D.Va

I don't really understand what your questions are, if any.

This is extremely interesting. You should probably contact ASUS about it and whomever else it might concern, since it appears to be poor design.

At dawn and dusk the game renders terrain object shadows. At night, I don't really know why performance is worse (is it?), but I guess it has to do with all the illumination around the city at night. I don't think lights create shadows in DCS, but there's probably something intense going on under the hood.

Wow, the "inevitable future"? May as well buy an i20 and 256GB of RAM preparing for the "inevitable future". What matters with regards to head and eye tracking versus virtual reality is today. You know what day it is? Today. Yeah, VR may replace head tracking, only to be replaced by head tracking again when we have glassless 3D monitors and people don't want to encapsulate themselves anymore, only to be replaced by neural injections. Why is this relevant today? Are you calling hansangb an idiot? Because he's the one who wrote 15" and I answered. Are you referring to me? I'm still waiting for your answer in the other thread about RAM, where I kind of disproved your antics with a benchmark.

You can; however, unfortunately the graphics card should come first if you don't buy the entire computer at once. Unlucky! If you bought everything but the graphics card, your old graphics card would be the bottleneck. Personally, I don't advocate overclocking if money is any concern. Consider maybe going with something in style with a MSI Z270-A Pro, i5-8400, 1060 (if you plan to stay in 1920x1080, the 1060 can max out almost all graphics options; 1070 if you really want (it’s expensive) VR), 8GB RAM (if you don’t play any multiplayer; 16GB if you do), and a quiet and unassuming case with a 3-500W power supply unit? I haven’t looked closely at the components above, but hopefully you can google for benchmarks, pricing in your country, and get the general idea.

I've started playing with TrackIR 5 in DCS 2.5 (really, any kind of head or eye tracking) and when the camera is always moving around, you focus a lot more on the objects themselves than individual pixels on the screen. As such, I can really recommend MSAA X2 instead of X4/X8 with head tracking... added performance and in an action scenario, you won't care!

DCS 2.5 is in OpenBeta and people on the forum have mixed amounts of computer knowledge. People are having a panic, changing core affinities and other stuff that probably only messes up their computers, at the same time as DCS 2.5 has known memory issues that are being worked on... if everyone could just calm themselves for three months, that would be great, methinks. Personally, I play it with a Haswell CPU and 1060 graphics card (cheap stuff) and can max almost everything out in 1920x1200, without any real bugs other than crashes while benchmarking repeatedly.

Yes, you have more than enough. What's your resolution? 4K? It's a bug. Singleplayer works with 8GB. I don't play multiplayer, but allegedly that uses more. Yes, that's it! Why, though?

There's nothing wrong with your system, but if you want more, the graphics card is what needs upgrading first, as others have pointed out. But I would wait until later in the year, because Bitcoin miners have driven graphics card prices up (and stocks down) recently and graphics cards release around August, if I remember correctly, so that will probably be the time to upgrade (when they are re-stocked, old models drop in price and new models are available). Go outside play this summer!

Here's an optimist. I play DCS on a 24" monitor with almost everything maxed, but that doesn't mean my CPU+GPU would have to cost more than $450 today. The standard pricing of the Oculus Rift on Amazon is $500 ($600 in Sweden), also requiring a graphics card that can easily handle it, which is more than the TrackIR 5 no matter how you twist and turn it. The 2nd generation of VR begins in Q2-Q4 2018, but nobody knows how big a step it will be just yet. You have kind of a snide attitude against people who aren't totally made out of money. Also, GPU prices are currently rising, if you've been watching the news at all, that is

I agree about the 500GB. I'm a video game collector and aficionado and have used a 250GB drive for years, but I've had another 250GB drive for flight simulation. A "250GB" drive is in reality only 232GB and Windows uses about 25 of that, leaving only about 200GB, which of 100GB is DCS 2.5 and 100GB is the Users folder. Adding another 230GB gives you space for another 50GB for DCS "future-proofing", two AAA games (which clock in at about 50GB today), and 80GB of assorted smaller games. Question: what happens with your 256GB drive, then? I was on 250GB for a few years and then upgraded with another 250GB drive, which is worth considering if you want to get away a lot cheaper. Drives are not normally something that you'll want to throw away (cost inefficient and comes with many security concerns), so either you go 500GB or you go 1250GB. Personally, I'm a strong advocate of small upgrades. Sometimes, all you have to do is change your wallpaper and the computer feels perfectly fresh I'm not talking about the "point of diminishing returns". I'm talking about zero returns. $100 extra on an i7 instead of an i5 may get you a few percent more performance (depending on the game, sometimes more, sometimes less) and it's the same (variable) with VRAM upgrades, but if you spend $100 extra each on an advanced motherboard, overhead memory, overhead storage, "Pro" SSDs, and, an excessive power supply unit you get zero returns (in gaming performance). My point is not only that this is a complete waste of money for the gamer, but also that this money could be spent instead where it matters: upgrading the graphics card to the next tier, which gives you about 20%+ gaming performance. Diminishing returns is another, also worth contemplating, matter.

I'm not really condescending. I'm frank. If I asked for computer advice and someone gave me advice that cost me $500, I would be angry. Wouldn't you be? For that reason, I give 100% no-nonsense answers and I don't take advice from anyone unless I can validate it for myself. Validation, that's where my opinions originate. That's why you won't see me messing about with core affinities, pagefiles, and other borderline hocus pocus and instead simply focusing on what actually works. I give advice. Follow it. Things work. If someone absolutely won’t listen to my advice, then I cannot physically stop them from spending another $500 on redundant components, but I won’t encourage it. For instance, I just booted with 8GB and 16GB: playing the same scenario I used 6.6GB and 9.9GB RAM, respectively. A-10C over Vegas. In both instances, I had identical (50 FPS) over a 30 second benchmark. Anyone care to explain this magic “making do” to me? Because if I'm not entire mistaken, it's been a major claim from my opponents in this thread that running a 10GB RAM scenario with only 8GB of RAM should cause stuttering, which of there was none. None, I tell you. I'm not going to claim to know how this magic works, but I can think of any number of ways a game can use less RAM that don't result in performance degradation.

Yeah, if you missed that 2016-2017 graphics card upgrade window after the new architecture was introduced, but before the Bitcoin miners, you're pretty ****ed! Best buy right now is a budget build, but that wouldn't offer any improvement over what you already have and certainly not in 4K. You really don't need a CPU upgrade anyway.

Do you still have stutters? There's nothing wrong with your specs. Did you check your VRAM already? Do you have a bad FPS or only microstutters? What graphics options are you using?

VR (including graphics card) $2000 Eye/head tracking $200 There's your argument against VR.

I will make a verdict tomorrow. Eye tracking works, but the head tracking is strongly inferior to TIR5 and when both are active, the delayed head tracking really ruins the overall experience. I found the technology works just about perfectly in the UH-1H with head tracking off, but that limits your view to 180 degrees in front (vs. 260), which is unacceptable in airplanes. Switching back to TIR5 after an evening of flying with Eye Tracker made me almost instantly decide that I'm going to return the Tobii. I will test it a little bit more with the other helicopters and see if there's anything salvageable about it, but I won't test it in any other games. I can imagine it working very well in ARMA and Elite with only eye tracking. But in DCS, being able to quickly look over your shoulder left and right is really important and that is one of the weaknesses of the Eye Tracker.

Update: my verdict for the Tobii Eye Tracker 4C is 4/10, I cannot generally recommend it: The Tobii Eye Tracker 4C is a 2017 eye and head tracker, which costs as much as the TrackIR 5, 90% cheaper than VR. If the head tracking had been as accurate as the TIR5, the extra eye tracking and the head tracking not needing any hat would have made it the superior product by far. Unfortunately, the head tracking is delayed by about 0.2 seconds, which is annoying compared with the not at all noticeable delay of the TIR5. If we only compare the head tracking, the TIR5 is the superior product and again, if both head tracking and eye tracking are active, the head tracking really ruins the entire experience. If only eye tracking is active, it’s a lot snappier, but you can only look 90 degrees left and right, instead of 130 degrees. I found the 4C works very well in one aircraft: the UH-1H, where it really works just about perfectly with the right software options. The 4C probably works very well in games other than DCS and in the UH-1H I was able to set it up, so I could look freely around the screen, including up and down between the horizon and my instruments, and the camera would only subtly shift where pointed my eyes, with most work being done by my head when looking left and right. However, the scenario where the 4C fails is quickly looking over your shoulder in any airplane. Turning from looking back at my left engine, to looking at my right engine, in the A-10C takes about two full seconds with the 4C, but I can do it just as fast as I can turn my head with the TIR5. The 4C doesn’t even start turning the camera until I’m done moving my head. I CAN recommend the 4C for UH-1H pilots and I can imagine it working great in ARMA and other games where you only use it to focus on points that are in your front 180 degrees, but for general use in DCS I cannot recommend it to anyone. Switching to the TIR5 after using the 4C for a while feels like a breeze and suddenly, I can shake my head as wildly as I want and get an instant response, or quickly flick the camera from over one shoulder to another in 0.2 seconds, instead of the camera not moving until after 0.2 seconds. If I wanted to show off DCS with a Huey flight over Vegas, I would want to use the super-impressive 4C technology instead of the dumb TIR5 hat, but that’s about it. I’m going to return my ET4C and stick with my TIR5. But I will definitely be keeping a close eye on the next generation of Tobii head and eye trackers coming up! What is the Tobii Eye Tracker 4C anyway? The SteelSeries Sentry was released in 2015, developed by Tobii, followed by the Tobii EyeX in 2016 and Tobii Eye Tracker 4C in 2017. The SteelSeries Sentry and EyeX were eye trackers and reviews of the products were positive but added that the technology was in its infancy. The Eye Tracker 4C is a 3rd generation eye tracker and adds head tracking as well! How does it work? The Eye Tracker 4C looks like a stick with infrared cameras on it that you attach to your monitor and after installing the software and calibrating it for 5 minutes, it simply works without modifying any special options in DCS. A lot of you are probably wondering how it works in-game and depending on the options in the software, it can work like this: As you hover over Vegas in your Huey, the camera sweeps across the streets along with your eye movements and when you look down on the instruments, the camera centres on them. Or this: As you look up and down between the skyscrapers and your instruments, the camera is still, but as you look at the edge of your monitor, the camera scrolls to your sides. In other words, unlike the TrackIR 5, the Eye Tracker 4C never exaggerates your eye movements. Instead, it allows you to look outside of your monitor with another strategy: by scrolling when you look away from the centre of the monitor and with the optional deadzone, described above, you can make the camera only scroll when you look at the edge of the monitor. A few people are concerned that the camera moves around a lot when they simply look down on their instruments: this can be fixed with a deadzone and probably other ways also. Why is it interesting? The alternatives are currently VR and TrackIR 5. VR headsets cost A LOT and even with an equally expensive graphics card, you must cut the graphics options considerably to make it work well and it makes your expensive monitor obsolete. TrackIR 5 is a lot less immersive, but also has less technical limitations and is cheaper. Eye Tracker 4C costs as much as TrackIR 5, but bundles with games and in Sweden, for instance, it’s 25% cheaper than TrackIR 5. The big difference between TIR5 and ET4C is that you don’t need any damned hat with ET4C, which is why I’m interested in it. In this regard, it’s comparable to FaceTrackNoIR, which unfortunately never was commercialised or garnered any success. In theory, ET4C, tracking eyes AND head, can be a lot better than TrackIR 5, but in reality, they are both flawed products and answering which one you should get isn’t immediately obvious: I hope to find an answer here.

Yes

Great screenshot!

Really? I don't have that problem at all. In DCS pre-2.5 everything looked bad with DS ON and in 2.5 everything looks bad with DS OFF, but in 2.5 with DS ON and Gamma 2.0, I don't have any issues with colour or contrast. You should probably troubleshoot?

I wrote this in another thread: If anyone here has an iPhone, you can adjust your monitor brightness with it, like this: Turn down your iPhone volume to zero. Click the volume up button four times, which puts volume at 25%. Open the control panel or whatever it's called and increase brightness to 25% so it matches the volume bar. Hold your iPhone in front of your monitor and adjust the brightness on your monitor until the brightness matches. You may be surprised at how dim this is, but this is in fact the recommended brightness for office environments all over the world (300 candela, if I remember correctly) and it greatly decreases the amount of headaches you get after prolonged use. You can also adjust colour this way, but iPhone whites are possibly slightly blue. With this brightness, I find Gamma 2.0 looks the most natural.

The difference between the 8600K/8700K (almost identical performance) is only 20-30% faster depending on game and it some cases even slower than the 4790K, based on a benchmark of 5 non-DCS games. You should itch to upgrade your graphics card before you itch to upgrade your processing power.

I suggest searching for benchmarks. I don't believe it would be worth it, but I also don't play around with that amount of money. Current i5's/i7's are only about 20% faster than the legendary i7-2600K, but I don't know if that translates to 20% more peformance in games or less. Probably adds up to little less.

Your computer is good as-is, except the processor that you should probably upgrade to an i5-8400 along with your motherboard. I doubt you need more RAM (maybe in multiplayer?), but it's a fast upgrade after you find yourself running out. Solid state drives affect start-up times immensely, but not gameplay performance as far as I know. Simply upgrading series typically only adds +20%. If you want an upgrade you can feel you should go for a 1080 or 1080 Ti.

I don't need to know anything you think you know. I just opened 70 tabs in Internet Explorer and it only uses 1.6GB RAM, so switch off Chrome or simply close it.