Performance problem

[Tornado]

I think I found the problem. It looks if my Nvidia is not responding sometimes. Two times tonight I heard the fans from the card increasing in noise. I paused the flight for a couple of mintues and suddently the fans start increase noise wise. Then the FPS became stable and smooth flight. However when start up again from the Mission Editor and want to fly again, the fans or actually the temp was back to normal and I suffer from poor frame rates. Most of the time I didn't hear an increase in noise. But when I hear the fans going up I assume that the card takes action and then fps are 100% okay. Most of the time the card stays low noise wise. So problem with the card I guess. Unless you in the forum have some better ideas what it might be. I don't think it are the fan(s) of the liquid cooling. As I can analyse it know it is the Nvidia.

[outlawal2]

Crack open your case and see if something is impeding the fan(s) on your video card. Sometimes a wire can get in the way or depending on how old the card is it may get chugged with dust / hair whatever and this will cause the fan to not respond as it should and this will cause the issues you are seeing..

[Lange_666]

@ Tornado:

- Did you try another game already to see what your nVidia card does there?

- You can try 3D Mark (or the older 3D Mark 11)to see how your card performs. If it's the card, you should see the same drops.

- You can also swap your card once with the ATI you have and see if you still have the same problem.

- Did you check if you have CPU downthrottling when it runs hot?

- In DCS: When the FPS drops occur, how many object are counted?

Edited November 18, 2014 by Lange_666

[Nedum]

Thanks Roko71 this morning I downloaded realtemp en Prime95. I started Prime95 first, so the PC started to make more noise etc. Then I started Realtemp and saw the 4 cores running temp wise. But none of them came above 90C. After 5 minutes I had the following temps: 84, 83, 78 and 74 recorded. So I don't think it will be the liquid cooling system. So we can rule this out (for the moment). The video card will be the next target. Maybe I have to go back to an ATI card. In my other PC I have a simple ATI card HD 5770. Never had problems with that one. But I still doubt about all. I am not an expert in technical components of a PC. I know some basic things but that's it. Thanks for your help anyway. If you have more suggestions please advise

 

If you only run Prime95 the temps are too high.

84°C without any GPU heat incomming... wow :shocking:

Which test was that. If this was the standard test, the temps are a WAY TOO HIGH!

If you play such a game like DCS the CPU and the GPU will generate extrem Heat. Much more than only with a standard Prime test, without any heat spikes and no GPU work.

If you have 84° only with Prime and only after 5 minutes, you can include more than 10 degrees with extra GPU work and that means your CPU must throttle down.

 

I would prefer Linx for a CPU test https://obsproject.com/forum/threads/how-to-test-your-cpu-memory-with-linx.5361/

This test will show you the truth about your CPU and RAM very fast!

 

and some overall benchmarks like futuremark to test your GPU and your whole system http://www.futuremark.com/benchmarks/3dmark/all

 

If you want to test your PC you must run these tests more than 30 minutes, longer = better.

If you have time 24h are good long time test.

If your PC runs both test 24h with no problems, your PC is really stable.

 

84°C is to high for standard Prime95 after only 5 Minutes. MUCH too high! There is something wrong with your CPU/System cooling.

[Random]

84c is normal for Haswells. Insanely hard to cool. Im Delidded and watercooled and with a 4.5ghz overclock see 65c with dcs. 4.7ghz yields 77c in DCS

 

Also prime 95 loads up all cores to 100% DCS only loads 2 to 50% max if you have an HT enabled CPU (bit misleading as with HT off it registers up to 100% on 2 cores). Prime 95 pushes my temps up to near 80c with 4.5 ghz and touches 90 and crashes on 4.7! So tornados temps are a little high but not massively so.

Edited November 18, 2014 by Random

[Lange_666]

84°C is to high for standard Prime95 after only 5 Minutes. MUCH too high! There is something wrong with your CPU/System cooling.

No it's not, @4.6Ghz with a H100i cooler mine go even even a bit higher on standard Prime95 with Artic Silver as thermal paste (not delidded).

I've been running this setup for just over a year now, no problems.

And it sure isn't the reason behind his FPS drops.

[silviuf]

Hi guys, this is my first post on this forum. Of course, given that I use an AMD card, as it seems to be, my first issue with this game has to be with the performance.

 

I really disagree with the people advocating the developing team: this game is very weak performance-wise. Based on my experience with this game, I have come to the conclusion that there is an engine flaw/issue, whether this exists because it is old or just flawed, I know not. On my configuration, I run any game available today at maximum settings (almost all), and yet, with DCS KA-50, A-10C and FC3 (SU-27) I am somewhere near 30 fps (more or less depending on the given area). Really? And as some fellow said, and I checked it myself, the engine doesn't utilize more that 2 cores (1 maybe 50%, the other way less). Plus, when things start to appear on the screen (other planes, missiles) things start to get even worse.

 

Of course, I won't bother you with the "behold the marvel named BF4 in 64 players and how good that runs", I agree that we are speaking of different budgets here; but for my money I want a game that runs well for what it does. Not 100 planes, just 2-3 but in a very good shape. I am not a bank, I won't support the developer until, somewhere in time, they may release a better version. I bought A-10C, KA-50 and FC3 and they run like crap (avg 30fps on high), so, basically, if I want to play them, I am left with the option of downgrading the Visib. Range, the only one which works, because all the other GPU-bound settings don't seem to have too much an effect. If my core i7 can't cope with this game, then I don't know what can nowadays. And I don't dig this excuse that AMD is at fault here, we are not kids here, please ED, don't give us this shit. The developer must follow the manufacturer, not the other way.

 

Even though this game is an outstanding piece of simulation software, for the time being I will remain with my free SU-25T (which runs great, btw, avg. fps 40-50+, only take-off area near 25-30, I don't know why) and what DLCs I have now, medium settings or not. If ED manages to fix and improve this engine, then I just can't wait to buy all the other available DLCs, I really want that much to support them.

 

Cheers.

Edited November 18, 2014 by silviuf

[NeilWillis]

AMD cards ARE an issue, simply because they withdrew support for DX9.

 

There is a big step up due soon in the form of Edge, which will mean DX11 support and better use of the resources of your 4 cores, and GPUs.

 

At present, DCS only uses one core, plus a second just to handle sound, so your PC is not being used optimally. Give it few months, and there'll be a change for the better.

[f4l0]

Of course, the engine is quite old and doesn't utilize nowadays capabilities of your graphic card. BUT a new engine is in development and should be here in the next months. (maybe until the end of this year)

[Random]

Back to Tornados issues... I've read back a bit and a 780 should be getting decent FPS at max settings. So firstly are you certain you got what you paid for? Are you certain its all installed correctly? Run something like openhardwaremonitor to check your GPU temps and check the fan is clear from obstructions. Since you state its fine when you can hear the fan I suspect the fan isnt running when it should and so the GPU is throttling back. You should be able to manually set fan speed to check if there is a problem with it.

[silviuf]

AMD cards ARE an issue, simply because they withdrew support for DX9.

 

yes, this is the official excuse come from ED. But, had they ever checked before they released this product IF the users could really run this software? I mean I find it hardly believable to develop a game and not to take into consideration that maybe half from the total number of systems use an AMD card. Plus all my DX9 games run perfectly, so again, this doesn't make sense. I do agree that a simulator doesn't have to be good looking and to have fancy images, and instead it must focus on physics, math computations in order to make it more realistic. Well, let's wait and see what that EDGE engine delivers to us.

[cichlidfan]

yes, this is the official excuse come from ED. But, had they ever checked before they released this product IF the users could really run this software? I mean I find it hardly believable to develop a game and not to take into consideration that maybe half from the total number of systems use an AMD card.

 

If Steam's numbers are any indication, only about 30% are AMD card users.

[AtaliaA1]

But, had they ever checked before they released this product IF the users could really run this software? I mean I find it hardly believable to develop a game and not to take into consideration that maybe half from the total number of systems use an AMD card.

 

 

I understand your point for sure. In this instance it is more a matter of the software being outpaced by Technology. AMD did support DX9 when this title was in development.

 

Keeping in mind the size of the makers of the program. It isn't hard to realize the key would have been to totally remake this title with the newer C++ tools i.e. Multi-CPU/GPU utilization faster instruction sets not to mention the GPU Technology Tessellation and the like.

 

As the program was being developed the bugs needing attention, removed the ability for this small group of guys to take on the total revamp of the programming language used to create the Sim. It would have taken a very large group of programmers to do this.

 

We have to remember the size of the programmers who developed this great Sim. They took on the "Big Box" developers and won. IMHO I can't think of one single development group that achieved what this bold brave men have accomplished with this offering. They put this absolutely realistic combat sim. together against the odds. I find it hard to find fault with what they have achieved in this economy and fragile market and to think "Study Sim." are not equal to the large First Person Shooter genre. yet they are here still, many have attempted what they have and are now dissolved as developers.

 

When you consider the odds (economic, market share lack of a large marketing group, publishing advertisement juggernauts like EA. Sports among others) They slayed the dragon with a pair of pruning sheers.

Edited November 18, 2014 by AtaliaA1

[silviuf]

IMHO I can't think of one single development group that achieved what this bold brave men have accomplished with this offering. They put this absolutely realistic combat sim. together against the odds. I find it hard to find fault with what they have achieved in this economy and fragile market.

 

I know, now I'm just whining too much because of some stupid performance issue. It's just I invested a lot of money in my system and now I expect to play all my favorite titles without flaws, especially ancient performance issues like this one. You're right, I should just move on and give it a try and to lower a bit the settings, in order to obtain a playable and smooth frame rate. But I don't want to give up and to let ED assume that we, the customers, are ok with this condition. I know that undertaking this kind of business is as troublesome as any other: initial investment, salaries, overheads, marketing and, in the end, to obtain profit in a world where, for some, it is easier to download that from the internet because, why not, it is free. And let's not forget, for this kind of military-type software, the finance needed to access this information because I don't think that one can just find it on Wikipedia. Yes, some people just don't appreciate the hard work which these people do. Well, with this good attitude which I've just got :), I'm already thinking into buying DCS Huey, my only real concern now is that I might get into another and even worse performance issues than what I have with KA-50 or FC3.

[Mustang]

I know this has been mentioned elsewhere in other threads but regarding the subject of AMD cards - this driver http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=393257 is fantastic with GCN cards and DCS (7xxx series and above) if anyone missed these i strongly suggest you try them.

[AtaliaA1]

The users of the R9 have had to turn the overclock off. That's all DX9 and the R9 "Overclocked" don't seem to get along.

 

Try it, it has worked for others with that card. Search forum u will see.

[silviuf]

With regard to the 14.41 AMD driver, I installed it yesterday (previous driver: 14.9) and I didn't see a noticeable difference, maybe 1-2 frames more. I read specifically your post Mustang, thanks for the tip, unfortunately for me it doesn't work. Also, the dll "injection" method didn't work for me; as soon as I copied that dll into the bin folder, my DCS game hanged; even though that was not a 100% hang, my game couldn't properly start and I think it rendered 1 frame/minute, something like this. In the end I had to restart the Windows.

 

As for the downclock of my R9 card, I don't know, I don't want to mess with it; it is stock and I want it to remain like this. Even though it may had worked for some, I find it hard to believe that downclocking a card may help some games (as it being a stock OC, not custom made). As I said, everything else runs flawlessly. Anyway AtaliaA1, I will check it out, thanks.

Edited November 18, 2014 by silviuf

[Tornado]

To all who responded to my problem:

 

This morning I contacted the builder because the PC is very new (bought it on the 7th of this month). He will dig into the technical issues of the PC. It is matter of garanty as well of course. All components are new. He will swap the cards (another GTX 780 and an ATI R9 290X to see what happens). I will stay out of the technical issues, also because of the garanty. It was not a cheap machine, so you may expect something decent.

 

I think the same as Random, the GPU throttles down, because the fans are not working properly. Sometimes they are activated, but in most runs not at all.

 

So I did not open the PC myself. What I did it: I packed the new PC back in the box as it will be "repaired" this week (I hope). I spent too much time behind this PC solving the problem. Nothing worked sofar. The builder is in charge now. It was no problem so I have full support.

For the time being I took my three and half year PC (the I7 960) from the attic and installed it back to it's old place. This one works. Less powerfull but still reasonable to fill up the gap

 

I will post the results when all is running well. So we all can learn about it. Fortunately we have this forum which I consult many times.

 

Thanks for all help and advises and again I will keep you informed. Tornado

[silviuf]

Unbelievable. I think I got the culprit (well, partially). At first I decreased to medium Visibility Range and Water quality. Result: KA-50 free flight 30-38 fps. After that I turned off the mirrors. Come on, the fps went up to 44-62. Really? Are these mirrors taxing that much? I will keep you posted tomorrow for another results.

[Mustang]

I never use mirrors unless i really really have to :)

 

Also try the shaders mod link in my sig, i have made a version that is high water setting minus the environmental reflections, gives even greater FPS boost and looks fantastic.

Edited November 18, 2014 by Mustang

[Wolf Rider]

the mirrors are a rendering in another smaller window, so to speak... you've got the big screen, your monitor, and then there a some smaller screens contained within - same as for the TGP, etc.

 

a tip, I've mentioned many times before for NVidia users (and as I don't run an AMD vga, I'm not sure the setting is applicable), that is turn to OFF the option of Threaded Optimisation... do not leave it on AUTO in the card's settings Control Panel

Edited November 19, 2014 by Wolf Rider

[msalama]

that is turn to OFF the option of Threaded Optimisation

 

I gained a couple of F/S when I turned it from off to on ages ago. But auto may still well be the worst option of all, I agree.

[cichlidfan]

I never use mirrors unless i really really have to :)

 

Agreed. They do look great but, unless you have a 'problem' with a frame rate that is too high ;) , they usually aren't worth the hit.

[Rhinox]

Agreed. They do look great but, unless you have a 'problem' with a frame rate that is too high ;) , they usually aren't worth the hit.

That's THE problem I'd like to have! :-)

[silviuf]

turn to OFF the option of Threaded Optimisation... do not leave it on AUTO in the card's settings Control Panel

I don't understand why you recommend this. As far as I know, threaded would imply that the software splits the workload onto multiple threads, for each CPU core/GPU SPU which ultimately translates into computation efficiency. Is this not the case with DCS? And why OFF and not auto? Or ON? Thanks.