gitbse

Not for me. See my comment above.

Pretty rough go for me on MT day zero. I'm sure I'm not alone, although the initial reviews seem to be stellar. I've lost an immediate ~25% performance with the MT option. Background info: SteamVR, Valve Index. 13700kf @5.5ghz. 6900xt, 32GB DDR5. Single thread currently, I can run a consistent 45fps (it never goes above for some reason.. no ASW ever enabled) in the Apache, and even up to a solid 60fps in other modules, the 14, 16, 18, Huey... etc. Now in MT, with exactly the same graphics settings, it will give me a "CPU Bound" fault, and chug along at ~30fps. Slow frames, and lots of stuttering. The FPS counter also will show something like 30FPS "Theoretical FPS:215" like it's mocking me. I get that it's the first day and ED has even said it may be messy. I'll add my dxdiag and DCS log along in here to help, but for now I can't get MT to even be playable. dcs.log DxDiag.txt

Nope, same for me on a 13700KF. Running at 5.5ghz, 6900xt and 32gb DDR5. I lost an immediate ~25% performance in VR with the MT release option, with exactly the same settings as single threading side by side. Something is oddly broken for an unfortunate few of us.

I love the tapedeck in the 14, it's one of the most enjoyable small details. It isn't working properly though as of 2.8. It will start playing, and then just keep going without any other possible control. Volume can't be changed, fast forwar/reverse doesn't work, and it can't even be stopped, it plays over even the F10 map, and you have to reload into a different airframe to stop it.

Shadows do not make a difference in my performance. I usually use low or flat anyways, but even low to off made no framerate change. I haven't tried general texture changes, but I did try the cockpit screen resolution, with no difference. I'll give the textures a try next.

@BIGNEWY I'd like to add what I found tonight. I did some testing with the same graphics settings, and found that there is a *significant* difference in the performance between models. My rig: i9 10900k, 5.2ghz; 6900xt slight overclock; 64gb DDR4, running off m.2 SSD; Valve index. In-game graphics settings are included in a screenshot. I mainly fly the Apache on MP servers, so I took it so NTTR, instant action. I had very similar performance on this instant start map as I do on MP servers. It was limited to 40fps, no matter what.... however the ctrl-Pause FPS counter showed a frame time of .1ms, consistently. I then got in the F14, same map. Hot start, instant action. There was an *absolutely noticeable* difference. I could run 60fps no problem, from ground all the way to 40k. Smooth running, no problems. The clouds are still ... eh... but the graphics and the straight out performance is drastically different. Same thing in the F16. Wonderful flying, no stutters, no frames dropped, 60fps solid all the way. Screenshots included of the in-game performance but kinda hard to read. The screenshot with the Mirage is actually from the Apache cockpit. Same thing happens on my squad's MP servers. There is a significant difference in performance. The Apache (my main frame unfortunately) cannot, and will not break 40fps, sometimes chugging to <30 depending where I'm looking. The 14, 16, 18? Awesome. 55-60fps even on a decently heavy MP server. Again, the screenshots of the ingame performance tab didn't come out well, but it can kinda be read. You can however see the graph, and the Apache at 40fps is .... somehow holding the same frame time as the others at 60. Odd. I can't emphasize enough the difference between model experiences in game. The Apache visual performance is sluggish, choppy, and at some points bad enough to where it's hard to fly it properly. 20fps is rough in VR. Same maps, both MP and offline, 14 and 16 are excellent. I know there have been mixed reviews from different users from a performance stance for 2.8, but I didn't expect myself to become a benchmark for each side. I can provide better performance screenshots if necessary. I'm not sure how much that performance tab would help in troubleshooting, but I'm ready to help sort this performance issue out. If all VR performance could be like how the 14 is flying right now in game, it would be excellent. For some reason though, different models fly remarkably differently in VR performance.

Yea I think it's still WIP. It does drop pretty dramatically while going to altitude. Engine fuel flow at altitude will decrease, but burner is just dumping raw fuel, it should still be a firehose.

Funny, I've never gotten bypass to work in the hornet. Programs always worked fine, but that was the only way I could get anything to dispense

Red bull pilots are limited to 10 or 11 for competition, and get DQ'd of they pass it. They also dont wear Gsuits, they pretty much show the limits of human performance in aircraft

The airspeed indicator maxes at 900ktsC This is true to the real jet. Doesnt mean it's not going any faster.

This is what stuck out to me. Granted, yes.... it's a light jet, and is much more influenced by stores, tanks, and extra weight so it's definitely going to be slower. However... the engine rpm isnt crossing 90% for.me either fully loaded. Bignewy and nineline have acknowledged engine, fuel, AB and others are heavily WIP and will be worked on. Its early, it will be worked out.

Other forums have noted that fuel burn is only about 25% of what it should be. Theres a missing ~50,000 pph fuel flow, so right now it's barely getting out of mil power.

Fuel flow is a known issue. Its topping out at ~22k pph, which should be closer to 65k-70k at full burner. Seems it's not lighting past either mil or 1st stage burner.

I have the same setup, a MCG pro with the extension. I noticed it felt sluggish out of the box as well. However, the Viper flies with a pressure stick, and the FM seems to replicate that. Say, vs the hornet which models a 1:1 movement of my stick to the cockpit stick pretty well. I changed my X axis saturation to about 70% with 10% curve, and it's perfect. The X saturation seems to make up for the input difference.

It's a known problem, discussed in other threads. The engine is only burning ~~1\3 of what it should at full wet power. Seems it's only getting to full milk, or stage 1 ab. Which totally makes sense from the few hours I have in it so far. It will not have near 1:1 without full AB, but it's still damn fast. Sp, its gonna be scary when properly tuned.