unreasonable low FPS with R9 270x?

[AtaliaA1]

The R9 and DCS do not get along.

 

Do a search many others are like you here in the DCS community. I wouldn't suggest buying the R9 if DCS is one of your interests.

 

Not only that but the Chip Manufacturer You chose is ill suited for DCS.

 

No need to attempt to find an answer the Q. has been asked lots of times before. Search the Forum and see for yourself.

[Ink]

Soulres I have been having issues with frame rates similar to what you have described. I found when I disabled (unchecked) the Full Screen option, my frame rates went up a significant amount.

 

I noticed in your response to mvsgas that you did not note whether you had the Full Screen option disabled. May be worth a try.

[Soulres]

All those new games you play, are they made for Consoles (PS4, Xbox one) and then ported for computers?

Are they more demanding on CPU or GPU?

Have tried any of the stuff mention in other post/thread like re installing DX9, etc.?

If Mustang has the same GPU as you ( or close to) and gets better FPS, why would you not believe is the CPU?

Does any one ells has a similar CPU as you?

 

Of course DCS engine is very old ( when compared to other computer sims/games) and it there are so many hardware/ software configurations. There are many problems and many people have different experiences. Hopefully we can help you at least get better results by adjusting some settings. Have you ever over clock your CPU/ GPU? Not recommended if you never done it since you can damage your hard ware.

 

Some yes how ever FSX,BoS(Battle of Stalingrad) and there is no "config" lower than the lowest settings, its unplayable since trimming is near impossible since every input is trippled due to the low fps And yes I can overclock my CPU or GPU however Ill give it a shot however the GPU heats up really quick while running DCS for some odd reason, And I mean 34c' to 64c' in under a minute which is abnormal for my temps

The R9 and DCS do not get along.

 

Do a search many others are like you here in the DCS community. I wouldn't suggest buying the R9 if DCS is one of your interests.

 

Not only that but the Chip Manufacturer You chose is ill suited for DCS.

I tried the full screen option on and off doesnt help, didnt even disable fullscreen left it in fullscreen,and if you would of read my Comments,I did do research here since ive been here along time, However Overheating,not updated drivers,Multiple screens, running high resolutions (my screen is only 1024x1080) or Occulus rift are thingsthat do not apply,

Soulres I have been having issues with frame rates similar to what you have described. I found when I disabled (unchecked) the Full Screen option, my frame rates went up a significant amount.

 

I noticed in your response to mvsgas that you did not note whether you had the Full Screen option disabled. May be worth a try.

Tried it, and it did not touch anything, loads fast but doesnt play fast.

So far seems like the game is very Anti-AMD and ATI

 

Since DCS seems to not support multiple cores is there any hope that DCS 2.0 will actually support it? (ive heard hype but never proof) otherwise would anyone like to trade games? Cause rebuilding another gaming PC with the sole purpose of a running a Outdated game is ludicrous..

Edited April 20, 2015 by Soulres

[mvsgas]

If your GPU overheats so quickly, I would not overclock. Maybe the card is not good for overcloking.

Have you tried changing the CPU affinity?

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=118535&highlight=core+affinity

Edited April 21, 2015 by mvsgas

[Wolf Rider]

@ Soulres...

 

 

To be fair... comparing one game to another is misplaced, its not fair and it tends to mislead.

 

Having said that, open the Control Panel for your video card and make sure Anisotropic and Anti-Aliasing are both set to Application Controlled for the DCS profile (I am assuming ATI does has a profile type thingy for the various games out there). Your card is the bottleneck, as mentioned earlier, but these two settings not being correct causes grief on better performing cards.

Also make sure any "Gamma Correction" or forced(?) Ambient Occlusion setting is set to OFF.

if you are using Windows 7, leave Aero on

Overclocking won't help, it will only hinder and DCS has never been multicore aware (though DCS does send audio through a second core)

CPU affinity doesn't do anything in Windows 7... that was for XP

Also... make sure your Page File is set to the system default

 

If you have "done the research" as you've suggested you have... you would know DCS E.D.G.E. was begun quite a while ago now (it was also quite a while ago that ATI dropped DX9 Support) and will be released when it is released - ain't much point in fishing around trying to dupe someone into revealing when

Edited April 21, 2015 by Wolf Rider

[Bucic]

I've been off from DCS for a while. When I had the time to do some gaming I dived into ArmA 3. The whole internet is going all over how unoptimized and single-core-stuckup it is. Recently I fired up DCS again, to see what's going on. Holy $%^! This thing on LOW setting profile runs worse than ArmA 3 on HIGH!

 

My hardware:

AMD FX-6350 @ 4.8GHz

16 GB 1600MHz DC RAM

AMD 6850 1GB RAM

 

Only CPU cores 1 - 3 are utilized. Neither of them crosses the 50% threshold (sic!).

 

@OP:

With your hardware I'd forget about DCS with combat missions altogether. Maybe some free flight. For the sake of your health.

[Punisher74]

No really big issues for me

 

My settings (could not get a prints screen)

Texture = Medium

Scene = Medium

Civilian traffic = off

Water = Low

Visib range = High

Heat blur = off

Shadows = low

Resolution = 1920x1080

Aspect = 1.7777777777778 ( not sure why that long number for aspect)

Screen= One

Re of cockpit displays = 1024

MSAA = x2

HDR = normal

 

Clutter/bushes = 0

trees= 1500

preload radius= 150000

 

I disable Aero interface and full screen, all others are off.

 

the in A-10C I get 37 forward, 36 right and left, 45 flying, and up I get 70.

[Punisher74]

Lol yup it's an age old problem that theoretically will be solved in September with the release of dcs 1.5. I'd find something else to do until then

 

Might be sooner if they release 1.5 to the open beta release first.

[SkateZilla]

My settings (could not get a prints screen)

Texture = Medium

Scene = Medium

Civilian traffic = off

Water = Low

Visib range = High

Heat blur = off

Shadows = low

Resolution = 1920x1080

Aspect = 1.7777777777778 ( not sure why that long number for aspect)

Screen= One

Re of cockpit displays = 1024

MSAA = x2

HDR = normal

 

Clutter/bushes = 0

trees= 1500

preload radius= 150000

 

I disable Aero interface and full screen, all others are off.

 

the in A-10C I get 37 forward, 36 right and left, 45 flying, and up I get 70.

 

Comparing a system running a GTX 970 vs a System Running a 270x,, is like comparing a 4 Cyl against a V8.

[tintifaxl]

Might be sooner if they release 1.5 to the open beta release first.

 

I think they will be releasing 1.5 as open beta first. Maybe they'll make it in September, but I highly doubt they will manage sooner.

[Punisher74]

Comparing a system running a GTX 970 vs a System Running a 270x,, is like comparing a 4 Cyl against a V8.

 

Only in dx9 in dx11 or even dx12 the 270x leaps forward. Newer AMD cards are designed for the newer DX versions. On a DX11 game I'm getting frames in the range of 120 with no dips. Without vsync and running in xfire high 180's or 190's DX9 is not supported in any AMD card passed 2011. DCS 1.5 is a much needed upgrade in software.

 

 

Current DCS version:

Now just today I adjusted the settings and with one card I'm getting 60 frames with high textures just lowered the water and shadows to low and scenes to medium, range to high and textures high in OC mode. That's flying in view from the pit. No texture mods. And I also achieved the impossible by running 2x GPU W/xfire Managed to not lose frame rates with both gpu's on and with 1 GPU on and 2x memory on in OC mode.

Edited August 5, 2015 by raptorsim

[giei]

Only in dx9 in dx11 or even dx12 the 270x leaps forward. Newer AMD cards are designed for the newer DX versions. On a DX11 game I'm getting frames in the range of 120 with no dips. Without vsync and running in xfire high 180's or 190's DX9 is not supported in any AMD card passed 2011. DCS 1.5 is a much needed upgrade in software.

 

 

Current DCS version:

Now just today I adjusted the settings and with one card I'm getting 60 frames with high textures just lowered the water and shadows to low and scenes to medium, range to high and textures high in OC mode. That's flying in view from the pit. No texture mods. And I also achieved the impossible by running 2x GPU W/xfire Managed to not lose frame rates with both gpu's on and with 1 GPU on and 2x memory on in OC mode.

 

no

270x is the low end vga of 2xx series and dx 10-11-12-13-14-15 can't do miracles.

You can compare the 970 with the 280 or better the 290 (who lays between 970 and 980).

[SkateZilla]

Only in dx9 in dx11 or even dx12 the 270x leaps forward. Newer AMD cards are designed for the newer DX versions. On a DX11 game I'm getting frames in the range of 120 with no dips. Without vsync and running in xfire high 180's or 190's DX9 is not supported in any AMD card passed 2011. DCS 1.5 is a much needed upgrade in software.

 

 

Current DCS version:

Now just today I adjusted the settings and with one card I'm getting 60 frames with high textures just lowered the water and shadows to low and scenes to medium, range to high and textures high in OC mode. That's flying in view from the pit. No texture mods. And I also achieved the impossible by running 2x GPU W/xfire Managed to not lose frame rates with both gpu's on and with 1 GPU on and 2x memory on in OC mode.

 

More along the lines of DX11, removed a significant amounts of CPU/Driver overhead compared to DX9,

And DX12 Allows programming directly to the GPu, removing driver overhead altogether

Then there's asyncronous shader model etc.

 

You cant blame DX9 for low performance on Entry Level Hardware.

 

However A R9-270 is NO WHERE Near the GTX 970 in performance or Hardware Tier,

 

So my comparison stands, Its comparing a 4cyl engine to a 8 Cyl Engine.

 

270's GPU Package is the equivelent of Entry Level Hardware now, 970/980s Are Enthusiast Level Hardware.

 

 

As for Xfire, Xfire Does Not work in DCS 1.2.x, SLi does sort of.

 

and when in multi GPU Mode your memory doesnt double, its mirrored, everything is copied to both ram banks.

So your 2GB remains 2GB, and not 2GBx2=4GB.

Edited August 6, 2015 by SkateZilla

[Punisher74]

More along the lines of DX11, removed a significant amounts of CPU/Driver overhead compared to DX9,

And DX11 Allows programming directly to the GPu, removing driver overhead altogether

Then there's asyncronous shader model etc.

 

You cant blame DX9 for low performance on Entry Level Hardware.

 

However A R9-270 is NO WHERE Near the GTX 970 in performance or Hardware Tier,

 

So my comparison stands, Its comparing a 4cyl engine to a 8 Cyl Engine.

 

270's GPU Package is the equivelent of Entry Level Hardware now, 970/980s Are Enthusiast Level Hardware.

 

 

As for Xfire, Xfire Does Not work in DCS 1.2.x, SLi does sort of.

 

and when in multi GPU Mode your memory doesnt double, its mirrored, everything is copied to both ram banks.

So your 2GB remains 2GB, and not 2GBx2=4GB.

 

If that's the case skate then I'm not sure what I did because after I installed the 2nd card my frames went for the 30's to 65 just confirmed it on my last flight at 12:46 to 2:43 in the a-10. From cockpit. Now my OC settings are the same as before, so I know it's not that. And as for a entry level card its specs are up to 4K on one card. So I'd say medium range card. The architecture on the 280 and up are less MHz then the 270, but the bits jump to 512. Now the Only reason I haven't jumped to the newer AMD cards is that the 300 series is the same as the 200 series just renamed. Except for the furyx and will as I do have the money to spend 650 for 1 card is outrageous. And since the human eye cannot see a frame rate cannot see past 120fps it really doesn't make sense when DCS 1.5 gets released in 1 month. Unless it's released earlier in open beta, but you'd know better on that then me. Now you think windows 10 had something to do with the increase in frames in DCS? The other thing I did was use the catalyst control center to hand the graphics calls to anti-aliasing, and all other image texture filters, lowered the pre load radius, trees amounts, etc. turning off vsync, Tssa, MSSA, anti-aliasing in game so the GPU handles to call rather then the CPU. Those were the things I did. But if those aren't what did it, then my assumption would be windows 10 improves performance to the point where the bottleneck is less then in windows 7 or 8.1. Anyways this will all be a mute point in a few weeks.

Edited August 6, 2015 by raptorsim

[SkateZilla]

Windows 10 has reduced Overhead drivers for DX 11, but a modifed Kernel Scheduler for CPUs.

[SkateZilla]

ps

 

$390 for 2 Entry level GPUs

w/ 2GB GDDR5 each on a 256 Bit interface, and 179 GB/Sec Bandwidth Mirror in Xfire

1280 GCN 1.1 Stream Processors Each (2560 in Xfire)

Xfire compatibility issues w/Multiple titles, or unsupported

Power Draw of 150w Each (310 in Xfire)

Single Xfire Bridge Support, max. Bandwidth of 900mb/sec

2X PCIe x16 Slots Each (4X Slots total, 32 PCIe Lanes from CPU Controller.)

 

vs

 

$560 for One AMD Fury

w/ 4GB of HBM on a 4096Bit interface, 512GB/Sec

3594 GCN1.2 Stream Processors (which are more efficient than GCN 1.0/1.1)

Power Draw of 220-240w @1080p

xDMA Crossfire Support (Bridgeless), Max. Bandwidth of 15.75Gb/Sec

2X Slots

 

 

I'd say the extra 170 is well spent.

[AtaliaA1]

I had to read that one twice to understand what U nerds were talking about.:)

 

How do those numbers line up with the nVidea equivalents.

[*Rage*]

lol ^

[Punisher74]

no

270x is the low end vga of 2xx series and dx 10-11-12-13-14-15 can't do miracles.

You can compare the 970 with the 280 or better the 290 (who lays between 970 and 980).

 

 

The 970 might be a over expensive workhorse, but this low end card as you put it can hang. The results speak for themselves

 

Single card: http://www.fotos-hochladen.net/uploads/270xoccorecl2kqzrgasmy.png

 

Crossfire 2x http://www.fotos-hochladen.net/uploads/overclock5osqyxrgkw.jpg

 

Overclocked with the standard AMD gaming app at 1120mhz and 1400mhz memory clock.

[Brainless]

I would rename the title to "resonable low FPS with FX6300". Core 2 Duo at 3GHz is more than 30% better in single thread applications compared to FX6300. I hope DCS1.5(2.0) will put an end of this.

[Punisher74]

I would rename the title to "resonable low FPS with FX6300". Core 2 Duo at 3GHz is more than 30% better in single thread applications compared to FX6300. I hope DCS1.5(2.0) will put an end of this.

 

I'm running the fx8320 @4ghz which covers that lack of 30% at adds some. Making the results for my machine better that the results shown. But I get what you're saying

[Skopro_PL]

hardware is not the problem. The outdated code used in DCS is; as it still runs on DX9 and is not optimized for the CPUs that are available. It is true that a Intel chip will run faster per core than an AMD will, and Nvidia still making use of DX9 out performs the AMD GPUs. I'm running a 4770k @4.2 with a r9 290 and the performance is not what it should be. I have a few buddies that have access to EDGE with one running AMD cpu/gpu and he says it runs great, this gives me hope for my rig.

[Fakum]

All good stuff! Im waiting to see what really happens when all is released, and that is between Windows 10 and 1.5 or 2.0 being released. Its going to take a bit of time to get some real world feedback on how the sim is responding to different GPU's/CPU's/ and DCS Engine. I'm anxious myself to upgrade to get out of the 30FPS club. Im willing to wait for real results though before I blow hard earned cash. I do like the discussion though!

[spaceraver]

I run a R9 290x 4gb Card, I have no issues with the game and I use quite a lot of mods. So stop banging on about the r9 series cards being bad. The 270 is just too small..