Limaro

Hello again, before making the update to the newest stable, I've first created two new test-flights, and run the nvidia logging of performance. With the new version I've played the tracks again and then also with cleared metashader and fxo. Average FPS results in a nutshell: Beirut 2.7.6 79.0 FPS 2.7.7 69.8 FPS 2.7.7 cleared: 67.8 FPS Caucasus 2.7.6 84.7 FPS 2.7.7 75.1 FPS 2.7.7 cleared: 73.0 FPS That the game with cleared cache files became even slower shocked me most. So, don't clear your cache after update... Below see my details data containing: - Both Trackfiles - Screenshots of in-game settings - Report Summary Excel - For all versions (2.76, 2.7.7, 2.7.7 cleared) - Verbose NVidia reports - Logfiles - The DxDiag (is the same as in my previous post.) This time I was not very motivated to run a whole bunch of settings again. These are now just the once I am usually flying with. 2.7.6_vs_2.7.7_Analysis.zip

+1 This would be very helpful!!

+1 I like this, good idea, and shurely no big deal of inplementation

I like the idea. However there is already a tool you can use for dcs. I am using VAICOM pro.

Dear ED team, It would be great to have a kind of benchmarking Flight/Mission/Track or how to call it. Some default situations, which shows and tests all the different aspects of the performance. (Flight though canyon, clouds, over the water, very high, etc..) The output of it should not be a simple number, but also a verbose report, including system specs, active scripts, etc. 1. This could a easy ways for you, ED, to get reliable data from the users, if there are any performance of visualization issues with new versions. At the moment the data from users is a wild mix of numbers, tables, unhelpful statements, trackfiles, rough system specs and screenhots. 2. Also for the players it would be very nice way to compare different graphical settings. 3. The perfect extension of such a benchmark could be to be able to automatically run a set of different settings. So that after an hour or so, the player can see the different results at once. I assume this was suggested somewhere before, but the current Open Beta discussion demonstrates the value of such a feature - for the players and ED. Regards Limaro

I have done many more analysis in which I compare Release (Which I freshly had to install) and Open Beta (where I already deleted caches and so on). Scriptfiles are synchonized to enable fair comparing. First of all: My previous fouding which i posted here, that the Terrain Shadow has to be Default, applies also to Release. So this effect is nothing new. In the attached Zip, you will find following analysis result files (All data is doubled. One set for Open Beta, one set for Release): - DxDiag output - Logfiles - Fresh, containing only start application, run trackfile with high settings and close. - Trackfile with flight over Beirut with F15, Syria Map ~110 seconds I recorded one flight, this can be checked here: Youtube-Link. It may help to bring the nvidia protocol data (data from every second) in the right context. - All Settings set to Low - Textfile: Benchmark the whole flight (Result FPS Average: Release: 130.1 Open Beta: 109.8, -15.6%) - CSV: Performance Protocoll form NVidia (Performance Overlay) - Screenshot of settings - All settings set to High - Textfile: Benchmark the whole flight (Result FPS Average: Release: 81.5 Open Beta: 72.6, -10.9%) - CSV: Performance Protocoll form NVidia (Performance Overlay) (3 Files, I did it 3 times) - Screenshot of settings - All Settings low, but Textures High - Textfile: Benchmark the whole flight (Result FPS Average: Release: 127.4 Open Beta: 109.4, -14.1%) - Screenshot of settings - All Settings low, but Terrain Textures High - Textfile: Benchmark the whole flight (Result FPS Average: Release: 132.1 Open Beta: 111.8, -15.3%) - Screenshot of settings - All Settings low, but View Distance Extreme - Textfile: Benchmark the whole flight (Result FPS Average: 102.0 Release: Open Beta: 85.9, -15.8%) - Screenshot of settings - All Settings low, but all Sliders to max - Textfile: Benchmark the whole flight (Result FPS Average: Release: 130.8 Open Beta: 106.6, -18.5%) - Screenshot of settings - All Settings low, but Water High - Textfile: Benchmark the whole flight (Result FPS Average: Release: 119.8 Open Beta: 109.6, -8.5%) - Screenshot of settings Small note the the continous nvidia protocol: I did not find something special compared the overall benchmark (MSI Afterburner). Things like temperature, PGU usage etc. are not really constantly changing comparing Release with Open Beta. Maybe others will finde something interesting in this set. Performance Analysis.zip NVIDIA System Information 10-29-2021 15-11-31.txt

This is all strange. I've tried your settings Miro, and can confirm that with this, the FLAT shadows seams to perform best. Totally contradictory to my initial tests with all other settings to lowest possible. I guess there is some unexpected interfering. These are my results with you settings, switching through different shadow settings:

That's really strage. Can you post your whole settings, I'd like to try and compare EDIT to your edit: dont set shadow below "low". with flat or off, fps drops.

Yes, that it is what I am saying. For some reason, shadows are increasing performance. but I can't tell all other conditions. I just saw it because I tried to set the best performance. So i lowered evey setting and the performance was horrible. Worse, than with my normal play settings. Some tests showed that shadows makes it better. See the screenshots below. However: When I have my normal settings, and I remove the shadows, it does NOT drop so much. So there must be at least a third factor. I had no time yet to identify other incluences. (Btw. I corrected my first post in which I assumed the nvidia driver to have big influence) EDIT: I've tried all combinations of Terrain Schadow and normal schadow settings. Best performance for me was having Shadows: Low Terrain Shadows: Default - -> Getting in 25 seconds an average of 80.5 FPS Any other setting combination, like any of them "Flat" or "none" gives me an average of ~64 FPS. I've tried all of them EDIT 2: I made a table of the results. Would be very interesting if other can also check this

I have the impression that shadows are impacting performance in a strange way. Shadows have to be at least to low or middle and terrainobject shows to default. If shadows are "only flat" or "none", then performance drops impressively (on my PC).

Also turned off, without noticable effect. I have the impression, that this is not related to any grafic options. Even when settings most low values, the frames are somehow limitted and it's stuttering. In the following perspective, I have constantly between 55 and 68 FPS:

I guess Global Illumination (Cockpit?) I tried and did not observe any difference. (Nvidia 472.12) I will try also the 442.19 driver

I had also a performance loss. but it was ok in first place. Then I thought it would be good idea to update nvidia driver. From my previous 472.12 I updated to 496.13. And THEN, I had a real drop of performance . It stutters and hangs, sometimes game freezes for some seconds. And when it doesn't, it has still less (previous 70, now 50). I then reversed my Nvidia back to 472.12 and the stutters ends. I am curious, if other have the same experiances. you can find old drivers from nvidia here: https://www.nvidia.com/Download/Find.aspx Edit: Seams more to be a combination of settings.

I made again a video. With Everything, starting at the Carrier. It shows this issue on a impressive way. MAybe to reproduce you'll have to go on the french 4YA server

I feel very unconfortable to say that: It has nothing to do with the alignment. Everything was always aligned well, playing on the server - just this single one for the "smaller" track, I only reproduced for this forum, was not. However, I don't know what causes this. I tried a lot of things to reproduce in a single player, but was not able to. Yesterday, I flew again on 4YA (caucasus, PVE). And again, about the half of GBU missed their target just like in the video I've linked at the beginning. So I have to guess it's some kind of a server/data transmissioning Problem. If there is a way to produce some debug-log, which you can use for analysis, just let me know how. Meanwhile, I will again do my best to have a very short MP-track with no fails at beginning

Please read what I wrote

Thats interesting, in my quick single player it also does not seem to happen. luckily, I just flew in 4YA, and just after ~10 minutes it happens. But the file exeedes anyway the 5MB. I uploaded it here: https://www.file-upload.net/download-14724357/4YA_Cauc_Capture_Base_v3.6_Maykop_BC-20211020-203812.trk.html To Explain: - I first sit into A10 but dont start ~ 2minutes - Second in F18, and start and get shot after ~3 min - Third flight is the one. Starting Sochi. All takes arround 10minutes. To mention the following: - The JDAMs were not finished aligned. I know, but this may not be the cause. from my previous flights they were, but happend anyway. - Also the small lift at dropping should not be the cause. In the video the jet was quite leveled.

Hi, I was experiancing a strage thing today. Most of my GBU-38 started to drop far away from target. After some total fails, I started recording a video. The effect I observed: The bombs started to lift right after drop. doing this, they lose most of their speed and then simply drops down to earth like stones. My very first ones (which i unfortunately did not capture in video) the failed hardly, as I droped them only few seconds after being in range. They were then arround a quater of a mile away from target. The Video: At (00:45) I drop two bombs. The second hits quite OK, the first bomb shows the effect very good. I can also share track, but it was neer end of long session. File has 211 MB.

I also would wish to have a better track replay/recording system. The main "requirement" for me would be to freely move through the whole replay, like in a video.

I'd also love this kind of change. And also tried my luck in here: But did not even got any reaction

I totally agree with you @Topper81. Bug priorization seams not very satisfying. (As for me, the clearing of TOO memory when undesignating target, is a total show stopper for me. It makes the module partially useless for A/G. And this bug was already introduced since 2.7 IIRC.)

How can I block the parking spots? - or do you mean by placing things on them?

Hi, I am trying to create a carrier with a lot of stuff on it. A bit like in reality, where the whole area of catapult 1 & 2 are full of people and aircrafts. Doing so, my KI planes don't take off - i guess it's because 1&2 are not free for launch. Is there a way to "shut down" these to catapults or to instruct KI planes to use a specific one? Regards Limaro

Hi, Today I had to install 2.7.4.9632. I now just wanted to check my replay from last week. Problem: In the F10 map, something seems to move the mouse to upper left corner. it makes it unusable there. any try to move away, moves it immediately back. REgards

Right, that may work. but I am getting tired to get used to one way, then with the next patch, it changes again. Hard life with pre-release. However, there was a bug reported, but it hats been locked for further submits and it still on "reported"