Hippo

OK, I'll rephrase: "was there ever a further official response from ED providing an update on the matter?" (last I remember reading was that it had been fixed in an internal build).

When the Hornet was released I recall there being some posts stating that there was a bug with the Hornet external model that caused severe frame rate drops. Anyone know if there was ever a resolution to this? I don't own the PG theatre. Is this 22 fps with all on minimum including MSAA off? (if so, jeez...).

Thank you for your informative post. I was being lazy and using ASW as a catch-all to include ATW also. However, Oculus's view: from https://developer.oculus.com/blog/asynchronous-spacewarp/ I do appreciate that it's a very personal thing (there are even posts on here saying 35 fps is fine). For me there is a very noticeable difference between (optimal) 90 fps, ASW on, or fluctuating frame rates 45 - 90 if ASW is turned off; < 45 fps is beyond the pale. If that me makes me less of man, then so be it!

With DS off, I used to get 120 fps (in a particular situation). For the same situation, with DS on 54 fps. I use 4xMSAA (I suppose you do not). DCS without MSAA, for me, is a complete no-no. Previously I could aim to get >90 fps most of time, and going down to ASW when things got busy; now I have to live with ASW all the time. Scenery looks better, cockpits not so much imho, and there continue to be all manner of annoying glitches. As to get over it, well clearly I have no choice. I'm greatly annoyed though, as there was an option in place that was working very well (unlike the other sim), and it was taken away without warning, explanation or apology. I will, however, find something else to do with regards as to where I spend my money, as ED will not be getting a penny from me in the future. There's not much I can do about what I've spent up to now, unfortunately. Vulkan? I won't hold my breath. That's what I'm (grudginly) doing. 90 fps is the minimum for the optimal VR experience; this is not obsessing, < 90 fps is not VR as it should be. I get that you value the visuals in terms of shadows, scenery, etc, which is fine. I value MSAA and 90 fps over all of that and am prepared to forgo it. One thing seems certain though - a PC that can give you both does not exist.

I am and have been on beta 2.0 since it first released. Only experienced ASW issue since this update.

It is (sort of). But anything over 90 fps is synched to 90 for the HMD. Until this latest update, if you ran DCS without triggering the HMD sensor (by wearing the HMD) you would see an actual frame rate (on the monitor) which could be well over 90 fps. This would cut to 90 the moment you started wearing the headset. After this update, the monitor display doesn't even update anymore* if you're not wearing the HMD. This alone makes me think that ED have made substantial changes with this update. I can just about maintain 90 fps most of time on my system, if there's not much going on. But I have to bring my settings right down (and with thanks to Kegetys). I certainly can if I turn off MSAA - but I will not play DCS without it, so it's a moot point for me. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3590191&postcount=43 https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3590195&postcount=44 *edit: in the cockpit. If you load DCS without wearing the HMD you should see frame rates > 90 fps in the loading / menu screens.

FPS is very useful in that it is an objective measurement of perfomance. Furthermore, in VR FPS is much more important than usual. > 90 FPS is VR as it should be, anything less is a sub-optimal experience; this is not just an academic point - > 90 FPS VR is flawless and it's instantly discernible. The gripe I had with the cows wasn't the cows per se. I got an e-mail from ED with screenshots and fanfare as if it was a really big deal. Compare this to when deferred shading was forced on us - my VR peformance was CUT IN HALF (I can say this with some precision because I can MEASURE FPS, btw). So what did we get then? Two lines buried in a readme. No explanation, nothing; a situation which remains unchanged to this day.

ASW issue still there for me with 2.5.3.21153. Kegetys mod still works though.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulkan_(API)

Yes that did it, but I now see an artefact near the mouth of the river (Batumi). It comes into view whenever I rotate my head below level with horizon.

Thank you! I'll give it a go - hopefully not too much of a hit on frame rate.

Any chance you could run your benchmark again on the latest update (2.5.3.21107)? Some are reporting a performance improvement (although I'm rather skeptical). How did you measure frame rates > 90 fps? Previously I used to do it by not putting on the Rift and running DCS on the monitor, but with the latest update this is no longer possible. Thanks.

As far as I can tell, there is no issue with performance. The issue is that ASW has stopped working. Ignoring the situation where frame rates are below 45 fps, there is only a problem when frame rates are between 45 - 90 fps. Usually ASW would kick in at this point and smooth things out (although with some artefacts). Now, it doesn't and you get a juddering which many people find very uncomfortable. It can be experienced easily by moving head (translating) left to right, the cockpit will judder. Or by rolling the aircraft and looking out to the side - the horizon and land will also judder. And although ASW is not working, the frame rate continues to be locked to 45 fps. At 90 fps there is no problem. There is some confusion because some people turn off ASW (e.g. with Oculus Tray Tool) all the time. In this case the frame rate will not lock to 45 but will vary continuously between 45 - 90. Clearly the people who do this all the time will notice no difference. However, I (and many) find the juddering and the fluctuating frame rates uncomfortable. Also, previous to the update, I could take the Rift off, and the game would continue to update on screen. Now it doesn't, the display on screen freezes at the point I took the HMD off, although the game continues to run.

Thank you again - a lifesaver. I mentioned this previously, and wonder if it's just me. I think it happens when I'm over water within sight of land. When I look around, occasionally the sea flashes white. I managed to get a screenshot this time.

I have updated. For me, ASW just as before - capped to 45 fps (when between 45 - 90 fps), but ASW not working.

Bump. Although distance can be set in labels.lua, what's not taken account of is object SIZE. An aircraft carrier and a yacht (or 747 / yak-52) would not become visible at the same distance. Is there any way to add a multiplier that takes object size into account?

It is definitely ASW not working. On the A10C ASW working can be seen when at 45 fps and moving your head the buttons around the MFDs distort (like a mirage), now they don't. Amazingly, the people who turn ASW off on purpose put up with this all the time. I don't know how they do it, but I guess it really does affect people in different ways. One way to "fix" the issue (until ED fix it) is to lower settings enough to sustain 90fps. After all, for the ideal vr experience 90 fps is a must.

Something's definitely changed. If I take the Rift HMD off (my head) I can no longer access the sim using the monitor, the game seems to pause / stop.

So If I understand correctly, your most utilised cpu core and the gpu usually both run at around 80%? On my system I would put that down to ASW kicking in (i.e. being unable to sustain 90 fps), and would expect to see 45 fps (dependent on settings of course). Unfortunately, I have no idea how the equivalent Vive mechanisms function. Are you unable to get 90 fps no matter how far you lower your settings? Have you tried using the in-game frame rate counter? Does that agree with the one you're using? IIRC, in Steam VR, there are general PD settings as well as game-specific ones, and they multiply with each other (have you checked this)? Some further suggestions: Read all of the following post https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=215853 Towards the end I posted some settings and resultant frame rates. I'm not suggesting that you use them, but maybe try them as a comparison, and see if you get similar frame rates to me. Please note that I am trying to argue a different issue in that post, so you'll have to give me some leeway. There are also many other threads relating to VR performance in that forum and it's worth going through them. There is also a mod out there that can get you more frames (Kegetsy). If you mostly fly the A-10C you could consider using v.2.5.0, as that still had the option to disable deferred shading, which could get you some more frames.

Is that the "average" reading? You should look at each core individually, and there will be one which is being most heavily used. If that's at 100% then, yes, your CPU is the bottleneck. I would offer more suggestions based on my own experience, but I have a Rift and am not using the Steam version of DCS.

I find it very useful for testing. I can measure the effect on performance of changing a particular setting. Though it is only useful if you're getting frame rates over 90 fps, I suppose. Not sure if you're using Kegetsy's mode. That gave me a 50% fps increase in 2.5.2 (for very similar settings).

(IMHO) By the way, although the terrain looks better in 2.5.2. The A-10C cockpit continues to look a lot better in terms of sharpness and colour in 2.5.0. And, for completeness, with deferred shading ON (everything else the same):

Just ran again on 2.5.0. The mission is Free Flight over Black Sea region Runway Start. Here are the results:

1) If you look at how I test in my link, the trick is to make sure that the HMD does not activate. When I do that, the frame rate (on my monitor) does not appear to be limited - I find it's a very useful way to test for performance. As soon as the HMD is activated, (I suspect that) the runtime kicks in and you will then not see the counter go over 90 fps. 2) Are you running with deferred shading off, i.e. on 2.5.0 or below? I also get a reduction after takeoff. Please note that in my previous post I was referring to 2.5.0 DS off with an A10C mission. In the linked thread I was asking people to test in 2.5.2. I do not get over 90 fps in that situation. 3) I'm afraid that I don't know what that is, but I can look into it.

VERY serious ;) Yes, of course it's settings. In my opinion, for VR: >= 90 fps Decent anti-aliasing (4xMSAA) are the two top priorities, all other settings are secondary. To achieve this I have to turn everything else to minimum. Without DS (2.5.0) I could get around 120 fps in the A-10C sitting on the runway - which gave headway for when things got busy. Even so, dips below 90 fps still occur. I can not achieve this with DS, where for the same situation, my fps goes down to around 60 fps. Not happy. ASW (which kicks in when fps drops below 90) should not be the norm for VR, but a temporary measure for rare occasions when 90 fps cannot be obtained. Another poster mentioned that they don't see glitching with ASW - I'd ask them to sit in the A10C and look left and right and check what they see around the MFD buttons. ASW does a great job, but it's stilll a suboptimal VR experience, and the glitches, when they do happen, detract. On another thread I think someone said he was happy with 35 fps! Different strokes, I suppose. Turning MSAA off makes the sim look so awful that I will not use it. I realise my opinion is a bit controversial (another poster called me a 90fps taliban), but I would suggest that everyone try 2.5.0 DS off with low settings. VR at 90 fps is the optimal VR experience, and anything less is a selling it short. From the Oculus SDK (https://developer.oculus.com/documentation/pcsdk/latest/concepts/book-dg/) I'm currently trying to wean myself onto 2xMSAA on 2.5.2. In combination with Kegetsy's mod, I'm getting there on frames. Just very sad that there was no way to keep forward rendering as an option for a bit longer (F-18C).