

Hippo
Members-
Posts
1055 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by Hippo
-
Come on ED, can we have some sort of acknowledgment here! Considering That this is a new very visible feature that has appeared in the options The considerable fps increase it should provide I find the fact that there has been no acknowledgement of this post from ED extremely disappointing.
-
Admittedly, I used fps rather lazily, simply because it's a measure everyone instinctively understands. In my case I am using ASW, and my frame rates are mostly fixed at 80 or 40 fps. What does vary is GPU utilisation, and it is that that I had been measuring. My point, though, is that the poster (and many others who post similarly) would be substantially more credible and informative if he had also posted: which mission he'd used to test how he tested graphs of util / fps / frame time / any objective measure you like his DCS settings his hardware spec (in this case he does, but many don't) Surely this is preferable to: Wow, this new version is so much faster.
-
Without wishing to appear rude I would be sceptical. Take a comment such as What does this even mean? Frame rate can be higher or lower, I'm not sure what is meant by "smoother". How much are "quite a bit" and "better"? When I see a post such as the above, without a description of how the testing was carried out, the DCS settings, and quantifiable results for the versions being compared, I take it with a huge pinch of salt. In fact, I would go as far as to say that such posts are worthless. Specifically, with 2.5.6 there have been (suggested) pathfinding issues, where fps can vary hugely depending on the mission construction. With my own, basic and somewhat flawed testing, all I can say is that frame rates took around a 10% hit from 2.5.5 - > 2.5.6, and have slowly been recovering ever since. This is for a simple F-18 mission with no other objects in it. I have, however, seen missions with an 80% hit in 2.5.6. If you were to read my previous posts on this thread you would see I have at least made a basic attempt to back up my assertions. I suspect that, even though 2.5.6 has gone to stable, many issues remain. Many issues that have been reported on this forum have been allowed to go on to stable without being fixed. Openbeta is now the wild west, with stable being nothing but a figleaf. I have so far not seen a single post where someone has stated that frame rate is greatly improved in 2.5.6, which contains any convincing evidence.
-
Can someone please check the following to confirm it's not just me: If I run MSAA OFF I get around a 15 - 25% drop in GPU util (i.e. a considerable performance improvement) compared with MSAA x 2 but I get the usual awful aliasing artifacts. If I run MSAA x 2 BUT set ["msaaMaskSize"] = 0 in the options.lua, I get no AA whatsoever (i.e. it looks just as awful), but get very little or no performance improvement compared to running at MSAA x 2. Certainly nowhere near 20%. Conclusion: the masking option is doing something, but is not providing the expected improvement in performance. I realise that I posted earlier pointing out an improvement, but it was very small. So, I entirely agree with the OP, and would suggest that this needs to be looked into (urgently).
-
For as long as I can remember my core 12 (11) was always the one that was heavily loaded, with core 1 (0) more lightly loaded. With the latest update they appear to have switched around? I've not seen this happen before, so just thought I'd mention it. Is this in any way significant? Has something changed? The system does not appear to be working any worse or better as far as I can tell. (very quick test only).
-
Is what out yet?
-
I'm not sure what to make of your comment. In the latest newsletter it states: This is not about future plans, it refers to 2.5.6 stable which is out now. It would be helpful if someone could the explain what the above refers to, as it's not clear to me. What are these "powerful new tools"?
-
I think that their position is "look guys, it's been months now and people are getting antsy, JFDI and hope for the best."
-
So 2.5.6 has now moved to stable. That's very... brave.
-
What exactly does the following refer to?
-
Many thanks to all who contributed, very helpful. (including, and especially the OP, obvs)
-
This is a great suggestion, perhaps AG could consider having the app "remember" the previous session's choices? In my case, I have been importing lots of pdfs for the F-18, and it gets very repetitive to always have to select the aircraft, etc. Pretty please.
-
Let's hope so. I was hoping to get a bigger increase in performance from the AA mask setting. Turning off 2XAA completely gives me around a 33% increase, so I was hoping for around 20%. Something seems off.
-
I don't have shadows either. I'm using a Rift-S, but not Steam. I agree, it's hard to see on screenshots. What I see in the HMD are shimmering jagged edges, most noticeable with slight head movements (i.e. always), which are not as evident on screenshots. It is particularly easy to see with cockpit edges when they catch the light and shine - the ka-50 mission is the only stock mission I can think of now that does this. But it's not the only way. I suggest you set AA to 2x in the main options and the mask to 0.1 in VR options, then fly near a Caucasus city int the f-18 (~2nm), at around 2000ft. A restart of DCS is necessary for the changes to take effect. The shimmering jaggies are extremely evident on buildings. You should see that AA is working in the centre of your field of view, but you will see the usual shimmering jaggies around outside of your fov. That's what I see, anyway.
-
I'm surprised, as that's not my experience. I would suggest you try flying around 2000 ft around 2nm from a city: 1. With no AA whatsoever 2. With 2xAA w/ mask 0.1 in DCS 3. With 2xAA w/ mask 0.1 in DCS + enhance AA X 2 w/ MFAA in nVidia. and see the variation in building jaggies in each case as you pan your view. You must restart DCS with each change for the change to take effect. We have different HMDs (and no doubt DCS settings). Maybe it's down to that.
-
(if you can be bothered) please see my other recent (post-patch) comments in this thread: https://forums.eagle.ru/search.php?searchid=34570384 I have also replied to you in another thread.
-
If you want to see a difference and you have the ka-50, go to the instant action mission beslan takeoff, and use the cockpit shinies and truck out of the right window to test. (turning shadows off will probably help). I believe it should be a rectangle, not a circle, and difference is not as marked as you suggest.
-
After further testing, what appears to be going on is that the mask affects "DCS's" AA, but does not affect nVidia's MFAA, which appears to still be applying to the entire image. Using MFAA in addition to DCS AA was recommended to me on here some months ago as a way of getting 4xAA at the cost of 2xAA. It seems to have almost no performance impact, so I recommend it to everyone in turn.
-
If you look at the GPU usage % graph in my link, and in the corresponding ones in my previous posts for the same thread for mask 1.0, 0.42 and 0.1 you will see that I already done so: 1.0 - https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=236376&d=1590017239 0.42 - https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=236375&d=1590017239 0.1 - https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=236465&d=1590059601 The graphs show me flying the same mission in the same way for a few minutes each time. The GPU usage % decreases (not by a lot), as the mask goes from 1.0 -> 0.42 -> 0.1. With 0.1 I can sustain 80 fps throughout the mission, with the the other two settings ASW (40 fps) has to kick in to varying degrees as performance cannot be sustained.
-
I definitely saw a difference in performance. See: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4341829&postcount=499 and my previous posts from yesterday in the thread. EDIT: I thought I'd add the following. I tried Kegetys mod with a recent 2.5.6 version and noticed that I was not getting the improvement I was used to getting on previous versions (I used to get a 25% fps bump, now no more than 10%). I reported it on his thread, but it seemed to be just me, so I just let it go and forgot about it. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4296328&postcount=1323 Now I notice that with this DCS change, the improvement is also small. To OP: If you get the same sort of improvement I'm seeing, then you're probably going to get no more than about 3 or 4 fps, which you'll probably not be able to pick up in your measurements if you're measuring fps in the range 34-38. So maybe you were expecting a greater increase than is being delivered by this update? This all makes me wonder if something has changed in the 2.5.6.x versions which makes the AA mask technique not as effective as it should be?
-
Agree. Disagree. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4341829&postcount=499
-
I reckon turning shadows on ameliorates AA artefacts in the cockpit - like the ones I complain about in my previous post. However, that still leaves buildings and runways looking like crap in the scenery. It seems that you just can't win: I have to choose between shadows or AA as I can't have both. I refuse to run with ASW on 100% of the time - it's ok for flying an airliner, but not acceptable in DCS.
-
I just tried the ka-50 instant action mission takeoff from Beslan. In this mission the light hits the cockpit so that straight edges shine. The mask can definitely be seen to be working here, I can tell you. Is there no way that this effect can optionally be turned off? There doesn't appear to be any amount of AA that can deal with it properly, and it's shimmery jaggedyness is just dreadful in VR? Other than in those conditions, what I described above does a good job imho of keeping jaggies at bay.
-
For a mission with nothing going on, like the one I'm using to test, I aim for 80 fps. There's no way I can achieve that with shadows and AA. So, no - no shadows. I've found shadows to be a big frame rate hit. It really shouldn't be necessary to have run at near minimum settings with nothing going on to just scrape 80fps on my PC. The same system with a 1070 / CV1, as it was before the deferred rendering "upgrade", I could manage 90 fps with better AA and plenty of overhead for when things got busy. But I digress... and I think I've flogged that dead horse quite enough.
-
A quick update. I just tried another test, this time with mask 0.1, and bloom off. Results are now on par with the last 2.5.5 OB. I didn't get a single drop out from 80 fps into ASW (40 fps). I was expecting to see major shimmering jaggies around the outside of a small core, but to my surprise, I hardly noticed anything - nothing like what I get with AA off. I am running 2xAA in DCS, and enhancing in nVidia Control panel as detailed here. Who knows how the settings are interacting with each other. Whatever, the upshot is I'm getting a result I'm happy with. It is entirely reasonable to point out that I could achieve a similar (or better) result with Kegetys. But it gets to be a drag setting up to work every time there's an update or when I want to test. And it does introduce issues.