Csgo GE oh yeah

3080 , 8700K @ 5ghz, 36GB RAM (3200mhz) Settings are in the video somewhere I should have used the geforce overlay to show GPU usage, but i didn't. It's about 80-90% in this empty , offline mission.

In gaming ? 25% ? I kind of doubt it especially if the 8600K is a little overclocked. Look here :

hmm... From 18 ms frametime to 15 ms. That's a 15% improvement. Can't say i'm over the moon with that.

Those programs only show vram "allocation". Some programs just like to reserve (allocate) all the VRAM available while only using 10% of it (example) Apparently the VRAM you actually need (the amount actually USED by the program) is very difficult to measure. This info should come from ED so we know if we need that ridiculous rtx 3090 or if an rtx 3080 will do (for VR) I'm beginning to think ED doesn't even know how much Vram DCS uses though.

Kills immersion though

Well, it will be many years before anything changes in that regard right ? Haven't they quite recently overhauled the engine already ?

Well that's my whole point. "Allocated" doesn't tell us much.

I doubt msi afterburner is telling you how much VRAM is being actually 'used'. From what i've heard that is not so easy to monitor at all. All these programs are just reading what portion of the Vram is 'reserved' , apparently there's a big difference between 'reserved/allocated' and actually used. Some programs even just hog all the Vram while only using 10% of it. In short, the 'allocated' VRAM doesn't tell you how much Vram you need at all , at least that's my understanding ?

Exactly, something like that. And in the process you get double frames, especially around the keypad thing in the cockpit.

But surely ED must have an idea of how much VRAM their program uses

Played there today after a long time playing on another pvp server. Server was smoother than the other server i play on, it was also pretty populated. Too bad there's no public 104th discord or something. I used to hate discord but it's a great community-binder thing. It includes voice-channels , a place to post videos, discuss server things and off topic things in real time. It acts as a central hub and i think helps tremendously to keep a server populated.

So, there's this 'bouncing' thing where the amraam just makes a 180 turn which appears to happen when the enemy turns his undercarriage towards the amraam. But now there's also this , 1 chaff from a useless angle and ... First bit is from extarnal view, second bit is from missile POV

aw man for a second i hoped that 'the netcode' (whatever that may mean) had been improved :(

"multiplayer protocol changed" What does this mean ? And how come this patch is 50 gigs , is it because i changed my shaders to the masked shaders for vr ? It'[s really annoying that i have to swap out the game's shaders and download again after every small update >_<

For me around 45 fps is actually the most fluent Above 60 seems to cause weird stutters every now and then. The absolute best would probably to get a 90 fps constant @ 90 hz but, dream on :d

ED should inform us on actual Vram usage in 2d and VR. Only they can tell us how much Vram we ACTUALLY need for different scenario's. All these tools that display "allocation" are not very helpful.

GPU-Z and the likes don't give any real insight in how much Vram we need at all unfortunately. Could you please shed some light on actual Vram usage in DCS ? We have no way of measuring this, this info has to come from you . Just ballpark numbers for 2d and VR would be immensely helpful !

What are you guys doing running steam supersampling @ only 150% with a 3080 ? You're not going to see much of a difference indeed like that. Put that slider on 300% , textures high, visibility extreme, Msaa on . Then test with your 1080 ti first, and then with the 3080. edit* I can see that in multiplayer or missions with A.I the performance gain will be a lot less. Holy crap just getting into a very simple multiplayer pvp mission with not a lot of A.I at all will put SO much load on only 1 core. It's a little sad actually :(

Don't base your choice on the capacitator drama.

None of the 30 series card really overclock very well. There's very little 'headroom'. The FE cards do boost themselves a little higher but in performance the difference is usually in the 1% range. The FE cards are (imo) better looking though. And cheaper. I've been deciding between the 3080 and 3090, personally i went for the 3080 because i was able to get it 2 days after launch . For the performance difference between the 3080 and 3090 alone (around 10%) i would never even consider the 3090 . For the VRAM, who knows. I have no idea how much VRAM is ACTUALLY used (not "allocated" but used) in various games. I wish someone would do some GOOD vr testing on that. Data about actual VRAM usage seems really hard to find unfortunately. Interesting times to upgrade that's for sure. Apparently AMD 's "zen 3" cpu is also very promising. @harlikin , 30 series is pretty good. I'm using Steam 300% now with HP reverb (200% or 300% really makes a difference in sharpness), also 2x msaa , and ultra visibility range. Textures high, shadows high. It just looks pretty good. Hope the G2 won't disappoint. I heard it needs an extra power cable now (that goes in the wall socket) . Not a fan of that but it is what it is.

The weird thing is, there's this kind of double framing/frame persistance in the cockpit, even when framerate and frametime is perfectly fine. I've tried all the settings but it really is something IN the cockpit that causes this no matter what.

Chaff resistance is based on the imagination that the phoenix missile did NOT go out of service, but was continued in development. I understand you work with what you got but that's one step too far if you constantly say "reality is all that matters" . And combined with the already insanely low chaff values for the old 1970's analog missiles ... 1970's missiles are supposed to have a chaff resistance value of 1, or 2 ? Not 0.06 As for effectiveness, Iranian reports well ... let's not touch that one at this moment. Anyway, i'm looking forward to the correction of the chaff values, in line with the aim 120 . Altough it should be even worse than the aim 120 , ESPECIALLY these old 1970's missiles.

Are the textures of higher quality compared to other aircraft or something ? Just sitting in the F16 seems to cost 20% performance, anyone know why that is ? EDIT* Ok so it's not so much about framerate. Even with high enough framerate, looking around in the cockpit seems laggy, or 'unsmooth' . Like frames are missing , but FPS (and frametime) are good ??

But the phoenix missile is now being based on a completely imaginary missile . It's being based on: "if it had been further developed". That's , well that's not even trying to emulate realism, because the missile was NOT further developed. "if this had happened", "if that had happened" . You get my point ?

hmm personally i'm not a fan of this bit : "and if their service would have continue, likely the aim54 would have been kept up to date in that regard as well". From all that i've read the phoenix missile in reality was horrible to begin with for air to air combat vs manouvrable aircraft. With that in mind it seems that the phoenix missile is already a sort of theoretical "what if" missile in DCS . Not sure if even going a step further, and basing it on "what if they had developed it further" is good for realism.