New Desktop!

[kolga]

Well, here is some of the difference then.

 

I have FPS around 45-85, depending on what I do.

In FW-190 and Mig-21 I have the lowest FPS, around 28-30 on the ground, which is the lowest I will accept.

Normally I don't get any lag, even with much going on around me.

 

You should try flying with the frame counter on, and see what it says when your game feels sluggish and lagging.

The most important is to avoid very low FPS, which generally happen when you have the biggest need for fast and accurate action.

 

I have flown with low FPS which degraded further when I was close to the runway, or if something was going on around me.

But low FPS makes the aircraft behave sluggish, because there is a lag between what you see on the monitor compared to what really happens, and then there is a further lag from your control input until you see a difference on the monitor.

To me it detracts from the feeling of the aircraft.

 

On top of that I have quite high settings for view distances, because it gives me more immersion when I for instance can see the houses and trees far away from me.

I also like detailed textures.

Finally I like a bit of anti-aliasing to smooth out lines.

 

All in all it makes me max out the GTX 670 I have, and I could easily use a more powerful one.

 

I attach here my settings in game.

I have used the High visibility mod to get Ultra High view distance.

 

 

Here a screenshot from my setup:

 

 

Here a view of the landscape:

 

 

I rarely get lag for more than a few seconds, I tried medium textures but i couldn't read the cockpit :) During lag it can get as low as about 10 but mig 21 siting on the runway i get about 25 which i am pretty happy with. I wonder what 1.5 will be like...

 

 

P.S. I think I heard somewhere that TSSAA just robs FPS without any graphical gain, you might try it with it off and see what happens.

[Sporg]

I rarely get lag for more than a few seconds, I tried medium textures but i couldn't read the cockpit :) During lag it can get as low as about 10 but mig 21 siting on the runway i get about 25 which i am pretty happy with. I wonder what 1.5 will be like...

 

 

P.S. I think I heard somewhere that TSSAA just robs FPS without any graphical gain, you might try it with it off and see what happens.

 

Well, usually you get lag in the instances where you need smoothness most crucially: When landing, with incoming missiles or with more planes in the air.

Lag here is often fatal and at least detrimental to the flying experience.

 

Try to lower your settings a bit and see how it feels.

Usually with low FPS there will be a sluggishness in the plane behavior, but you only learn to recognize this if you have tried flying with the smoothness of high FPS.

 

About the TSSAA that is not entirely true.

I found a nice picture that illustrates the effect:

It is from this thread: http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3722862/Re:_Optimising_Guide/Advice#Post3722862

You see that you gain a better crispiness and readability of the instruments.

 

Finally though, I will say that this discussion really highlights why I was advocating for a better graphics card:

OP (and maybe you too?) have an expensive PC, with one of the most powerful CPUs you can get, and nevertheless you have to sit and trade high settings to medium in order to try and gain some FPS.

While I, with an older PC and a two generations old graphics card, can fly with much higher and even enhanced settings, while still maintaining a smooth game with fairly high FPS.

 

This is what I tried to warn about.

But of course, if you are happy as is, no problem. :)

 

Happy flying. :)

 

[kolga]

Well, usually you get lag in the instances where you need smoothness most crucially: When landing, with incoming missiles or with more planes in the air.

Lag here is often fatal and at least detrimental to the flying experience.

 

Try to lower your settings a bit and see how it feels.

Usually with low FPS there will be a sluggishness in the plane behavior, but you only learn to recognize this if you have tried flying with the smoothness of high FPS.

 

About the TSSAA that is not entirely true.

I found a nice picture that illustrates the effect:

[]

It is from this thread: http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3722862/Re:_Optimising_Guide/Advice#Post3722862

You see that you gain a better crispiness and readability of the instruments.

 

Finally though, I will say that this discussion really highlights why I was advocating for a better graphics card:

OP (and maybe you too?) have an expensive PC, with one of the most powerful CPUs you can get, and nevertheless you have to sit and trade high settings to medium in order to try and gain some FPS.

While I, with an older PC and a two generations old graphics card, can fly with much higher and even enhanced settings, while still maintaining a smooth game with fairly high FPS.

 

This is what I tried to warn about.

But of course, if you are happy as is, no problem. :)

 

Happy flying. :)

 

 

Thanks for the info! I only get lag with lots of rockets and explosions together usually. I pretty much never get lag on landings :thumbup: My pc was only about $850 so not too expensive :) If i change my textures to medium I can't read the cockpit very well but i might be doing something wrong (?)

 

Happy flying and safe landings! :)

 

EDIT: I had scenes on low and thats why i couldn't read the cockpit, i have textures on medium now and it looks fine! and BTW my FPS is usually in the 40's at higher altitudes :)

Edited August 30, 2015 by kolga

[Art-J]

Visibility range and water details are the biggest fps killers around cities, harbours and airports in this sim and even my GTX780 doesn't allow me to max these settings out (I aim at solid 60 @ 1200p though and consider drops below 50 absolutely unacceptable, so yep, "smooth" is a VERY subjective thing).

 

I did not hesitate to drop water to "medium", since "high" was a bit too glitchy and cartoonish anyway. Using visibility on "medium" for many months was smooth but ugly, adding an 800MHz overclock to CPU lately allowed me to go to "high" at last. However, Mi-8s standing or flying nearby always cause serious fps drops no matter what CPU clock I use :D. New DCS renderer can't arrive soon enough!

[kolga]

Visibility range and water details are the biggest fps killers around cities, harbours and airports in this sim and even my GTX780 doesn't allow me to max these settings out (I aim at solid 60 @ 1200p though and consider drops below 50 absolutely unacceptable, so yep, "smooth" is a VERY subjective thing).

 

I did not hesitate to drop water to "medium", since "high" was a bit too glitchy and cartoonish anyway. Using visibility on "medium" for many months was smooth but ugly, adding an 800MHz overclock to CPU lately allowed me to go to "high" at last. However, Mi-8s standing or flying nearby always cause serious fps drops no matter what CPU clock I use :D. New DCS renderer can't arrive soon enough!

 

LOW water actually looks really good to me so I have had it there for a while :)

 

consider drops below 50 absolutely unacceptable

 

:cry:

[Sporg]

Visibility range and water details are the biggest fps killers around cities, harbours and airports in this sim and even my GTX780 doesn't allow me to max these settings out (I aim at solid 60 @ 1200p though and consider drops below 50 absolutely unacceptable, so yep, "smooth" is a VERY subjective thing).

 

I did not hesitate to drop water to "medium", since "high" was a bit too glitchy and cartoonish anyway. Using visibility on "medium" for many months was smooth but ugly, adding an 800MHz overclock to CPU lately allowed me to go to "high" at last. However, Mi-8s standing or flying nearby always cause serious fps drops no matter what CPU clock I use :D. New DCS renderer can't arrive soon enough!

 

It's funny and interesting to see the different balance people prefer. :)

 

I need to try those Mi-8's, it's a long time since I tested them.

 

For me I could easily get higher FPS than what I have, but I have a crave for eye candy because it helps my feeling of immersion.

Especially the enhanced view distance is important to me, because for me it killed the immersion that the landscape looked so "bare" and that buildings were "sinking into the ground" as I moved away, and popped up when I was closing in.

So I settled with a minimum of 30-45 FPS as acceptable, with as crispy a picture as possible and as far a view distance as I could get.

 

I still have a problem with some ground and air targets only popping up as I close in, but will have to try find out what causes it.

[Art-J]

Oh, I agree about annoying pop-ups. That's why finding a compromise between conflicting interests of minimizing pop-ups and keeping solid 60fps is always a major trouble for me in any sim.

 

I really hope upcoming 1.5 renderer will help us with this issue Actually, buildings rendering in Vegas, shown in Wags' streams looked good in this regard, didn't it? I don't recall any obvious pop-ups there. Mi-8 might still be a bit more troublesome though. Nowadays, in startup tutorial mission, when I look left to the other Hips standing on the ramp, my fps always drops below 50, no matter what the CPU speed is. I already know this damn mission will be the first thing I'll fire up when 1.5 arrives to check for performance improvements :D.

[remon]

It's funny and interesting to see the different balance people prefer. :)

 

I need to try those Mi-8's, it's a long time since I tested them.

 

For me I could easily get higher FPS than what I have, but I have a crave for eye candy because it helps my feeling of immersion.

Especially the enhanced view distance is important to me, because for me it killed the immersion that the landscape looked so "bare" and that buildings were "sinking into the ground" as I moved away, and popped up when I was closing in.

So I settled with a minimum of 30-45 FPS as acceptable, with as crispy a picture as possible and as far a view distance as I could get.

 

I still have a problem with some ground and air targets only popping up as I close in, but will have to try find out what causes it.

 

There is no immersion killer like low fps/stutters.

[Spasticatedtoad]

Harvey Norman is not really the place to buy anything, unless you want to pay 60% more than anywhere else. The people who work there, can only advise you what you should buy, by reading the Box to you. They are not computer experts and they only have stock that looks good on paper.

On paper they have the right parts, until you find out that the PC is woefully underpowered, or throttled.

And if that's not enough to turn you off Harvey Norman, most of their stock is superceded, therefore, good luck claiming warranty in anything. All you will end up with, is store credit so you can buy some other junk from them. The advice people have offered here is dead on accurate and they are far more knowledgeable than 'Hardly Normal'.

I bet nobody here got their advice from a box.