DCS World - seriously bad framerate

Hi,

I have a very powerful machine and no issues whatsoever with Ka-50 or A-10 as solo games. But in DCS World I have noticeably lower framerates (about half of what I'm used to). Are there any new options that can be disabled? I really wonder why World would be so much more taxing.

Thanks in advance.

if you are running multi screen untick the turn off aero box in options

Hi,

 

I have a very powerful machine and no issues whatsoever with Ka-50 or A-10 as solo games. But in DCS World I have noticeably lower framerates (about half of what I'm used to). Are there any new options that can be disabled? I really wonder why World would be so much more taxing.

 

Thanks in advance.

[/quote

My framerate jumped from 15FPS to 30FPS on taxiways in multiplayer DCS World 1.2.0.

I have i5 2500K@4.5Ghz, 16GB DD3, 60GB SSD and AMD HD6770 1GB graphics card...

HDR Cold, 4x MSAA, all High except Water on Medium and Civ traffic Off, Fulscreen, Vsync on, TSAA off, Disable aero On, Cockipt shadows off (due to bug), Clutter 250m, Trees 6000m, Preeload maxed out, Tree shadows off.

I use SoftH as an inbetween layer... no extra monitors... and MAXFPS=35 in graphics.cfg

Don't understand that. I use the last instant action mission to test different settings. In Cockpit directly after load I see 22-23, external view looking at the mountain range I see 18-20.

I was able to push it to 28 in cockpit and 22-24 in external view towards the mountain range by disabling TSAA and reducing draw distance to 1000/10000/100000 but I'm still far away from why I used to see in DCS A-10C before. Somehow DCS World seems much more taxing but I can't put my finger on where.

My system ...

i3570k stock clock

16GB DDR3 RAM

Samsung 830 SSD

Sapphire ATI 6870

I have water on high and civ traffic on low and active cockpit shadows but other than that, similar settings. I'm a bit annoyed about the handling of trees. Is there a way to thin out forest instead cutting the draw distance badly? I seems to help increasing the framerate but instead of putting draw distance to half I'd rather see less dense forests. There are a lot of trees.

Please visit this thread and check if this instruction helps you :

Got stutters? Odd lag? This helped us! - ED Forums

Don't understand that. I use the last instant action mission to test different settings. In Cockpit directly after load I see 22-23, external view looking at the mountain range I see 18-20.

 

I was able to push it to 28 in cockpit and 22-24 in external view towards the mountain range by disabling TSAA and reducing draw distance to 1000/10000/100000 but I'm still far away from why I used to see in DCS A-10C before. Somehow DCS World seems much more taxing but I can't put my finger on where.

 

My system ...

 

i3570k stock clock

16GB DDR3 RAM

Samsung 830 SSD

Sapphire ATI 6870

 

I have water on high and civ traffic on low and active cockpit shadows but other than that, similar settings. I'm a bit annoyed about the handling of trees. Is there a way to thin out forest instead cutting the draw distance badly? I seems to help increasing the framerate but instead of putting draw distance to half I'd rather see less dense forests. There are a lot of trees.

Turn off AAA in the catalyst control panel.

Nate

If you're referring to adaptive multisample AA, it did not really help. Also disabling TSAA in game did nothing really. It does not seem to be a GPU performance issue at all. More an issue of too many things on screen as draw distance reduction helps. Maybe DCS World is rendering much more trees and clutter. But a 3570k a CPU too slow? Hardly believable.

My main issue is that I don't want to reduce draw distances to nothing. Rather thin out the density of clutter and trees. But there is no slider for that. Config tweak maybe?

P.S.: The cockpit shadows really look off too. Is there a thread about that bug?

Config tweak maybe?

>>>http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=71639

Put water on Low, see it that helps.

I had really low frame rates and very.. long load times when i first installed the latest DCS world. I removed all trace of a10 & dcs world beta from my pc and did a fresh instal and it runs perfectly now... maybe try a fresh instal...

Tried that too, several times. I also never had the beta of world installed. First install was with the brand new 1.2 version. Framerate ist ... well not abysmal ... much lower than under A-10C and Ka-50. Also the bugs the messed up shadows are annoying. Why was world released after all? It still seems to be a messy unoptimized beta.

Edit: Just to make that clear, I set up the same settings I used to have in A-10C and Ka-50. Why should I lower water to low in World if it was never necessary in the mentioned two. Sure I can lower everything to lowest settings and the usual answer is anyway that my PC is at fault and I'm to blame. But why does world perform worse side by side with identical settings?

Don't get me wrong, I really like DCS and the insane system simulation it offers. But everything else seems more and more meh. Ground textures are bad, terrain elevation detail is bad, structures and ground clutter is bad. Short, the entire engine is rubbish from todays point of view.

It is a deep and challenging hard core simulation but I'm somewhat spoiled by the sheer beauty and performance of RoF. Even in the wildest online situations my framerate never ever dips below 30 with all hell going on on screen. Terrain and weather also look and feel much better. Sure you can argue that the system simulation is not as good but do you expect a simulated autopilot on a Spad VII? Sure you can argue that the flight models in RoF are sometimes guesswork but documentation from the time is somewhat sparser than the one of the A-10C. I really hope DCS will get a modernized - well better brand new - engine some day to accompany the great depth with some visual treats and framerate that don't require an overclocked supercomputer. Heck, you have to tweak your ass off on a modern ivy bridge system to get stable 25 fps without much going on??? That somehow reminds me of another badly optimized engine ... FSX.

u have p-51 installed ? or ca?

Neither. Although I would love the Mustang I simply don't like her in this setting, neither geographically nor in respect to time frame. She simply feels out of place for me. And I'm not really interested in activity near the ground (like tanks and other vehicles) with a bad engine and terrain displays like it is. Up there with the birds it looks ok but when you come in down low you better close your eyes. :cry:

ok.

Neither. Although I would love the Mustang I simply don't like her in this setting, neither geographically nor in respect to time frame. She simply feels out of place for me. And I'm not really interested in activity near the ground (like tanks and other vehicles) with a bad engine and terrain displays like it is. Up there with the birds it looks ok but when you come in down low you better close your eyes. :cry:

So ?!

Place yourself with the Mustang in the middle of the BlackSee ...see ... Wouldn't this do the job for you?! :D -this is almost identical to a pacific stationed mustang.

;)

Sorry- but you asked for it!

The stang is not really a carrier base plane. So in the middle of the black see? :music_whistling:

Did some more testing with a side by side installation of world and A-10C. My god, is this world thing a buggy and broken mess. Wasn't this in beta several month? What did they actually do there? The list of bugs grows every minute flying in world and I really wonder if they had a meeting with 1C how to best release a broken mess and screw their fans over. GUI Manuals? Not available. Voiced tutorials? Broken and not working. Framerate? Worse to say the least. Visuals? Buggy Shadows were introduced as a big new feature in world. :doh:

I mean, world was in beta a long time. Why release it now in such a sorry state? Iron out the issues and release it properly several month down the road. Instead throw out the junk and make you look like a fool. Is the team behind DCS in such a desperate need for funding that the pump out one beta for purchase after another and declare broken betas as final so they can concentrate on the next mess? My god, this is royally screwed up. I'm wiping the entire DCS stuff off my system now and taking another look 2-3month from now. Maybe the will get their act together till then. I don't see myself supporting this with future purchases.

I have terrible FPS too :/ In cockpit of BS2 i have 13FPS...

Phenom 955 @ 3.4GHz

HD6950 1GB

6GB RAM

Win7 x64

Already disabled Catalyst AI, reduced settings... I can play Battlefield 3 on high/ultra, but DCS World lags as hell...

There is a 'new' option in the options menu DCS World 1.2.0 (if that's what your talking about). It allows you to enable/disable aero mode or something similar..(I am not at my gaming PC so pardon me if the term is incorrect) I have a pretty mega system, I was getting 50-60 FPS then when I installed 1.2.0, my frames went to 20.. When I disabled this option in the option menu (on top of where you would select Full Screen. TSAA etc) my frames went back to 50-60. Try that unless you have already tried it.

Yep, already disabled TSAA and unticked "disable aero interface"

Are you running multi screen? exporting anything out of the rendering area? What are your settings in the options menu?

I have terrible FPS too :/ In cockpit of BS2 i have 13FPS...

 

Phenom 955 @ 3.4GHz

HD6950 1GB

6GB RAM

Win7 x64

 

Already disabled Catalyst AI, reduced settings... I can play Battlefield 3 on high/ultra, but DCS World lags as hell...

Well you have to understand that with a hardcore sim like DCS a lot of CPU power is required for "under the hood calculation" that you can't see. Instead of neat visual effects the insane system depth and flight model uses the CPU power. Both are simple to non-existent in BF3 so you really can't compare those. I understand the sims like DCS require a powerful system to be enjoyable.

What I can't understand is why a developer would be willing to release an "update" that breaks many features, introduces a lot of bugs and is far less "optimized" than the old system. Is there any logic behind that that I'm unable to see?

I understand the idea behind world, although I don't like it. Opening up the sim to 3rd party junk? Not a good idea in my eyes. DCS always was the most hard core sim but as a host of watered down 3rd party planes?

But why release DCS World as it is? How difficult can it be to make sure that tutorials are working? That no new visual bugs are introduced? That the performance it not worse? I really don't get it, at all.

P.S.: I tested A-10C in world and A-10C solo with identical settings. I will not disable stuff in world that I did not need to disable in the old version. Why disable Aero if the old version did not and never had to? Why disable TSAA if the old version runs flawlessly with it. I reduced draw distances in world to match the old dedicated A-10C since world offers farther settings in that respect but other settings are the same. If world cuts framerate in half over the equally set up older A-10C/BS2 and requires serious concessions in the settings department to get it up to the same level it is simply not ready. I don't run multi-screen or anything different in world. World is simply not running as well, not nearly. Did multiple reinstalls, tweaked the config and did several tests. It's a performance graveyard. And then there are the bugs ...

The funniest thing is, that I have only 17" monitor and play in 1280x1024... still trying to figure out why cockpit of BS2 causes ridiculous lag. While flying above sea I have only 20FPS in cockpit, but 60 outside. I did not experience that sick lags in A-10C.