Mig-21 Low FPS.

[theGozr]

Well we can all Beta test it :) if this help.. :)

[Raven68]

Well we can all Beta test it :) if this help.. :)

 

Haha. :) I would settle for that, because at the moment this is not playable for me.

[Cyb0rg]

Didn't get the preview version, I was trying to get some "investigation", you're obviously right in this case ;)

 

Here I made a quick tweak to improve FPS if this could help :

I've just played with the LODS & 3D mesh file names

 

- One version with exterior 3D mesh (lower mesh than the original, took the LOD1 3D mesh, still great but less FPS cost than the original)

 

- One version with NO exterior 3D mesh HIGH FPS

(don't use exterior view, you will also see AI Mig-21 as transparent) --> use it only on solo flight to learn the aircraft systems

 

ORIGINAL BACK-UP FILES ARE INCLUDED

 

Download : https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bzy06scTcPcnaVJFckNFdDhIeHM/edit?usp=sharing

 

The version with no exterior 3D mesh solved the FPS issue.

But the other version (lower mesh than the original) didn't do much, maybe 3 or 4 FPS increase, also one lose landing/taxi lights and no helmet-visor too.

Edited September 24, 2014 by Cyb0rg

[theGozr]

The version with no exterior 3D mesh solved the FPS issue.

 

Yes but... no external model = invisible plane.

Edited September 24, 2014 by theGozr

[uboats]

The revision of the MiG-21 that is included in the update is from September 19th. Thus; most of the changes that have been done in reaction to the launch are not fixed in it.

 

FFB Sticks are, however, fixed. We will post a changelog ASAP.

 

If the update includes changes made by Sept. 19th, then the needles of NPP have reversed tip and tail. Will there be any manual update accordingly (also for other changes)?

[BS_Fighter]

Haha. :) I would settle for that, because at the moment this is not playable for me.

 

+1, hoping for a quick update that makes this payware reasonably usable.

[theGozr]

Ok Now with the FFB back .. what a difference.. so sweet.. well i flew 4 minutes will try more later :) THX

[Saab-FAN]

I have done some testing with a quite big mission I put together (over 100 units on the ground and in the air fighting), which pretty much maxes out the available computing power of ONE core (CPU-Usage never goes above 13%!). Frame-Rate in that mission is below 20.

 

There seems to be an issue with the 3D-Model of the MIG-21. Idk if this is an issue caused by the relatively old render-engine of DCS that just can't handle all the polygons, or if there is a big bug inside the model.

One suggestion: Check if you can reduce the amount of materials and thereby the amount of draw-calls for the model.

The textures seem fine btw. The RAM-Usage of the GPU doesn't go above 2,5GB in the mission I created.

 

Another thing I noticed (probably the main problem): Once I activated "Simplified Engine Management" in the options, I got a significant increase in FPS. Maybe there is a possibility to place the engine-calculations in a different thread that is computed on a different CPU-Core. (I also noted a short freeze of the entire game in other missions when I start the engine and also SIGNIFICANT slowdown when I put the plane into a stall.)

 

In all, I think the biggest problem here is DCS itself, as it does only utilize 1/8th of the available computing-power in my PC. When I fly this mission in a A-10C, I get about 10FPS more, while CPU-Usage stays the same: 13% at maximum. Using the core-affinity option in the Task-Manager also doesn't really help.

GPU-Usage (measured with GPU-Z running in background) also stays well below the 100%-Mark.

 

My System: 8-Core AMD FX-8120@3,6Ghz, 16GB RAM, AMD HD7950 3GB, SoundBlaster X-Fi.

[-Rudel-]

VRAM is not quite the main issue also though It's the amount of materials used (not textures). Cobra did a quick test with less materials and saw an improvement with FPS. I'm now going to try condensing to 3 main materials.

 

This means, FUSE_F/M/R/T will be on one texture, and the WING_L/R, and other bits on another.

 

We'll test it out and go from there.

.

[Art-J]

There seems to be an issue with the 3D-Model of the MIG-21. Idk if this is an issue caused by the relatively old render-engine of DCS that just can't handle all the polygons, or if there is a big bug inside the model.

One suggestion: Check if you can reduce the amount of materials and thereby the amount of draw-calls for the model.

[/Quote]

 

If You checked the replys from Cobra and Rudel a couple of pages back, You would notice that they are indeed doing just that for their next revision of 3D model.

 

In all, I think the biggest problem here is DCS itself, as it does only utilize 1/8th of the available computing-power in my PC. When I fly this mission in a A-10C, I get about 10FPS more, while CPU-Usage stays the same: 13% at maximum. Using the core-affinity option in the Task-Manager also doesn't really help.

GPU-Usage (measured with GPU-Z running in background) also stays well below the 100%-Mark.

 

My System: 8-Core AMD FX-8120@3,6Ghz, 16GB RAM, AMD HD7950 3GB, SoundBlaster X-Fi.

 

Apparently current DCS engine maxes out only 1 core (computing everything except sound) and a bit of the second one (sound). Your observations seem to confirm that. That's why, from strictly DCS point of view, Intel CPUs with lower number of cores but higher clocks are a bit better option at the moment, while octo-core AMDs cannot be utiilized properly. Unfortunately, seems like it's going to stay that way after EDGE release, but hopefully better balance between new renderer and CPU will give us some performance gains.

 

Edit: ^ sniped by Mr R. himself :D.

[Eldur]

My new MSI GTX 970 rocks.

 

[Corrigan]

Awesome. What processor do you have?

I ordered the exact same GPU today.

[Eldur]

i5 3570K, 3.4GHZ / 3.8GHz boost.

[-Rudel-]

What do you get zoomed out and in external view?

[Saab-FAN]

Okay, was too lazy to look through the whole thread, but I ran into the same problem with a game I am developing and also was told the same thing by my teacher at the SAE: Use as few materials as possible to reduce Draw-Calls.^^

 

Every Drawcall causes overhead because the CPU has to tell the GPU what to do and if I remember correctly, DCS uses DirectX 9, which has not been optimized in that area. DirectX 10, 11 and especially the announced DirectX 12 will generate much less overhead for each drawcall sent to the GPU.

 

Btw. as I said in my earlier post: The GPU is not maxed out yet. So it should be possible to save additional RAM and/or Drawcalls by calculating certain things in the shader. In my Game-Project we're using only the Red and Green-Channel for the Normal-Map and put the Specular-Map in the Blue-Channel. The Blue-Channel of the Normal-Map is then calculated by the shader-program that runs entirely on the GPU.

[eyusuf]

Awesome. What processor do you have?

I ordered the exact same GPU today.

 

When you have a beta release it means the software is not optimised. Measuring graphics and processor speeds should be done on a flight sim that is matured in terms of development.

 

I would suggest you use the Hog to measure your processor and gpu power. That would be a good indicator.

[Eldur]

What do you get zoomed out and in external view?

 

I've attached some more of that flight... my view angle is normally 60°, zoomed in = 30°. I very rarely use zoomed out 90°. No shots of that :)

 

System and settings I had during that one:

 

 

Win 7 64 Pro

Gigabyte GA Z77-D3H (BIOS v.23b)

Intel i5 3570k

MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G (344.16)

Crucial Ballistix Tactical 16GB CL8 DDR3-1600

Corsair Force GT SSDs 120GB (Win) + 240GB (Games/Sims) on an ASUS U3S6 PCIe x4 controller card

SB X-Fi Elite Pro (drivers dated 05 May 2010, ver 6.0.1.1375)

VIA HD onboard audio (drivers dated 04 Aug 2010, ver 6.0.1.8700)

 

MS FFB2 + Simped Vario Pro + Precision 2 + Precision Pro (latter 2 just for sliders) - FFB2 is joy1, Precision Pro is the first one in my device list + Dual Saitek Pro Flight Throttle Quadrant

 

TrackIR 4 + 5.1.3 software

 

Textures high

Scenes high

Civ Traffic off

Water high

Visib Range high

Heat Blr on

Shadows high

Resolution 1920x1200

Aspect Ratio 16:10

Monitors 1 Screen

Res. of cockpit displays 512 every frame

MSAA off

HDR normal

 

Clutters/bushes 500

Trees visiblity 6000

Preload radius 150000

 

Tree shadows ticked

Cockpit shadows ticked

Mirrors on

 

no AF, no AA

 

no mods, no tweaks, completely fresh install done at 1.2.10.32095

 

 

Looking at mirrors reduces the frames pretty much, as it always has been. Just didn't take some shots of it, but I switched it off anyway. And I'm running 4x AF now, had the bushes down to 0 as I saw none at 500... also I disabled tree shadows again as I didn't see any noticable difference, maybe I didn't look enough.

Not 100% sure if I made the screenshots after these changes though :)

 

I will also try 1500, my rig shouldn't have any problems with it.

[mpdugas]

I've attached some more of that flight... my view angle is normally 60°, zoomed in = 30°. I very rarely use zoomed out 90°. No shots of that :)

 

System and settings I had during that one:

 

 

Win 7 64 Pro

Gigabyte GA Z77-D3H (BIOS v.23b)

Intel i5 3570k

MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G (344.16)

Crucial Ballistix Tactical 16GB CL8 DDR3-1600

Corsair Force GT SSDs 120GB (Win) + 240GB (Games/Sims) on an ASUS U3S6 PCIe x4 controller card

SB X-Fi Elite Pro (drivers dated 05 May 2010, ver 6.0.1.1375)

VIA HD onboard audio (drivers dated 04 Aug 2010, ver 6.0.1.8700)

 

MS FFB2 + Simped Vario Pro + Precision 2 + Precision Pro (latter 2 just for sliders) - FFB2 is joy1, Precision Pro is the first one in my device list + Dual Saitek Pro Flight Throttle Quadrant

 

TrackIR 4 + 5.1.3 software

 

Textures high

Scenes high

Civ Traffic off

Water high

Visib Range high

Heat Blr on

Shadows high

Resolution 1920x1200

Aspect Ratio 16:10

Monitors 1 Screen

Res. of cockpit displays 512 every frame

MSAA off

HDR normal

 

Clutters/bushes 500

Trees visiblity 6000

Preload radius 150000

 

Tree shadows ticked

Cockpit shadows ticked

Mirrors on

 

no AF, no AA

 

no mods, no tweaks, completely fresh install done at 1.2.10.32095

 

 

Looking at mirrors reduces the frames pretty much, as it always has been. Just didn't take some shots of it, but I switched it off anyway. And I'm running 4x AF now, had the bushes down to 0 as I saw none at 500... also I disabled tree shadows again as I didn't see any noticable difference, maybe I didn't look enough.

Not 100% sure if I made the screenshots after these changes though :)

 

I will also try 1500, my rig shouldn't have any problems with it.

 

With that kind of complete information, this is a very useful post...and a pretty nice PC.

[Cyb0rg]

This is the Ramp Start mission in the tutorials with simplified lods :

 

Here 10-11 FPS. Same if I make a close up.

 

And now a little bit far (mouse wheel tik) gives 40 FPS.

I don't mind have orange 21s.

 

:(

Edited September 28, 2014 by Cyb0rg

[theGozr]

Any ETA for the fix? Thx

[Raven68]

Any ETA for the fix? Thx

 

+1 My Mig-21 is grounded;) until this is resolved.

[Devrim]

Raven, our GTXs seem same. On ground I suffer from FPS, but in the air (and especially far from cities) it's nice actually. :)

[Raven68]

Raven, our GTXs seem same. On ground I suffer from FPS, but in the air (and especially far from cities) it's nice actually. :)

 

Pretty much the same here Devrim. I'm being a bit nick picky about not flying the mig actually. I just want better frames on the ground as well to make my overall experience enjoyable. My first impressions especially from the start up tutorials was a bit disappointing so I decided to ground it until the update. Just a personal preference for now buddy. :)

[theGozr]

yes same !

[BS_Fighter]

Any ETA for the fix? Thx

 

+2, is a long time in the hangar!