pegasus1

Running 6000 at 1:1 can be faster, certainly in benchmarks but in games then faster RAM can prove a bit faster. To be honest other than set the correct rations i dont spend to much time optimising my RAM (96GB C32 6600 Corsair). Just put it in the MOBO and set whatever Expo is the most stable. Not always true, it depends how many NVMe slots the MOBO has and what ones are used. The ROG STRIX X870E-E GAMING WIFI has 5 x M2 slots with 3 x being PCIe 5 and the remainder PCIe 4, i use the PCIe 5 slot for my Gen 5 OS drive and the 2 x Gen 4 slots for my DCS drive and Steam drive, in that configuration there is zero impact on performance as the 2 x remaining gen 5 slots are not occupied.

7800x3d doesnt do PBO, you need a 9*** series for that mate.

I wipe it after every module and mod installation.

Google gets its info from a less limited pool than AI, i mean its silly to not conduct due diligence on any advice whether its from AI, a Search Engine , a forum or direct from a person. Ive read some absurd advice on here over the years, and on all forums, you only need to read what some people are advising about DLSS to know how far of the mark some people are irrespective of how confidant they seem. All my RAM settings come via AI and its bang on and getting some great CB24 scores, on a side note i wouldn't use the quick answer setting for an Ai search, for work i use the Research functions and they are bang on for accuracy.

I checked last night and i cant see any difference on my 9950x3d whether using just the cache cores, just the performance cores or all 16 cores, temps are all around what id expect. Still hitting around 5.7ghz on the cache cores and 5.9ghz on the performance cores and that was running a huge mission with 120 planes up and around 1000 missiles in the air. Also guys, using other peoples quoted CPU temps as a reference to your own doesn't work unless they also quote room/case ambient so you are comparing Delta to Delta. Hitting 90c isnt an issue if the ambient is 30c, hitting 90c in an igloo is a big issue.

Its what happens when people have a little bit of knowledge, im lucky in that ive been a member of GURU 3D for over 15 years and there are some crazy knowledgeable people on there and some very interesting topics, the guy who wrote MSI Afterburner is a staff member and some top end private custom system builder are regular posters. For me DLSS 4 using Version K has improved the visuals of many games and obviously there is also a performance boost, other games to me look no different but DCS at 77% DLSS still looks amazing and smooth at Max settings and 4K is always over 100fps on a 9950x3d/4090@3ghz. Something like Ready Or Not looks no different, Metro EEE looks better i think. As for FG, maybe it looks better on CP2077 but on other games i have it off.

Every issue ive ever had with DCS has been fixed via deleting the cache.

Well four stick places more strain on the system so you might need to make some adjustments in the BIOS as far as timings and voltages go (a Google/AI Search for your specific RAM and MOBO would help). I don't use VR so cant comment but DCS is becoming more and more complex and finally is able to take advantage of better performing hardware so at some point 64gb will be a limiting factor.

NVIDIA GeForce 576.52 WHQL driver download The 50 series owners i know are saying 576.52 is much improved but non of them play DCS. For 40 series then the 566.36 is widely regarded as the best game driver.

DLSS doesn't add frames, it renders the image at a lower resolution then uses AI to upscale it, zero frames are added. Render the image at 1080p then upscale to 1440p, that how it works, dont confuse it with Frame Generation which add AI generated frames between rendered frames but can introduce latency.

I doubt you would notice a difference between a 7800x3d and a 9800x3d unless you also updated the motherboard as well and even then it would be slight at best. On my AM4 5800x3d i ran 64gb and the system would regularly exceed 40gb, i now run a 9950x3d and 96gb of RAM and see over 60gb of total usage, DCS will use just about all the RAM you can throw at it and also loves the fastest CPUs but at that point the game engine becomes the bottleneck. The best upgrade is to run DLSS Setting K and if you have the GPU to power it, at Ultra Quality level (70 - 80% resolution).

This is a must after every patch, after adding a new module and after adding any mods.

I downloaded the patch last night but havnt played it yet. Has anybody seen an increase in CPU related performance that mirrors increased CPU utilisation and temperatures? I run a 9950x3d and il be interested to see using Process Lasso how this patch is working with both the cache and performance CCDs and if its any different to the last patch.

People are free to spend their money how they like, i paid £1500 for a 4090, thats what the average UK smoker spends on cigarettes in three months. Gaming is a hobby, its not babyfood and nappies, its not a life essential, either pay or dont, the prices are not changing anytime soon.

You can pick up a 1TB Gen 4 NVMe drive for £50, thats less than the price of a module. Just run all your DCS stuff from a single drive. Silicon Power 1TB UD90 NVMe 4.0 Gen4 PCIe M.2 SSD R/W up to 5,000/4,800 MB/s (SP01KGBP44UD9005) : Amazon.co.uk: Computers & Accessories