av8orDave

You're running a top of the line system that most playing the game don't have. Additionally, you don't appear to be running VR. Throw VR into the equation and your tune will probably change, even with your system. Again, I run a Ryzen 9 7950X, 4090, and 64 DDR5, and DCS in VR with any reasonable number of units can bring my system to a crawl. Running on a monitor, few if any issues whatsoever. I've posted my specs, logs, etc ad-nauseum over the years. I actually don't believe they are that helpful, to be honest.

Here’s the simple answer: if you spawn into even just a scenario that will make the mission look “real”, it’ll be a stuttery mess. If using VR especially, you basically have to spawn into an empty, lifeless airfield or your framerates will be jumping all around. We’re talking basically ANY aircraft on the airfield. And it won’t matter what your graphics settings are. I have all the headroom in the world, but if I spawn onto Kandahar with the AH-64 or CH-47 and there are any other planes or choppers present, it’ll stutter. It is entirely unrelated to settings and entirely about CPU usage.

And how would a campaign creator do that? They design the campaign to run in the environment it currently operates in, I assume. Should they dial the demands of their campaigns back to accommodate some future yet-to-be-determined performance-impacting change coming down the pipeline in some future update? What is your solution here? I've run similar VR settings for a while. As the game changes, I should dial the settings back? That, or should ED optimize their code to accommodate their planned changes? While the campaigns may be designed around 2D, which I don't know to be factual but is your assumption, the campaign in question ran fine prior to the last update, so what does how it was designed have to do with anything? Seems like a stretch, sir.

I appreciate the perspective and opinion, but have you ever been around lawyers? You aren't going to get any of that, nor should you. Buying an $80 USD product does not entitle you to knowing how often, when, and about what two business communicate. You want to know who is in charge of negotiations? For what reason? You want to know any proposed settlement terms? Yeah, I can tell you with 100% confidence, that ain't gonna happen.

I know it has already been said, but I also think you're missing the point. Retribution ran just fine prior to the last update. Additionally, it isn't just Retribution that is currently screwed up, it is paid campaigns that have taken a performance hit. Set Retribution aside for a moment; Prior to the last couple updates, I could run the paid First in Weasels Over Syria campaign with no issues with more than acceptable framerates. Now, it is a stuttery mess. I run a Ryzen 9 7950X, RTX 4090, 64GB DDR5, and a Quest 3; my system shouldn't be the issue here.

I kept it. It is as functional as most planes in DCS. If it breaks at some point, I've probably already got my money's worth. It has made me rethink early-access purchases (again). You really do have to buy as if all you're getting is what is completed at the moment you buy. It is indeed a small, niche hobby where developers or the game itself could go belly up or change the program at any moment.

That was my first thought as well. What a beautiful country. Really kind of sad that it has been war-torn for such a long time. To the OP, great photos! Thank you for sharing!

Yeah, I’m aware and agree with your points from a general sense. Heck, you even just restated my first point (which by the way is an “official” recommendation from the ED team, so yes, the program should do that automatically). But the point is… it is no longer an “open beta” branch. The game ran fine enough til the last update, and then bang, were trying to troubleshoot so that paid campaigns are playable. Ugh.

This is the correct ranking. Only thing I'd maybe debate a bit is whether avionics accuracy & completeness should be rated ahead of or behind physics in ordinary flight regimes. They're close. Let me explain. DCS and most of the third party developers often cite lack of available information for a specific aircraft avionics system as a reason they don't model the aircraft. There are aircraft that I have a specific interest in, both due to the airframe and the mission profile, where I could live with "best guesses" or "compromises" if the avionics are maybe 95% accurate. It is a game, after all. I'm not suggesting DCS turn into War Thunder or the such, just that the quest for 100% accuracy where 97% accuracy might suffice might stand in the way of progress.

It's a real bummer, indeed. All the tweaking and tuning wears you out. Stuff like "delete your FXO and Metashaders" after each update (which I think is a "wive's tale" anyway)... if it is that important, why doesn't the program do it itself during the update process? "Upload a trackfile" and "submit your dcs log"... for crying out loud, my computer is a top-end system, what the heck? The game ran almost fine until the last update. The only thing that changed was the software itself. "Turn on vsync", "Turn off vsync", "Turn down the shadows setting", "turn textures to medium", "turn terrain textures to low", "reduce your PD", "Have you looked into core parking?"... It's exhausting. It really makes you question your own sanity.

Yeah this didn’t do anything.

Anyone using VR noticing that just loading the textures in the CH-47 takes like 30 seconds or more in some cases? Once you drop into the cockpit, you have to sit and wait for an extended period of time while textures load. I don't seem to have nearly as long a wait in other modules. Something seems amiss.

Well, just wanted to report for anyone with an AMD processor that is FPS-challenged, the reports of the increase in FPS for Ryzen processors with the Windows 11 24H2 preview build seem to be accurate at least in my case. I updated this evening and the performance increase in indeed noticeable, although I think ED still has quite a bit of work to do to make the game perform as it should. The preview build is not a "beta" or anything like that for those wondering... it is more like an "imminent release" candidate.

In VR, the CH-47F cockpit textures sometimes take a full minute to load. No joke. You'll drop into the plane, sit there before clicking "fly", and watch while the textures crawl in. It is crazy. How someone equates that to a portion of the Sinai map being deleted is a mystery to me. Just to put it into a different context, I'm a long-time, avid user, and I had no idea there was a Sinai "outcry" over the deletion, but was well-aware of the outcry over the performance issues. Hey, to each their own.

Thanks @Glide, I'll give your mission a try, both to gauge performance and for some fun.

And the last bit here is maybe an example of where this thread gets confusing; your Crystal at full resolution gets a smooth 60 fps in what type of mission? Can you post a trackfile or screenshot showing high, smooth framerates while sitting in a newer module (say AH-64D, CH-47F, etc) at Nellis AFB Nevada surrounded by 30 or 40 other aircraft, or do you mean you are getting a smooth 60 fps alone in free flight over the Caucasus? To be clear, I can get a rock-solid 72 fps in non-resource intensive (older) modules with very few AI assets in play over some maps; or I can cripple things with DCS Retribution, or particularly frustrating on some paid-DCS Third-Party Campaigns, where I used to be able to get smooth framerates.

Yeah, I tried terrain set to medium (along with almost every other options tweak possible) to no avail. There are two issues being discussed, as far as I can tell: 1) Stuttering. This is new as of the last few updates and has nothing to do with anything, settings or otherwise, other than the fact that something was introduced during the last couple updates that prevents running smooth gameplay. I'd describe it as a microstutter. 2) A major decrease in FPS. This, to me, seems to be entirely related to the number of units. I can set the units to a min number and maintain 72 fps with high settings, or I can add a lot of units and cripple the FPS even with low settings. In my experience most of the DCS options hit the GPU... I personally am not GPU limited, so reducing the settings has no effect on the FPS when a high unit count is in play. This 100% sums up where we are. A major frustration of mine is when people post that they are seeing a major FPS decrease when using missions with a large number of AI units where they used to have smooth framerates, and someone chimes in and says "my FPS is fine, post your settings, a track file, your DCS log, tell us what your system spec is, and give us a blood sample from your first born child" but when you ask them to post evidence that their FPS is "fine" in a very complex mission with high unit counts, it is radio silence. Very frustrating.

Do you mean that you think the new threading model will make missions with high unit counts a thing of the past because it will kill performance, or that it will make low unit counts a thing of the past by improving performance? I ask because my impression was that spreading the processing load across more threads would help performance. If the opposite happens, I honestly have no clue how the endless march toward better graphics, higher fidelity flight models, better AI, and eventually a dynamic campaign results in a playable game/simulation from a performance aspect.

You bet, but it 100% isn’t related to settings in my case, purely to AI unit count. Ryzen 9 7950X, RTX 4090, 64GB DDR5, using Quest 3; settings as follows: cockpit displays 1024 DLSS quality sharpening .5 textures high terrain textures high vis range medium shadows medium water medium clouds standard civ traffic off terrain object shadows I’ve tried default, flat, and off, no difference forest vis 100 clutter / grass 0 forest details 1 scenery details .5 preload radius all the way up Chimney smoke 0 LOD factor .5 Anisotropic 2 Global illum on Vsync off Pixel density 2 (quest pd set in meta app to default) Now that I’ve punched all that in, exactly what value did that add? Does someone NOT having issues care to post evidence that they are using a mission with a reasonably high unit count and getting acceptable framerates and without microstutters?

Regarding unit counts: Yesterday I loaded a Retribution mission with the option for all friendly forces that aren’t tasked not spawning. This results in you and your wingman being the only two aircraft on the airbase. My FPS were a solid 72 (7950X, 4090, 64G DDR5, Quest 3). I ran the same mission with all aircraft spawning, even those that are untasked. This results in you spawning onto an airfield surrounded by about 30 other helos. My FPS, same mission, were barely holding at 30 - 40 fps. To me it is obvious that something changed with the last update that is preventing DCS from handling any meaningful amount of units. How on earth would an eventual dynamic campaign work?

Maybe so, but given that it launched in a pretty bare-bones state (it’s basically unable to taxi, for example), it might be a nice gesture to show the plan.

I'm quite sure the OP is looking for something like this. If not, then I think something like this would be helpful.

This is the correct answer. I've used a number of VR headsets on multiple systems, and the sad reality is that you have to level-set your expectations when it relates to VR, even with a top-end system. Compared to TrackIR, the visual experience won't be on-par... you'll have to make graphical tradeoffs, primarily on texture settings and other visual details. The benefit is the "immersion" you get in VR. You're no longer flying in your living room starting at a flatscreen monitor with a hat and infrared clip on your head. You're now sitting in the cockpit, at least as far as your visual senses are concerned. If you don't think you want to live with lower graphics settings, and don't want to spend at least some time tweaking and adjusting trying to get just the right experience, don't torture yourself with VR. Once you try it, you can't un-see it.

I almost posted the same thing today. No idea how to operate them. Also couldn’t find anything in the manual.

I'm thinking I'm going to take a break from DCS. I've spent thousands of dollars with ED on modules, and I'm beyond frustrated. Any mission with a decent number of units brings my pretty powerful system to a crawl (Ryzen 9 7950X, RTX 4090, 64GB DDR5). I'll keep checking the forums and hopefully be back to playing when the performance improves.