LucShep

The VRAM numbers difference may come from one value (the lower one) being the VRAM usage, and the other (the much higher one) the VRAM allocation. It just seems then that MSI Afterburner still calls them both the same name (has done for years, wrongly so) but you can change the name on the wrong one and correct it. In your RTX4070Ti Super, you have a 16GB VRAM buffer, available to be allocated and used (Nvidia explains more of this here). Don't worry about VRAM allocation, it's normal that it gets close to total of VRAM in the GPU (‘I want it in case I need it’). With DCS, it will always be allocated as much as possible. Now, the other one, the VRAM usage (the actual one in the in-game statistics you mention) is the one to be worried about, and DCS likes to eat a truck load of it.... If the VRAM usage gets to that point that reaches the total VRAM limit of your GPU, a purge is atempted, causing a noticeable performance hitch while the current scene is reloaded into memory. And it then (in panic mode) goes to consume your RAM, and then your Swapfile/Pagefile if there isn't enough RAM (which can go 40GB+ usage on its own in MP). Neither RAM (best case) or Swapfile/Pagefile (worst case) will be anywhere near the speed of dedicated VRAM on the GPU, and assets load much, much slower then. And then if you add the fact already mentioned in this thread, that DCS swaps a lot, the big textures inside the .ZIP files, being extracted and then swaped, etc...... Things can become extremely problematic (a nightmare of stuttering only fixable by quitting the game to desktop), and why high-end 16GB(+) VRAM GPUs and 64GB of fast RAM, along with a strong CPU and game on a good NVME drive, are so desirable for DCS. And also why those "optimized textures" mods got so popular. Hopefully, all that is far more controlled there now. PS: for a real test of performance, I'd suggest a higher detail module and map (Tomcat, Phantom, Apache, Chinook, Hind, etc, on Syria, Sinai, Afghanistan, Kola, etc). Those will push a LOT more than the default Frogfoot (or even the Hornet) on Caucasus, guaranteed.

Nah, the OVGME folder where you put the mods to be activated is just an "archive base" (and why it doesn't really matter in what drive it is located). When activating a mod, its respective modded files go into your game (in your NVME) replacing old/original ones, and OVGME creates backups of those, in case you later wish to revert.

I didn't use that. What I did was to separate the mod in parts, instead of just one huge folder. You'll notice that inside the .Mod folder there is (or at least when I used it there was) "Bazar", "CoreMods" and "Mods" folders I created three folders in OVGME mods folder... "BAZAR_Texmod" "COREMODS_Texmod" "MODS_Texmod" ...then copied/pasted the "Bazar", "CoreMods" and "Mods" folders inside those respective folders in OVGME, and activated them... Done. (note: it may take quite a while for each, make sure to have the disc space as well for OVGME mods and backups).

First of all, I'm not sure you're accustomated with mods in DCS. If you are then pardon me (and ignore) the quote below. Now, as for your questions.... 2.1 It's been months since I used it, but IIRC, it puts all resized textures inside a .Mod folder, itself with folder structures inside just like the DCS main installation ("Bazar", "CoreMods" and "Mods" folders, with all the resized textures inside). I would not recommend copy/pasteing its content to the game. Instead, use a mod manager, and then "activate" that Mod folder, pointed to the main installation folder of DCS. 2.2 I use all my mod manager files on an HDD (yes much slower but far more practical for mod activation and original backups placement). Mainly because NVME space is dear to me. There is no need to have the mod manager files on same drive as the game. 2.3 Yes, it may overwrite files and then it may become a mix of all things wrong. You can use them together, but make sure to leave the CGTC mod for last. 2.4 No, it won't, no problem there. The Shadows_Reduced_Impact_v2.11 is just a modified Shadows config, which none of those mods aproach or touch. Install it first or last, won't matter. I'll finish with an advice that you'll often see repeated.... Whatever you do to change stuff (which you should, modding is amazing at times), always make backups, and even better if you use a mod manager. There are literally thousands of files in the game (it's friggin huge as you've noticed) and it's not funny at all when things go wrong (and at times they do).

I did. It's again the subjective aspect of "perception and preferences". Maybe it's just that I'm more sensitive to micro-stuttering than others - and I think I've tried everything. The main problem for me is, being spoiled for so long with a modified DCS 2.5.6. It works in VR significantly more performant and absolutely smooth at 170% HMD resolution, MSAA 4x and all (yes you read that right). It becomes a huge downgrade to get back to latest 2.9x (or any version of DCS after 2.5.6) and having to set it at 100% HDM resolution, and always some micro-stuttering creeping in (hence such settings).

It's not the same thing for Maps (terrain) textures as it is for Core and Mods original content. Those use a single set of textures, but the Maps have their own "HIGH" and "LOW" textures, so makes no sense to resize textures of Maps (IMO). Meaning, for now it's better to leave those as is and just set "Terrain Textures" to LOW - doing that you basically end up with same result as if you'd "optimize" them. That Shadow mod in my sig atempts to ensure best quality of Cockpit shadow (I can't use a cockpit in DCS without shadows, looks horrible), while reducing the number of cascades, or "resolution steps within ammount of distance" if you will, for the external shadows (i.e, all those outside of your cockpit, so of your own plane and every other object outside), which reduces CPU utilization for them - therefore slightly increases performance. Notice that you have shadows in other objects, such as other aicraft, vehicles, buildings, very long etc, which are not included in the "Terrain Shadows". Those usually belong in the "Shadows" setting, as does your own cockpit shadows as well (yes, should be a separate setting... but isn't!). Hence why the mod was created. It achieves the best of both worlds (IMO) - great cockpit shadows, no matter what setting you use for the externals shadows (with increased performance). And that's why, with it, you can set the "Shadows" setting at LOW and it still looks good. It's set at 4096 pixels for the shadow resolution no matter the setting. But you can also edit it, with notepad++ or any other text editor, and adjust the shadow resolution as you wish (for some, 2048 may be better for VR, instead of 4096). It does not affect Flat shadows, if you intend to use that setting (for the Terrain Shadows). And, of course, if you ever resort to use "Shadows" set at OFF (i.e, no shadows at all, as I see some DCS VR youtubers do! ) then it obviously makes no sense to use that mod.

Sure, give it a go and follow the few instructions in it. But, again, do not expect miracles. Suggesting settings for VR is complicated because each person has their own perception of things (of stuttering/hitching, and of desired details), it becomes subjective. What might be good for me may not be for you, and vice-versa. But, for me and my system (and similar), these have been "non-negotiable" for VR: "Terrain Textures" - - - - - - - - - LOW (this is important to avoid stuttering in VR, no matter the system - as I previously explained) "Terrain Object Shadows" - - - - OFF (very important to avoid stuttering in VR; "Flat" or "Default" to be used only if performance is outstanding and smooth in all situations) "Clouds" - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - LOW (this is to avoid impact on GPU usage and VRAM; Set at "Standard" should also be okay, but avoid higher settings) "Visib.Range" - - - - - - - - - - - - MEDIUM (good enough detail that doesn't bog down performance too much) "Forest Visibility" - - - - - - - - - - 100% (so at max, this will balance/mask the tree-popping by the limited "Medium" Visib.Range, not a problem if with Terrain Shadows OFF) "Forest Details Factor" - - - - - - 0.4 (this is a LOD switch for forest related details; always avoid more than 0.5, as it impacts performance ) "Scenery Details Factor" - - - - - 0.4 (this is a LOD switch for scenery related details; always avoid more than 0.5, as it impacts performance ) "LOD Switch Factor" - - - - - - - - 1.0 (this is the main LOD switch for all details, decrease for more performance; do NOT increase over 1.0) "Civil.Traffic" - - - - - - - - - - - - LOW (this setting is really no big deal for immersion and just consumes CPU cycles - maybe even consider it at "OFF") "Water" - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - LOW (easiest sacrifice (IMO); MEDIUM may be an option (if perf. allows it); "HIGH" best avoided - adds complex reflections and does impact) "Shadows" - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MEDIUM (good enough detail for cockpit that doesn't bog down performance - maybe try the Shadow mod in my sig and reduced it to LOW) "Clutter/Grass" - - - - - - - - - - - 1000 (nice enough detail for that, usually doesn't bog down performance) "Preload Radius" - - - - - - - - - - 75000 (perfect for 64GB of RAM, more than "90000" the loading times become long and impacts RAM + pagefile) "Chimney SMoke Density" - - - - 1 (this is the number of chimneys smoking in a radius; at minimum is best also for lower repetition pattern) "Anisotropic Filtering" - - - - - - 8x (you don't need more than this in DCS, be it for VR or 2D screen, and can impact performance) "Lens Effects" - - - - - - - - - - - - Flare (clean and natural sun flare effects; If you dislike the effect, change to OFF) "Heat Blur" - - - - - - - - - - - - - - LOW (no need to use more than this, higher settings can impact performance with no benefits on image; OFF could also be considered) "Motion Blur" - - - - - - - - - - - - - OFF (of no real importance for a flight-sim; OFF avoids creating ghosting (or adding even more) on objects) "Depth of Field" - - - - - - - - - - - OFF (huge impact on GPU usage; avoid enabling it at all times, no matter the system, be it 2D or VR) "Wake Turbulence" - - - - - - - - - OFF (this particular setting is found under "Gameplay" settings - can greatly impact performance with more aircraft ingame).

Yep, just tested, both links working.

I know mate but, while that's valid, I'm hoping for the author to improve it (it's still not there IMO).

Maybe you didn't look hard enough...? https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/product/DP7scf/gskill-trident-z5-neo-rgb-64-gb-2-x-32-gb-ddr5-6000-cl30-memory-f5-6000j3036g32gx2-tz5nrw https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/product/hRQcCJ/gskill-trident-z5-neo-rgb-64-gb-2-x-32-gb-ddr5-6000-cl30-memory-f5-6000j3040g32gx2-tz5nr https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/product/6QcgXL/gskill-flare-x5-64-gb-2-x-32-gb-ddr5-6000-cl30-memory-f5-6000j3040g32gx2-fx5

That is also good, but I see two problems - price is too high and the Corsair iCUE () software for the RGB setting.

There are many other brands, but I recommend GSKILL (personal preference). This would be good: https://www.gskill.com/product/165/390/1692167426/F5-6000J3036G32GX2-TZ5NR (black) https://www.gskill.com/product/165/390/1692584825/F5-6000J3036G32GX2-TZ5NRW (white) Or this, if you're looking for something more affordable: https://www.gskill.com/product/165/396/1691400033/F5-6000J3040G32GX2-FX5

Two choices, IMO: DDR5 6000 CL30 "AMD EXPO" kits (if you just want to put the sticks and load EXPO in the BIOS, i.e, basically "plug ang play") or DDR5 6400 CL32 kits (if you're willing to adjust/change/test a few RAM speed and timings settings in the BIOS). See HUB's video at 24:32 time:

@Gil80 Please try "Terrain Textures" at LOW and "Terrain Shadows" at OFF. That will imediately aleviate things a bit. DCS has three major problems (among others, I presume) for a long time now, still to be addressed: 1) The clouds system, how they're rendered - comparing Clouds setting "LOW" and "ULTRA", imediately one notices a considerable performance difference. Maybe also try Clouds at "LOW" see if it helps? Anything above "Standard" is a no-no for VR. (and I don't care if those contradicting have a NASA system, it shouldn't be like that) One of the main reasons for so many disgruntled VR users when version 2.7 came out (when the new clouds were introduced), still to be addressed. 2) The shadows for terrain objects are also a problem because, while it "beautifies" the image at distance, it does put a heavy toll on the hardware - even if set at "Flat". Shadows are still intensive tasks in any game, and in DCS with them at such long distances, for a gazillion of trees, bushes and etc, it can be a problem. If you're one of those that "can not live without Terrain Shadows!" then all I can suggest is the Shadows mod in my signature (it may or not help, do not hope for a miracle). 3) The exaggerated usage of high res formats in textures. @The_Nephilim is right in that, reducing textures settings does help in VR, even if you have 16GB VRAM. It is so, because too many are too big, and how often DCS swaps. Most of the textures are stored in compressed .ZIP format. The bigger the texture size, the longer DCS will take to extract from the .ZIP file and then swap, for Core, Modules and Maps. In VR the issue gets even more exarcebated because every little tiny wee I/O interference is imediately noticed, more so than in 2D. So, for the Maps, and because these have their own separate "LOW" textures (Core and Modules do not, they use single set), it instantly helps. After over four years with this issue exposed in these forums inumerous times, I start losing hope that a fix for this will come. Taz presented a solution but isn't maintaining it anymore, unfortunately. His mod is/was an absolute must (yes, it did/does break IC for those focusing in MultiPlayer):

Yep, it's been crazy. And perhaps you were lucky with yours. Word here is that it all sold out everywhere in less than three hours(!) even those through external sellers pushing silly prices (some had them at 770€!) I guess scalpers already took over online retailers and reselling it at 800€-1000€... PS: those less lucky should calm down temptations and wait for it to normalize, price and stock wise.

Consider me impressed. Was not a fan of previous 8-cores X3D chips of AMD, but this one impresses in the changes, for temps and wattage department, given the higher clocks it can now achieve. I'd probably be all over one if AMD made it a single CCD with 12 cores, but alas... If anyone getting into a new platform wants gaming performance and 8-cores is all you need, yeah this is it. Yes, the price (of motherboards inclusively, not just X870/E but even X670/E and B650/E are seeing prices rising) is the biggest question mark now, at least in Europe. That and availability. I suspect these will either get inflated prices and/or get out of stock soon. Anyone thinking about getting it should do it NOW.

Fair point, but at least wait for BlackFriday deals and such (keep an eye out there).

....ooh you'd be surprised how many people in competitive gaming (so called "Esports") look for the last little bit of performance edge to get some advantage (and pay for it).

It's been commented in various other videos, of other youtubers, that the 285K "Error Lake" (lol) comes quite a bit effed up right out of the box, that there's a lot to tune but then is quite complex to OC (far more than before). Some sell modmats, hoodies, hats or t-shirts... he builds and tweaks systems, and gives lessons. That complexity in OC'ing the 285K seems like an opportunity he sees to promote his own business. (or at least that's what I take from it) As usual, I simply ignore that part and take the rest that interest me from his video(s).

He's been around for quite a while and knows his way very well around stuff, and is severely underrated (his somewhat obnoxious tone doesn't help him, I guess). It's one of very, very few people in the tech space that doesn't give a hoot if it hurts or not the manufacturers/brands (and fanboys) of whatever product, sponsorship and samples be damned etc, as he fully relies in his own community and related business for own funding. Tells like it is, and calls a spade a spade, every time. But, from that to recommending his (or any) course goes a looooong way. I have no interest in that, and honestly can't see why would anyone here would need it.

Finally.... the one that most were looking for (always tells like it is) - Framechasers review.

and I did...... Means nothing. The included terrain.cfg.lua bypasses the encrypted one (at least for now), no issues there at this point.

64GB of RAM is recommended for DCS, especially if you tend to do complex missions and/or get into MultiPlayer (40GB+ of RAM usage is not uncommon). Of course, 96GB will be even better - that's kind of overkill today but at least you won't bother again about RAM for years. There is no need for 128GB, that's way overkill. The thing is, not all RAM is equal (speed and latency varies), and advice on which memory kit for your to get will depend on the system... Which processor and motherboard is going to be used for that new system? As for the VRAM on the graphics card, models with 16GB are recommended. DCS has many large textures being triggered and swapped at the same time, it can easily consume over 12GB of VRAM, and even more so when in MultiPlayer. If it's for a 4K screen, either RTX 4070Ti Super or RX 7900 XT will be good. RTX 4080 Super or RX 7900 XTX even better. You may wonder about something extreme like an RTX 4090, but spending on that one only makes real sense if you're going to play DCS in VR.

All of the 42'' OLEDs in the market are as flagships and outstandingly good, some slightly more than others (and not all have USB-C) but you can buy any with confidence. That is, provided that you're already aware of risk of burn-in in the long-term with prolongued heavy usage of static images (but mitigations and routines to avoid it exhist). All have continuous support with own Firmware releases that keep slightly improving things. As for the lack of DisplayPort 1.4 on those labelled as TVs, it's not a problem at all in practice when using them as a PC monitor, though you must have a good quality HDMI 2.1 cable (Zeskit, Maxonar, Stouchi, Audioquest, etc). 42” OLED 4K 120Hz (138Hz w/OC) --------------------------- ASUS PG42UQ - review: https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/asus/rog-swift-oled-pg42uq Philips 42M2N8900 - review: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/philips-evnia-42m2n89-review KTC G42P5 - review: https://www.guru3d.com/review/ktc-g42p5-oled-monitor-review/ 42” OLED 4K 120Hz --------------------------- LG OLED42C2 (TV, only HDMI, no DP) - review: https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/lg/42-c2-oled LG OLED42C3 (TV, only HDMI, no DP) - review: https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/lg/c3-oled LG OLED42C4 (TV, only HDMI, no DP) - review: https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/lg/42-c4-oled 42” OLED 4K 120Hz Bendable (flat to 900R curve) ------------------------------------------- LG OLED Flex LX3 (TV, only HDMI, no DP) - review: https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/lg/oled-flex For more listed specifications of these (and other) PC monitors and TV's, you have good old DisplaySpecs website (https://www.displayspecifications.com).

@zbysiek Hello, Please disregard the following wall of text, if it's too much work, too complex to accomplish from a batch conversion. They're just suggestions. If it's already being taken into account, pardon me because I'm not up to speed (I didn't read all the pages in this thread, sorry all!). I wonder if you can separate sizes and formats depending on the type of texture and aplication? Core and Modules? And for Modules, if you can separate packages for such batch process, "external textures" from "cockpit textures" ? For example, this is what I've manually done (took weeks then!) for myself a few years back (for older DCS 2.5.6, not latest DCS versions). I found outstanding results for smoother performance, with minimal (pratically unnoticeable) graphical difference: CORE textures (weapons, tanks, ships, vehicles, non flyable aircraft, etc, etc - i.e, every other texture not belonging to Maps or Modules) Diffuse maps (the main textures) ---- resized to 75% of original (4096 pixels become 3072; 2048 pixels become 1536, etc). Bump maps and Specular maps ---- resized to 50% of original (4096 pixels become 2048; 2048 pixels become 1024, etc) MODULE textures - External textures Diffuse maps (the main textures) ---- resized to 75% of original (4096 pixels become 3072; 2048 pixels become 1536, etc). Bump maps and Specular maps ---- resized to 75% of original (4096 pixels become 3072; 2048 pixels become 1536, etc). - Cockpit textures Diffuse maps (the main textures) ---- size remains as they are originally (I think some could be resized but, as they're so close to POV, pixelization becomes evident, so best avoid) Instruments / Gauges ---- resized to 75% of original (4096 pixels becomes 3072; 2048 pixels become 1536, etc). Bump maps and Specular maps ---- resized to 75% of original (4096 pixels becomes 3072; 2048 pixels become 1536, etc). All the .DDS textures converted to 8-bit whenever possible, whatever the case (i.e, no use of 32-bit textures as far as possible). Even better, if there is any .DDS texture for the above that has no transparency alpha, then converted to DXT1 (and not DXT5). - - - - Please don't bother with the Maps (the terrains), it's not really worth it. The problem is not so crucial with these because all Maps have their own "LOW" textures. Core and Modules don't have these (they use single set of textures), so are the most problematic. That said, there is a simple trick that works well for slightly smoother rendering, which is to use the corresponding "LOW" (.min) trees in place of the "HIGH" ones in a Map. There are then improvements without any prejudice for graphics, for those that wish to keep Terrain Textures set at "HIGH" (terrain remains the same, difference for trees is very minimal). Benefit impact in VRAM might be small, but smoothness is noticed, especially in forested areas where tree textures are being triggered/rendered by the dozens. Or at least I woldn't bother much with Maps (terrain), unless it's an 8K texture that is found - then maybe it should be 4K. Lastly, and still about Maps, if you're going ahead and doing it anyway... You may have already noticed that all the Maps use some sort of a system in which, if you resize a texture differently (or use different format) and repackage it again inside the respective .ZIP where it belongs, it may produce a rendering error once in the game - parts in the terrain to which that .ZIP package content corresponds become fully black. Meaning, for the Maps, pay attention to the .ZIP packages where all textures inside have same size and format. For these, you either resize ALL the textures exactly same format and size inside their corresponding .ZIP package, or otherwise problems will be ahead once in the game. PS: sorry all for the wall of text!