Jump to content

VR Performance investigation.


uri_ba

Recommended Posts

Hi folks,

I've been bashing my head for the past few months with VR performance issues in DCS on my rig.

 

I've been following whatever tips I could find and Ended up belly up all the time.

I will not put it as "un-playable" but in some scenarios it's definitely not very "stomach friendly" I've not very prone to motion sickness, so I can "deal with it".

 

I'm experiencing framerates as low as 18 in airports (Mirage 2000, instant action, takeoff) going up to 90 above 15k over the sea. going over land will give me 60. low altitude is 30-45.

 

lowing everything to minimum definaly makes frame rate go up, but immersion plummets as I can't read gauges, or feel anything close to real life. (I "need" x1.5 PD, HDR and (at least) "flat" shadows). which is what I get for the framerates above.

 

My spec is as follows:

i7-2600K @ 4.2

24GB RAM (2*4+2*8)

GTX1080 (which goes up to 2Ghz)

 

and I have a secondary GTX750 I use for some extra monitors and NVENC video encoding).

 

I've recorded a 12 minute clip of a quick flight, (M2K, takeoff from IA). with the Steam VR frame timing on top

 

the OSD wasn't recorded, but sitting on the runway (with 18-25 fps) my GPU load was 40%.

also looking at the timing data, it seems that I'm very much CPU bottlenecked.

 

SteanVR timing data from their developer wiki:

https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/SteamVR/Frame_Timing

 

Can someone have a second look before I start saving up and working on approval from upper management? :)

 

I'll be waiting a month or so for the Gen 8 Intels first anyway.

 

and if someone can post another frame timing data from SteamVR or a rift with a better CPU for comparison, it would be greatly appreciated. (attached my current graphics settings - pretty much "VR" preset with high textures. and my PD is set to 1.5)

 

if someone can think of a better or additional tests to preform (call it "DCS VR benchmark guidelines"). feel free to suggest.

 

Cheers,

Uri

 

 

=== Update 1 ===

It seems that MSAA (and AA) are not an issue in this scenario, as both seem to be GPU only workload and in my case, had minor effect.

 

Shadows on the other had, had a major impact. And with shadows off, FPS very rarely dropped below 45fps while not directly in the airport.

 

HT enabled or disabled seem to have little effect. But I'll need to look at that more closely.

 

=== Update 2 ===

I've ran a second round with all shadows off. frame rates were noticeably higher. (same exact settings, just without shadows)

but flying low with no shadows feels weird.. but if that is the price to pay.. :(

 

 

bottle neck is definitely CPU..

now it's time to wait and see what intels comes up with.

 

is there anyone here with a ryzen that can post similar video? just to see how it handles VR?

 

Next Up.. bumping up PD to 2.0 as this is pure GPU load, and mine "just sits there"...

gRAPHIC_SETTINGS_1.5.6.thumb.jpg.61a55fbec935bf10e3e2627ed22ce4aa.jpg


Edited by uri_ba
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a somewhat similar setup (1070, with a 6700 @ 4.7).

 

I have very few drops in frame rate and have the same settings with the following exceptions:

 

MSAA=off

visib range=medium

terrain shadows=flat (on the right)

disable aero interface checked

 

Other things to consider:

In DCS 1.5 cpu clock speed is king so that .5 ghz may make a difference.

Ram speed does have an impact up to about ~3000mhz

 

Your problem may be fixed when dcs goes to 2.5 (or if you have NTTR or normandy do you have the same problems?)

5800X3d, 32GB DDR4@3400, 6800 xt, Reverb G2, Gunfighter/TMWH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check passmark for your single threaded CPU performance. You'll find that old 2700k is about 25% slower than current tech. Your CPU simply can't feed that 1080 in DCS, which relies heavily on single thread performance to send stuff to the GPU.

 

Modern games offload most to the GPU, which is why you probably see great performance in GTA or insert whatever new game you might play here. Unfortunately the engine in DCS is many years old and can't do what new games do today.

 

You may see better performance in NTTR, but I really doubt that a whole lot. 2.1 does a better job of relying on the GPU but it's still a single threaded CPU king.

 

Time to upgrade...

 

TJ

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drives me mad when I see "New CPU coming....i9 with 18 cores...and a pants processor speed". Am like Arrrrg WTF! Why can't we just have at least ONE 4-core 8GHz+ processor option for stuff like DCS!

 

How many people really need to run a bazillion things at once on 36 threads?

Asus Maximus VIII Hero Alpha| i7-6700K @ 4.60GHz | nVidia GTX 1080ti Strix OC 11GB @ 2075MHz| 16GB G.Skill Trident Z RGB 3200Mhz DDR4 CL14 |

Samsung 950 PRO 512GB M.2 SSD | Corsair Force LE 480GB SSD | Windows 10 64-Bit | TM Warthog with FSSB R3 Lighting Base | VKB Gunfighter Pro + MCG | TM MFD's | Oculus Rift S | Jetseat FSE

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drives me mad when I see "New CPU coming....i9 with 18 cores...and a pants processor speed". Am like Arrrrg WTF! Why can't we just have at least ONE 4-core 8GHz+ processor option for stuff like DCS!

 

How many people really need to run a bazillion things at once on 36 threads?

 

 

It would make rendering photos sooo much faster, when I render all 12 cores hit 100% till the jobs done.

 

IMO when DCS gets to multi thread way better it will make a significant difference. ;)

Control is an illusion which usually shatters at the least expected moment.

Gazelle Mini-gun version is endorphins with rotors. See above.

 

Currently rolling with a Asus Z390 Prime, 9600K, 32GB RAM, SSD, 2080Ti and Windows 10Pro, Rift CV1. bu0836x and Scratch Built Pedals, Collective and Cyclic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would make rendering photos sooo much faster, when I render all 12 cores hit 100% till the jobs done.

 

IMO when DCS gets to multi thread way better it will make a significant difference. ;)

 

Well there you go - an 18-core processor sounds great for you, and I would recommend it. I would just love the option of ONE soopa-fast processor speed, reduced cores version. Not replacing every multi-threaded CPU available or anything ;).

 

I agree lots of cores are useful for people such as yourself, but Intel and AMD seem to think EVERYONE needs heaps of cores.

 

As for 'when DCS gets to multi-thread way better'...remember how awesome it was when when FSX did that....oh wait. :music_whistling:


Edited by VampireNZ

Asus Maximus VIII Hero Alpha| i7-6700K @ 4.60GHz | nVidia GTX 1080ti Strix OC 11GB @ 2075MHz| 16GB G.Skill Trident Z RGB 3200Mhz DDR4 CL14 |

Samsung 950 PRO 512GB M.2 SSD | Corsair Force LE 480GB SSD | Windows 10 64-Bit | TM Warthog with FSSB R3 Lighting Base | VKB Gunfighter Pro + MCG | TM MFD's | Oculus Rift S | Jetseat FSE

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check passmark for your single threaded CPU performance. You'll find that old 2700k is about 25% slower than current tech. Your CPU simply can't feed that 1080 in DCS, which relies heavily on single thread performance to send stuff to the GPU.

 

Modern games offload most to the GPU, which is why you probably see great performance in GTA or insert whatever new game you might play here. Unfortunately the engine in DCS is many years old and can't do what new games do today.

 

You may see better performance in NTTR, but I really doubt that a whole lot. 2.1 does a better job of relying on the GPU but it's still a single threaded CPU king.

 

Time to upgrade...

 

TJ

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Using cinabench 15, I get 170/715 for single/all cores.

Single core performance is decent, and is very close to that of the ryzen 1700x.

 

It's down about 20-25% off the 7700K performance (for single thread)

 

Naturally, in full out they both stomp the 2600k. The both have total score of 1500+.

 

However, if single core performance is King. How does a ryzen holds up in VR? As it feels like it will not hold, even bumped up to 3.9Ghz. but that will not make sense..

 

I'll try running a similar run tonight with some variations. Ending with "Low" preset with PD at 1.0. we'll see how it affects stuff.

 

Btw, NTTR is pretty much same performance, they optimized the engine a bit, and then dumped a bunch of new shaders on it.. and I dread the new damage engine promised.... Sounds like hell of a lot of additional CPU cycles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VR Performance investigation.

 

Using cinabench 15, I get 170/715 for single/all cores.

 

Single core performance is decent, and is very close to that of the ryzen 1700x.

 

 

 

It's down about 20-25% off the 7700K performance (for single thread)

 

 

 

Naturally, in full out they both stomp the 2600k. The both have total score of 1500+.

 

 

 

However, if single core performance is King. How does a ryzen holds up in VR? As it feels like it will not hold, even bumped up to 3.9Ghz. but that will not make sense..

 

 

 

I'll try running a similar run tonight with some variations. Ending with "Low" preset with PD at 1.0. we'll see how it affects stuff.

 

 

 

Btw, NTTR is pretty much same performance, they optimized the engine a bit, and then dumped a bunch of new shaders on it.. and I dread the new damage engine promised.... Sounds like hell of a lot of additional CPU cycles.

 

 

My Ryzen CPU doesn't hold up in DCS and I don't use it to play . Probably very similar to your 2700k.

 

Amd isn't known for single threaded performance. But it's a beast at rendering (or anything that can rely on a ton of cores.)

 

Your performance with NTTR is as I expected. DCS 2.1 is a step in the right direction but it still relies on the single threaded performance. Upgrade to something that knocks out the single threaded performance numbers.

 

Good luck.

 

TJ

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Edited by Tj1376
Grammar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well there you go - an 18-core processor sounds great for you, and I would recommend it. I would just love the option of ONE soopa-fast processor speed, reduced cores version. Not replacing every multi-threaded CPU available or anything ;).

 

 

 

I agree lots of cores are useful for people such as yourself, but Intel and AMD seem to think EVERYONE needs heaps of cores.

 

 

 

As for 'when DCS gets to multi-thread way better'...remember how awesome it was when when FSX did that....oh wait. :music_whistling:

 

 

 

The i3 passmark scores make me want to get one. Water cooled. To see if it can beat the 4790k.

 

TJ

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that your CPU is a problem. It's nowhere near minimum spec according to Oculus by the way.

 

VR performance isn't great at present, but that CPU cripples your system.

 

 

Just to be clear, CPU is no problem in any other VR game i have, as 99% of VR games have a relatively small world with low asset counts. It's DCS that kills me.. and it's the only reason I got into VR (had a round on a friend's DK2 long time ago and I got hooked).

 

So based on your comments so far it seems that ryzen is not ideal for VR in DCS, guess I'll be waiting to see what the "8700k" would have to offer. (Probably 7700K performance per core but with 6 of them).

 

I'll post the low settings stuff, and might try HT off and slightly higher OC on the CPU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's such a depressing outlook though - because you KNOW that future processors are just going to get more and more cores with no improvement in base clock speed. :(

Asus Maximus VIII Hero Alpha| i7-6700K @ 4.60GHz | nVidia GTX 1080ti Strix OC 11GB @ 2075MHz| 16GB G.Skill Trident Z RGB 3200Mhz DDR4 CL14 |

Samsung 950 PRO 512GB M.2 SSD | Corsair Force LE 480GB SSD | Windows 10 64-Bit | TM Warthog with FSSB R3 Lighting Base | VKB Gunfighter Pro + MCG | TM MFD's | Oculus Rift S | Jetseat FSE

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well there you go - an 18-core processor sounds great for you, and I would recommend it. I would just love the option of ONE soopa-fast processor speed, reduced cores version. Not replacing every multi-threaded CPU available or anything ;).

 

I agree lots of cores are useful for people such as yourself, but Intel and AMD seem to think EVERYONE needs heaps of cores.

 

As for 'when DCS gets to multi-thread way better'...remember how awesome it was when when FSX did that....oh wait. :music_whistling:

 

:huh: No I don't DCS is my first flight sim. :)

 

And yes I get it, Just thinking 4 cores @ 4.5Ghz in a perfect world is like 18Ghz effective then throw in a fudge factor for well written software for the virtual cores. ( I do understand it's not a straight line function) but one technology is here now we should exploit it. :thumbup:

Control is an illusion which usually shatters at the least expected moment.

Gazelle Mini-gun version is endorphins with rotors. See above.

 

Currently rolling with a Asus Z390 Prime, 9600K, 32GB RAM, SSD, 2080Ti and Windows 10Pro, Rift CV1. bu0836x and Scratch Built Pedals, Collective and Cyclic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's such a depressing outlook though - because you KNOW that future processors are just going to get more and more cores with no improvement in base clock speed. :(

 

I don't think so not for the mainstream stuff, all those cores still have to communicate and use i/o bandwidth I think that's the rub. besides there are self imposed throttling controls for thermal management from such a repetitively small area of die(s).

Control is an illusion which usually shatters at the least expected moment.

Gazelle Mini-gun version is endorphins with rotors. See above.

 

Currently rolling with a Asus Z390 Prime, 9600K, 32GB RAM, SSD, 2080Ti and Windows 10Pro, Rift CV1. bu0836x and Scratch Built Pedals, Collective and Cyclic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard a report about an ultra bright light laser system that is supposed to make scanning x-ray machines with huge resolutions possible.

 

They're already seeing the possibilities of ultra microscopic computer chips being a possibility. Maybe the next step in computing isn't going to be down the quantum road after all, and it could make some big steps possible much sooner with current technology taking a leap forwards.

 

Those ultra high speed chips could be a year or two away, who knows?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's such a depressing outlook though - because you KNOW that future processors are just going to get more and more cores with no improvement in base clock speed. :(

 

yeah :(

 

Let's hope that at some point (the sooner the better), DCS will be able to utilize more smaller threads. however, the problem is that the master thread is still the blocking one (usually), and it will wait for all it's "children" to return results. but no matter how many threads you have, unless you spawn all the child processes in an Async way and then wait for them at the end. you will still need raw single thread performance to chug down the serial line.

 

have no idea which way DCS is designed built, we just know that current release does not scale in performance beyond 4 cores.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2624490&postcount=2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, CPU is no problem in any other VR game i have, as 99% of VR games have a relatively small world with low asset counts. It's DCS that kills me.. and it's the only reason I got into VR (had a round on a friend's DK2 long time ago and I got hooked).

 

 

 

So based on your comments so far it seems that ryzen is not ideal for VR in DCS, guess I'll be waiting to see what the "8700k" would have to offer. (Probably 7700K performance per core but with 6 of them).

 

 

 

I'll post the low settings stuff, and might try HT off and slightly higher OC on the CPU.

 

 

 

Why not try an i3? It's single threaded performance is on par with the Devils Canyon CPU. And it's dirt cheap. I've been really tempted to see if it can perform in DCS.

 

TJ

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not try an i3? It's single threaded performance is on par with the Devils Canyon CPU. And it's dirt cheap. I've been really tempted to see if it can perform in DCS.

 

TJ

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I don't think I will... I would take the 7700K on a Z270 board anyday over this i3. even if it means to save for another month or two....

yes, in a very small budget it's a reasonable option... but when you go up to a system this expensive (VR, HOTAS, High end GFX card). skimping on CPU and MOBO seems a little.. redundant...

 

 

and because passMark keeps getting mentioned here...

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2874&cmp[]=2930&cmp[]=868

 

 

 

 

and I'm "aiming" to the 8700K with "z370" board. unless someone can put up some evidace that the 1700/1700x can preform in VR scenario in DCS.


Edited by uri_ba
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I will... I would take the 7700K on a Z270 board anyday over this i3. even if it means to save for another month or two....

yes, in a very small budget it's a reasonable option... but when you go up to a system this expensive (VR, HOTAS, High end GFX card). skimping on CPU and MOBO seems a little.. redundant...

 

 

:thumbup:

 

Smart move!

Don B

EVGA Z390 Dark MB | i9 9900k CPU @ 5.1 GHz | Gigabyte 4090 OC | 64 GB Corsair Vengeance 3200 MHz CL16 | Corsair H150i Pro Cooler |Virpil CM3 Stick w/ Alpha Prime Grip 200mm ext| Virpil CM3 Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Base w/ Alpha-L Grip| Point Control V2|Varjo Aero|

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I will... I would take the 7700K on a Z270 board anyday over this i3. even if it means to save for another month or two....

yes, in a very small budget it's a reasonable option... but when you go up to a system this expensive (VR, HOTAS, High end GFX card). skimping on CPU and MOBO seems a little.. redundant...

 

and because passMark keeps getting mentioned here...

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2874&cmp[]=2930&cmp[]=868

 

and I'm "aiming" to the 8700K with "z370" board. unless someone can put up some evidace that the 1700/1700x can preform in VR scenario in DCS.

 

I don't disagree with your logic on steeping into the 7700k. From your first post I thought budget was an issue, but if it's not definitely don't look at the i3.

 

However, I can't tell you enough... stop looking at multithreaded passmark scores. The URL you posted above is to multithreaded CPU passmark scores.

 

DCS only cares about single threaded performance. 16 or 32 cores won't mean squat to DCS 1.5 or 2.x.

 

I3 runs at 2400 passmark on single thread. 7700 runs 2600.

 

Throw AMD out the window if you want to play DCS. The current AMD architecture doesn't aim to have high single threaded performance.

 

TJ

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And 1800x and my poor little 2600k get 2000 on single core performance... That is exactly the point of this whole thing. Not in any point I said I'm stressed over budget, not that the purchase will be done "in an imminamnt date".

 

The purpose of this discussion as far as I see it. It trying to establish some basic "footing" on what is required on the HW side, in order to achieve the magic 90fps on a VR rig.

 

For regular screen, all this stuff is really not needed, as everything above 5 is completely fine and no one will never notice a dip down to 30 here and there..

 

So far, I've seen multiple settings suggestions, you see folks with 1080Ti complain about poor performance in VR, while others with 970s and 980s will say they hit 90 and sit there nearly all the time, and even post their settings, and dialing those exact settings will yield nothing to the other guy....

 

I'm trying to establish some sort of base line we can then use.

For example. My i7-2600k has pretty much the same single core performance of an R7 (they all OC up to 3.9 where they all show same performance anyways). So is it safe to assume that an R7 will yield the same performance as I have, hitting the same CPU bottleneck? Answer is "no".. yes, it's the logical assumption, but we don't know, because we all mesure things differently.

 

This is the first time I used SteamVR timing data like this. Have anyone with "90 fps all the time" had mesured these things.

 

Could it be that ryzen will have an edge? For example, my CPU will boost up to 5.0GHz on a single core when the rest is idle

That deffinatly skews the data "in favor" of my chip. While an R7 will get that performance on all threads. Not just one.

 

So what I'm trying to establish is what testing should be done to get a proper baseline for VR performance comparison...

 

7700k stock is 30% stronger per core then my 2600k at stock. But I OC it by 800mhz, which are about 25% of stock clock speed. Does that make it as capable as a stock 7700k? (No, it does not BTW, but it does close the gap taking the 5.0 boost thing into account

 

just as a reference. to show how bad the VR situation is.

I've disabled VR in the options, and relaunched the game. without changing anything in the settings.

FPS went up from 24 to 135... and I'm using a 4K screen. bumped up shadows to HIGH, asn still got 70 FPS at the same spot on the runway...

 

something is weird... as the resolution is almost twice that of the HMD.. could it be the two view ports required by VR that is demanding on the CPU? (two frames to be rendered at the same time)


Edited by uri_ba
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It trying to establish some basic "footing" on what is required on the HW side, in order to achieve the magic 90fps on a VR rig.

 

A different game.

 

But seriously, you can check my thread here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=189375

 

The testing setup I used is very basic, just an empty mision with an aircraft on a runway, you can easily recreate it on your side and compare how many FPS you get.

Hardware: VPForce Rhino, FSSB R3 Ultra, Virpil T-50CM, Hotas Warthog, Winwing F15EX, Slaw Rudder, GVL224 Trio Throttle, Thrustmaster MFDs, Saitek Trim wheel, Trackir 5, Quest Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1, would like to test with the same mission file. I just flew the Huey in NTTR Instant Machine (vegas free flight) and it was pretty much 45FPS solid as measured by the built-in coutner. More importantly, to my eyes, it was very smooth. Used 1.5 Pixel density with VR setup.

hsb

HW Spec in Spoiler

---

 

i7-10700K Direct-To-Die/OC'ed to 5.1GHz, MSI Z490 MB, 32GB DDR4 3200MHz, EVGA 2080 Ti FTW3, NVMe+SSD, Win 10 x64 Pro, MFG, Warthog, TM MFDs, Komodo Huey set, Rverbe G1

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...