Jump to content

Raven (Elysian Angel)

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3746

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Raven (Elysian Angel)

    From 14900K to AMD 9950X3D Is Lack Luster

    in VR Bugs

    Posted

    6 hours ago, The_Cokester said:

    Also, never once did the frame counter say I was GPU bound. It just said CPU Bound Rendering Thread.

    It says the same for me: in 2D I’m ‘GPU bound’, but in VR I’m ‘CPU bound rendering thread’ with some dips to ‘CPU bound main thread’ on unoptimised sections of maps for example. My hope is that Vulkan will fix this, so that we are GPU bound even in VR.

    From 14900K to AMD 9950X3D Is Lack Luster

    in VR Bugs

    Posted

    51 minutes ago, Hiob said:

    I was/am a little bit tempted by the 9800x3D though.

    As I mentioned before in another thread, I went from a 5900X to 9800X3D and the performance upgrade is eyewatering in games that are CPU-heavy (not just simulation games but also ARPGs for example especially in endgame).

    P.S. I kept the same graphics card but upgraded everything else - it was well worth it.

    • Like 1

    From 14900K to AMD 9950X3D Is Lack Luster

    in VR Bugs

    Posted

    4 hours ago, Hiob said:

    Ah, ok. Thank you. I wasn't aware of those.

    Contact frames exist for AMD too but for different reasons compared to those for Intel: while on Intel they are needed to ensure proper contact between IHS and cooler/pump, for AMD they are mainly used to prevent thermal paste making too much of a mess, as the IHS on AM5 doesn’t cover the entire die. I have one from Thermal Grizzly for that very reason; it keeps things a lot more clean.

    • Like 2

    New Medium/Medium texture quality Special Option still exceeds 16GB VRAM buffer

    in Bugs and Problems

    Posted

    On 8/20/2025 at 4:54 PM, jnr4817 said:

    Did you manage rebar at the driver level or bios level for turning on and off. If at the driver level what did you use, NVPI?

    At the driver level yes, and yes I used Profile Inspector.

    I had to keep it off in fact until there was a new version, and it was fixed after so it was definitely a driver bug with that 1 specific driver version.

    Patch notes discussion August 2025

    in DCS 2.9

    Posted

    42 minutes ago, ricktoberfest said:

    What was the answer?

    Because:

    1. Skeletal animations are complicated;

    2. There are so many different factions that need infantry models and ED wants to release them all at the same time.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 3

    ED's next helicopter

    in DCS Core Wish List

    Posted

    2 hours ago, MAXsenna said:

    I'm happy you guys are happy with it. Us, not so much.

    Norway terminates its contract for the NH90
    "Regrettably we have reached the conclusion that no matter how many hours our technicians work, and how many parts we order, it will never make the NH90 capable of to meeting the requirements of the Norwegian Armed Forces", says the Minister of Defence.

    Indeed, the Belgian armed forces spared no effort in showing their disdain for the NH90 to anyone willing to listen: it was a huge scandal in our national media. They said it was so hilariously bad not a single thing about the entire helicopter was to their satisfaction - not even the floor of the troop cabin / cargo hold.

    • Like 1

    AI "overperformed"

    in DCS: MiG-15bis

    Posted

    17 minutes ago, SignorMagnifico said:

    was this reported bug already fixed? Maybe I missed the patch note

    The MiG-21 AI got patched recently, but I haven’t seen any about the MiG-15.

    There is an updated lua by a user, but if I use that, every single AI MiG-15 in any of my missions gets turned into an A-10 for some reason 🤔

    • Like 1

    Mi-24 Rudders issue (ignore trim, move to the left)

    in DCS: Mi-24P Hind

    Posted

    2 hours ago, div0 said:

    What is  "Pedals Auto Move" used for?

    I suspect that in the real helicopter the yaw autopilot moves the pedals automatically if needed to maintain heading. I have it disabled as well, and I think it's only beneficial for us simmers if we have FFB pedals. Since most of us don't, it's best to leave it disabled to prevent problems.

    • Like 1

    Todays Update - 1 July 25 ??

    in DCS: CH-47F

    Posted

    4 hours ago, av8orDave said:

    Having said that, this module released bare-bones, and has seen very little development in the year it has been around, to the point that the CDU is barely functional. Heck, it kind of sort of has radios.

    While I agree with you on the state of EA of ED modules, let me play a bit of devil's advocate here, since I think a part of the community has some blame here too.
    When the F-18 launched in EA, ED's plan (as per Wags - and I'm going off memory here so I'll be paraphrasing) for Early Access was to release a module with the basics functioning, at a point where everything that would be needed for a RL young pilot to start training on the type would be there, and then develop weapon systems and advanced avionics as time progresses - in the order it would be presented to a new RL pilot.
    But then came the community and they complained they couldn't blow stuff up...

    My personal priority for early access would be 'aviate-navigate-communicate': have a good flight model at EA launch that only needs minor adjustments, have all the navigation tools working (at least TACAN, ADF, manual waypoint/flightplan creation, etc), and have the radios in working order. I really don't care about weapon systems at that stage: I want to practice take-off and landings, fly the pattern, get used to the in-flight behaviour, do some in-flight refuelling (if available in that model), do some basic navigation and free flights.

    There are plenty of other modules available to please those who want to "blow stuff up" in the meantime (though that was less so when the F-18 first launched). Part of the community wants everything to work properly on day 1 so they can do their Rambo-style "you and what army?" scenarios immediately.
    And as a result you have the module released in a half-baked state with a lot of systems sort-of working, sometimes, on a good day unless there's a full moon and Mercury is in retrograde - and the community starts complaining again...

    That, and a lot of people expect every module to be as detailed and in-depth as the A-10, and for some reason only ED knows, that is not the case (not possible?). While ED claims to have a "standard" for EA and post-EA, when every module has a different "standard", clearly the word "standard" means something different for ED than it does for a lot of the community. So here we are...
    And the more modules there are in EA at any one time, the larger this problem becomes as it becomes a juggling exercise for ED...

    Do I like this? Nope, but I'm part of an old-school minority and I suppose from a business point of view you can't blame ED for trying to please a larger part of the community so they can keep their finances in order... 🤷‍♀️

    • Like 2

    FFB Center Position

    in Bugs and Problems

    Posted

    2 hours ago, bigdave32 said:

    The center position of a FFB stick (I have the Moza AB9) is at least 70% forward on the A-10C

    Yes, ideally it would be like that in every fixed wing module, as that’s how it works IRL: there’s a lot more positive pitch travel than negative pitch - for pretty obvious reasons.

    2 hours ago, bigdave32 said:

    which makes it awkward to use in a home cockpit

    Depends on your setup. Mine accounts for that, as it’s one of the things that gives added value to using a FFB stick.

    • Like 2

    ED's next helicopter

    in DCS Core Wish List

    Posted

    20 hours ago, Ornithopter said:

    next Helicopter I want to see is an 80s version of the Cobra, with the TOW missiles.  Start fleshing out the period maps with the period aircraft!

    Luckily we have a cold-war version of the Bo-105 incoming 😉 

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...