Charly314159

Yes it has been reported to be briken since the first 2.7 beta but instead of patching it or rolling back to a working state ED decided to push the bug to the release. They will probably try to adress it in 2-3 months once enough things have piled up on top of it... Is porting bugs reported on a beta program to the stable branch the new standard of software development?

ACM modes have never been an issue before on the hornet. The bug has been reported multiple times since 2.7. If this was an open beta program you would have solved it or rolled back to a previous working state before pushing it to the "stable" branch. Conclusion : this is not a beta program, this is a joke. And this is a show stopping bug for F18 BFM.

So it seems the broken early access code was "ported" to the stable release in the end. Nice ... This alone discredit everything that is said about using the release to avoid bugs.

@BIGNEWY Well it was working flawlessly before. Isn't it point of a beta program to be able to roll back when something breaks? Will we get the usually strategy of burying to the bug under a ton of updates before trying to fix it in one or two years? This is a game breaking one.

@BIGNEWY When will the F-18 ACM modes be fixed? It has been broken and reported for nearly a month already... BFM was the last thing in which it was competitive after the hit the radar took (breaking the consistency with other modules).

Yeah it's really killing the Hornet in BFM...it is sometimes necessary to undesignate and relock 3-4 times to get a working gun sight... And it is not limited to HACQ but to all ACM modes. I don't get why this kind of bug need to be reported when 2min of testing prior to release would have shown it...

Have you already seen a feedback on a track here?

I see much more stutter in VR with this week's patch I was quite happy with the performance I reached with 2.7 in VR (despite having to downgrade settings again...) but it's all broken once again

If it brings us toward more realism that's a good thing. However, it is a bit frustrating to update one plane at the time. Now the Hornet looks ridiculous against the F-16 or the JF-17 which really doesn't make sense. Physics should be the same for all modules so we shouldn't see this kind of inexplicable disparities

As you said if you want to play MP you are almost required to make the switch to OB unless you have your own server. You managed to contradict yourself inside of a single post. Moreover let me remind you that often the stable has more bugs and performance hiccups than the open beta (since bugs are patched in the OB and transferred to the stable months later). What happened last year with 2.5.6 is a really good example of that. I agree this not how a stable/open beta should work but it is what we get. So again your comment was pointless.

He is clearly referring to multiplayer play so your remark is pointless...

As discussed with you performance is something really non linear especially for VR users. On screen especially when using vsync you might not notice a performance drop because you have enough performance overhead to stay locked at 60fps typically which is not that hard to get on screen. VR is much more demanding and as soon as ASW or motion smoothing doesn't get the required threshold to correctly interpolate the experience is totally ruined if you're sensitive to stutter. Of course people who had decent margin with the ASW might not notice anything despite a drop in performance. People who fine tuned the sim to get the most out of their hardware will in contrary suffer from the slightest drop in perfo. Judging perf with vsync, ASW or motion smoothing ON is wrong.

LOL:

Nvidia 466 was rebar introduction I think, that might be linked even if my 2080ti doesn't support it

Don't try to argue, this guy has too much PC maintenance skills for us mere mortals

I was having dips to 30-35 fps with the 466.11 driver I am now pretty much locked at 45. I think 466.11 it has some strange interraction with 2.7 as it was working fine with 2.5.6. give it a try. What I don't understand so far is why some people with radeon cars have suffer are suffering as well with 2.7.

Guys, try to roll back to nvidia driver 461.72 it appears to be much smoother to me

Awesome finding this is indeed much smoother in VR with 461.72! The strange is is that the 2.5.6 was good with 466.11 vut DCS probably interract differently with the driver now. This also proves that next time you can keep your condesending comments about PC maintenance.

Such a ridiculous comment... All the data I saw prove the opposite. You're comparing numbers to impressions. Maybe be a bit less biased when you want to teach life to people.

That's unfortunately not a computer issue ad I have changed, reinstalled it and made all possible optimization several times. I have confirmed that I am quite far from having any CPU, ram or GPU bottleneck. As express multiple times this is a core issue that makes the sim unable to leverage even the most capable hardware.

Lol it's difficult on high end hardware too. 30% is 30% regardless of your initial fps. And indeed that 's a huge performance hit.

Test conditions : - Caucasus - Only one aircraft - overcast preset - settings as attached - Ryzen 4600x @ 4.8GHz, 32gb @ 3700MHz, RTX2080ti @2.1GHz, DCS on a dedicated 1to 970 evo pro nvme SSD - HP reverb G1 Everything was fluid on the last 2.5.6 versions (the first one were terrible...) using motion smoothing at 45fps. I deleted the saved game folder and did a cleanup and full repair With 2.7 I am seeing dips to low 30s with unacceptable stutter. I don't have the track as it was disabled to maximize perf. The flight was simple flying around Batumi. Looking down under over over the clouds causes a FPS dips and stutter. @BIGNEWY I have given you all requested data I hope this will be analyzed and that it's not just something to get us to wait for months like last year . dcs.log WeatherTest.miz

I think he is just one of the lucky guys not sensitive to stutter. No way he is not getting any with that cpu.

Unfortunately, and despite calling it a beta, ED never roll back on any new "feature" regardless how catastrophic it is. I bet it will take weeks for this performance issues to be even acknowledge. They already moved it away from the front page to hide it in the bug section...

For that they would first need to acknowledge the issue. Look at the second post, that's their typical answer...