing this or is it just the way it is? Additionally, in my own mission building should I do things certain ways to reduce the impact? I ask becuse Ill be soon starting to redo many of the personal missions I created from the Shark and adapting them from the Hind and, if there is something to watch out for, I would like to incorporate it from the outset.

What she did first time took me 2 days and many broken hueys!

Fanstastic!

I totally understand. At least Flappie experienced it. Whilst Im not one for threatening tantrummy unilateral boycots it does make me somewhat circumspect about future purchases at this time, especially newer modules. Its not a reactionary thing but soley based upon the fact that my abilty to enjoy them is likely to be limited without the significant outlay required for a new GPU which, in turn, would pretty much wipe out my free cash for a good few months in any case. The Hind, as a case in point, can really only be used in 4 of the existing 12 instant action missions across the maps without issue on my current set up in OB. Even in the faster running 2.7.6 Stable, its marginal. Spending hard earned on supporting the brand whilst knowing it really needs to be committed elsewhere just to use what I already have is always a feature of simming I guess. I fully understand that if ED could fix it they would and also that tech marches on. Im not ranting. Im not even "Dad Dissappointed". I regret the hit at this time but equally there is always an iceberg on the horizon. Sadly we appear to be somewhat in the middle of an unmoving perfect storm right now when it comes to remaining comfortably current on a casual hobbist budget. I shall continue to hope for the best, be as helpful as I can to others and enjoy all the other stuff in the game that I can in the meantime.

Firstly neither of these things are especially new nor groundbraking but, together and for me at least work to improve the experiecne (in addition to marginally increasing performance, which, on a maginal rig, is marginally better in marginal situations!) First up is altering the shadows lua. Possibly a no- no for MP but ok for single player. Not my solution and one of a number out there but @Taz1004's suggested settings in the thread linked below, along with his clear explanation of stuff is worth having a looksee. In my experience the settings he proposes greatly reduce the flicker (which seem to pulse in time with the rotas for some odd reason, possibly just my impression) of the low res and pretty much stop the "pop" between the low and higher res shadows at low level. Given that the shadows in DCS are not one if its strong points its not a perfect solution to all scenarios but better then nothing for low level antics until ED come up with something better. If you are so inclinded I strongly recommend reading carefully what he has to say and experimenting. You can find the shadows.lua in the game's root folder/Config/effects. Second is my attempt to ease the load on the system when messing about in the wooded valleys and forests of the Caucauses. This involves find your terrains folder (Root/Mods/terrains/Caucauses/), then opening the "surface details", then renaming "shrubs.ref" to something (anything) else. I use "Shrubs_0". You will need to go delete the recreated Shubs file after every update unfortunately. Doing this removes the shrubs (obviously) but you'll be surrprised at just how many of those sods lurk under the forest canopy. Graphically it does show, the forests appears a little less dense but the overall impact isnt too severe. I presume the shrubs have shadow effects too but Im unsure if removing the shrub also removes its shadow. Either way, it made my Harrier excursions out of Batumi a much smoother experience. If you are not put off by renaming stuff in the terrains folder there are some other things you can do (again both are not new but Id thought Id mention them) in the Syria terrain's sufaceDetails folder , renaming the file "Anabasis_setifera.ref" gets rid of the pop up bushes whilst in the PG SurfaceDetails folder doing the same to "Small Bush" and "Small Bush Group" does similar. Whilst in the PG terrains folder, if, like me you think that civilian aircraft, as boring as they are, should not simply be concrete grey and undeletable using the the ME, you can erase all trace of them by opening the "Models/Aircraft" folder and renaming the "Aircraft.ref" and "Aircraft.ref.m5" files. I presume you can do similar for the aircraft on other maps to. If you like yer Mods the cilivilan aircraft mod has some useful aircraft and approriate skins (in addition to the user files section) to re-populate the main airports nicely should your system support it. Finally, for an FPS friendly experience on the Marianas you can create a batchfile using the synax "Make_like_palm_oil_plantation" and this will instantly deforest the whole region and wipe out all those little pesky villages...........honest

@BIGNEWY Thank you

To add to the OP, I had previously, on my previous sytem, experienced a difference in performance on the current 2.7.7. Stable in comparision to the 2.7.7 OB. This equated to about 6 fps in the Mil24 Caucaus Weapons Range Mission at spawn in. At the same time the optimizations put in place using the Adam X guide resulted in a further FPS increase of 6 fps in the Stable 2.7.6 but had no discerable impact on the 2.7.7 OB or 2.7.7 Stable. This difference was not replicated by other people trying the same. I was careful to check my expeiencefor placebo effects but found the increase to be consisent accroos various stock missions and modules tried. I have to today installed the current 2.7.7. Stable having again applied the "optimizations" in the ADAMX package. Before dowloading I renamed all installed version's root and saved games folders to prevent crossover with the latest Stable and, additionlly re established the NCP settings for each specific exe, carefully checking the path to each. On this occasion the results are much more in line with those reported by others, specifically: A very slight overall decrease of frametime low resulting in a very marginal fps/sec increase of 2 fps across all version (2.7.6, 2.7.7 OB and 2.7.7 Stable) Zero difference in the performance of the 2.7.7. Stable to 2.7.7. OB as should be given there identical status other wise. No significant further increase in performance on 2.7.6 Stable over the overall 2 fps increase. I cannot account as to why this would be. Had it been down to patching and repatching the original beta, I would have expected to see the increase across all the versions with the 2.7.6. Stable continuing to show a slightly bigger increase. What Im seeing instead is the prevously better performing 2.7.6. Stable which acheived an average fps of 92 in the Mil24 mission now only acheives a stable 88 fps (the same 2 fps increase as seen in the other version and likely more the result of changing the power profile in the NCP) whilst the previously unimpacted versions not showing small improvments. I am not attaching logs as, without the orginal logs from the previous PC it would be meaningless. @BIGNEWY hate to be a PITA but I notice the orginal (now thankfully locked) thread was tagged as both "Reported" and "Investigating" orignally but is now simply tagged "reported", as is Limaro's thread. Are you able to comment on whether or not the issue is still under active investigation? Thank you.

Not sure I get your point

No, its bad enough having to wade though all the ludicrous fantasy skins in the user dowloads as it is. The less fictitious nonsense the better. The only fantasy scenario in DCS I would like to see at present is the one where a moderately heavy helo mission runs well on a mid range PC.

Its a regular £2 4 porter USB 2.0 slot plate extension card (sorry not a hub) - one that slots into the rear of the PC and plugs onto the MB via two headers. I did read somewhere abut the X570 boards needing some driver to power phones but cannot find it again. The track IR works fine so I assume some power is there if needed. The warthog however did occiasionally disconnect when plugged directly into the ports of the MB so thats also going to be tried the old card as well now.

Im putting this up so it may add (if needed) to Limaros previous excellent submission. Im also posting this as the comparisions have been done on a new PC, using a different brand of Chip and using a brand new Win 10 Pro install. Sadly I patched the install with the MS updates prior to thinking. For this comparison I have no outboard controllers plugged in. FRAPS is used to measure the average FPS. The Chip is a Ryzen 5600X running stock with 2 x 16GB 16-16-16-32 double ranked RAM @ 3600. Win 10 Pro 1904 updated, Latest Bios on MSI Tomahawk X570, Nvidia 496.49 drivers, Crosair RM850x PSU, System and game on separate 4th Gen M2 cards (Sammy 980 pro and WD Black) respectiviely.. The two miz files are used. The first is simply the default Caucaus map with a tracked unit placed at Kobuletti. I created the same mission in both the OB and in the stable and captured images from the same view point in both. I also used ech versions mission in the other and, save for the stasble throwing up a warning of being created on a different ME, saw no difference in ether version on either mission. Settings for both versions are identical in both Game and the NCP. OB 100 fps, Stable 128 Fps. OB Stable 2.7.6. Next I defaulted the NCP and repeated. OB 100fps, Stable 128 fps. The images are in the zip but are essentially identical to the above. This is approximately the same ratio of performance difference on a low impact mission that I intially experience in my last build. On that occasion I had both the OB and Stable fully populated with all my modules. I have not added all the modules to the stable on this occasion as it would appear that these do not degrade the performace in this Stable version. I do not know if they degrade performance in the OB. IF REQUESTED, I AM HAPPY TO COMMENCE REMOVING THE MODULES FROM THE OB TO MEASURE ANY DIFFERENCE. Of note in the last build was the performance increace on Stable that a generic optimization session had (YouTube ADAM Xs optimisations if anyone wishes to risk it). The result was a further increase of about 7-10 fps in stable but, oddly zero impact on the OB. I have not done this to the new PC as I have yet to pick apart what exactly it is doing and what it is not. Next I used the Mil24P instant mission Caucaus Wepons Range, keeping the NCP on default and taking the FPS from the intial cockpit view. OB 74 fps, Stable 86 fps. This is about 4 fps higher on both versions than on my old system both otherwise is consistent to earilier results in the experienced difference. The overall narrowing of the differences over the previous, low impact, mission, I assume is down to the limiting nature of the GPU currently installed bottlenecking the performance (GTX 1080). Whilst in this mission I used the Riva element of the MSI Afterburner software to measure the CPU use for both OB and then Stable. The image below first shows the use in OB then Stable. I hope its obvious where one ends and other starts but , if not the swap occurs approximately halfway across where you see a period of little use.. The image does not show all cores but these were viewed and showed little to no activity of note. The cores captured however do show behavioural differences. I do not know it this is anything but Ive included it anyway. The result is basically Stable appears to be demanding less CPU use and peaks much lower than the OB in the same scenario. Finally, Logs for both versions and a DXDiag are included along with the screen captures and the miz files. If there is anything more I can help with please ask. Supporting Data.zip

That was five pages and 5 days ago and still guff upon guff is being posted, bloating the thread even further for absolutely zero point and potentially loosing appropriate posts in the noise.. If you want 6000 fps in 4K VR, shove it in the wishlist section instead of screwing up a legit bug thread with utter nonsense and steams of conciousness. Sorry to be plain but 12 of the 21 pages in this thread are filled with garbage no even realted to the OP.