FLIR - FPS killer

[shagrat]

@raptorsim - just notice you did "disable Aero interface". This is different compared to my Settings, and I cannot see why it should affect fps at all, but won't hurt to crosscheck what happens if unchecked.

I'm not near my rig to check until tomorrow, but I'll see if it has any reproducable effect on my PC.

[Punisher74]

@raptorsim - just notice you did "disable Aero interface". This is different compared to my Settings, and I cannot see why it should affect fps at all, but won't hurt to crosscheck what happens if unchecked.

I'm not near my rig to check until tomorrow, but I'll see if it has any reproducable effect on my PC.

 

I found in 1.2.16 it helped with FPS. I did try it unchecked in the beginning of the OB, but I don't remember the difference. I'll test it later tonight after primetime.

 

 

 

 

but wasnt this quite always a problem since the a10-beta?

TGP and Mav images need extra GPU-computing of the displayed environment (like a second viewport). Hence the fps-drop. And if zoomed out, the field-of-view that needs to be rendered is bigger, so zooming out may cause extra fps-drops..

I thought wags mentioned this some very long time ago...

 

I agree. Yet I never saw that with the 2x R9 270x gpu's with 2gigs, and see it with my new R9 390 8gig card. Either way the rendering of the map on both the visual and MFCD are doubled or tripled with the TGP and MAV in dx11. And even the extra VRAM didn't help. To me that is a bug, the minimum gram is 2gigs and even 4x that amount didn't improve the FPS by much. Maybe 10 fps at best.

Edited November 4, 2015 by raptorsim

[NineLine]

I agree. Yet I never saw that with the 2x R9 270x gpu's with 2gigs, and see it with my new R9 390 8gig card. Either way the rendering of the map on both the visual and MFCD are doubled or tripled with the TGP and MAV in dx11. And even the extra VRAM didn't help. To me that is a bug, the minimum gram is 2gigs and even 4x that amount didn't improve the FPS by much. Maybe 10 fps at best.

 

 

So you changed vid cards and you still get heavy drops.

 

Yet here I am still without the issue... it very well still could be something on your machine. You need to look close and see if there is anything you can shut off, or anything else that might be effecting this. It may be something you would never expect... try shutting off anything you dont need, processes and such. Any little programs that might be running in the back ground, anti-virus, etc... you just never know.

Edited November 4, 2015 by NineLine

[Punisher74]

So you changed vid cards and you still get heavy drops.

 

Yet here I am still without the issue... it very well still could be something on your machine. You need to look close and see if there is anything you can shut off, or anything else that might be effecting this. It may be something you would never expect... try shutting off anything you dont need, processes and such. Any little programs that might be running in the back ground, anti-virus, etc... you just never know.

 

 

Well not so heavy as before, but the heaviest was zoomed out, that's without sync. I think it's all in the GPU speed itself. Nvidia has crazy OC where as the AMD Cards top off in the 1100's. I think the R9 390 Max's at 1200mhz in OC.

 

I've monitored the CPU usage on all 8 cores only 2 cores run high the rest are in the teens. Afterburner on screen display does wonders. I basically went from 2 cards that perform the same as this one card does. But I have gained more VRAM, stream processes, better cooling, etc. Not to mention this rig was built in February.

 

I'll check tomorrow and post.

 

In the autoexe file what is the render 3D statement for. I set it to false and I still get 3D?

Edited November 4, 2015 by raptorsim

[Punisher74]

@sithspawn I checked every background processes and all are Windows processes, sound, CCC, Internet, steam, MSI updater, corsair link. All have a 0 drain on CPU.

[Pikey]

I used to have slowness in TGP's when I had an AMD card. Try preload radius to nothing. It trades some things but may work for you.

 

What also helped was having a faster disk drive, but I lost the exact point where these things disappeared in 1.2 with various upgrades.

[shagrat]

In the autoexe file what is the render 3D statement for. I set it to false and I still get 3D?

In 1.2.x it was used to disable the 3D Engine. (To run a Server where 3D was unnecessary).

Seems with EDGE in 1.5 it is obsolete, at least for now.

 

Edit: BTW as you said, "aero interface" on or off does make virtually no difference on my PC, as well.

[Punisher74]

In 1.2.x it was used to disable the 3D Engine. (To run a Server where 3D was unnecessary).

Seems with EDGE in 1.5 it is obsolete, at least for now.

 

Edit: BTW as you said, "aero interface" on or off does make virtually no difference on my PC, as well.

 

I'm beginning to think AMD cards whether highend, medium, or low are having issues with DCS. I just upgraded to a highend card MSI R9 390 8gig. OC'ed the card to 1180 MHz (Max card OC is 1200MHz) push the memory to 6100 MHz. Now with those settings in the card one would think they could set the game settings to high and max out trees, shadows, DOF off, etc all while maintaining 60 FPS. But that's hardly the case. Maxed out settings with DOF off I got 44 FPS on the runway not even moving. A 970 or 980 would have pulled it off with 4gigs.

 

To maintain 60FPS MAX OUT everything but shadows (flat is ok), water, DOF off, CIV traffic low or off, msaa 4x, ATF 16x, heat low, pit 512, vis ultra or high. Trees 2500 or less, grass 500.

 

Anyway I ran tests all day I was able to achieve a 5 to 12 FPS drop with the above settings in campaign with MAV and TGP active. Now that was with VSYNC. Regardless if vsync is on or not with off the FPS should remain with in 5 to 12fps. And no matter the card manufacturer the cards should also to similar within the card class level.

 

The issue should be somewhere within the api calls to the dx11 DLL's, and the i think that DCS might be more GPU intensive then VRAM. I have noticed that whether you set you clock speeds to factory OC, gaming speed, or Custom OC the GPU is still higher then it should be. For me 98% was the highest and most sustained percentage. I say this because I've read through the forum of people getting 58% or more on other cards. I'd understand that with a lower end card the GPU should work harder with the less VRAM, where with higher VRAM the GPU could work less. What I see with a 8gig card is I'm only using about 3gigs of VRAM where I could be using more VRAM buffering more causing the GPU to not work as hard. In turn reducing the bottleneck. Which could very well be the issue causing me & others to loss FPS and for you guys the bottleneck might be less causing you and the Dev to not to be unable to reproduce what I was seeing and others are.

 

But all in all you guys at ED have done a really bang up job with the new version it's a visually great looking and a fun game. I'm not trying to be super critical, just trying to help.

Edited November 5, 2015 by raptorsim

[danilop]

[FLAME SUIT]

 

Get Intel and nVidia based system.

 

I've always been financially challenged, so for long time I was trying to save money going with AMD solutions. It's cheap and it kinda works. Most of the time. Unfortunately, not that well in software I'm interested in, like DCS.

 

Switched to Intel and Nvidia a few years ago. Haven't looked back since then. No more problems.

 

[/FLAME SUIT]

[Punisher74]

[FLAME SUIT]

 

Get Intel and nVidia based system.

 

I've always been financially challenged, so for long time I was trying to save money going with AMD solutions. It's cheap and it kinda works. Most of the time. Unfortunately, not that well in software I'm interested in, like DCS.

 

Switched to Intel and Nvidia a few years ago. Haven't looked back since then. No more problems.

 

[/FLAME SUIT]

 

It wasn't about the money, i mean yes it was a lot of savings. It was I know a AMD card can handle it. Even thou I was eventually upgrade my card, I bought the new one to test my theory. And I was right, where AMD shines in multi GPU. But performance should be similar when it's a highend card, and over the top with multi GPU.

Edited November 5, 2015 by raptorsim

[shagrat]

Multi GPU, unfortunately requires a perfect synchronization of the framebuffer to work. So the PCI bus timing/clocking is vital to get stable and realtime results...

Yet, it is common, that little differences in mainboard quality, driver optimization not optimized for linked graphics card can cause problems like stutters, glitches or other weird effects. Both on AMD and(!) NVidia by the way.

 

They get better at this, but there is a reason why 90% of the CAD or other Graphics intense Workstations use single specialized highend GPUs rather than simply putting two or more cards in SLI or X-Fire...

On the argument about nvidia vs AMD, though I agree with the nvidia/Intel preference, the issue discussed in this thread seems to be present on both AMD and(!) Nvidia systems, so it is likely not related to "bad" AMD drivers or the GPU architecture in general. What makes the root cause analysis a real PITA.

[Punisher74]

Multi GPU, unfortunately requires a perfect synchronization of the framebuffer to work. So the PCI bus timing/clocking is vital to get stable and realtime results...

Yet, it is common, that little differences in mainboard quality, driver optimization not optimized for linked graphics card can cause problems like stutters, glitches or other weird effects. Both on AMD and(!) NVidia by the way.

 

They get better at this, but there is a reason why 90% of the CAD or other Graphics intense Workstations use single specialized highend GPUs rather than simply putting two or more cards in SLI or X-Fire...

On the argument about nvidia vs AMD, though I agree with the nvidia/Intel preference, the issue discussed in this thread seems to be present on both AMD and(!) Nvidia systems, so it is likely not related to "bad" AMD drivers or the GPU architecture in general. What makes the root cause analysis a real PITA.

 

I always ran 2 or 3 machines 1 for coding, 1 for testing highend and 1 low end. I'm also anal retentive about getting it right the first time. Old military habits.

Edited November 6, 2015 by raptorsim

[Punisher74]

Test Passed!!!!!

 

Finally a FPS test for the TGP FLIR and the MAV that passes with only a 8 point FPS drop with VSYNC Off. I updated to the lasted patch and ran a fps test. Changed some minor things in the options menu. (Also noticed that Model Visibility was gone) Ran the test mission and it passed.

 

Settings at time of Test:

 

[NineLine]

Model enlargement has moved to the Gameplay tab

[Punisher74]

Model enlargement has moved to the Gameplay tab

 

Thanks man.

[ody81]

Had my first decent flight in the A-10C since the open beta started!!!!!!!

Unnoticeable fps drop with both TGP and MAV using their respective FLIR modes.

Just got some trouble making a fast mission with the A-10C without it crashing, but that's for another thread, I got some bulk logs to submit XD

 

Thanks everyone for trying to get to the bottom of this or at least trying to reproduce it, but for me at least the problem has disappeared :)

Edited November 9, 2015 by NineLine
1.1

[NineLine]

Has everyones experience with this improved, those that were having issues?

[Punisher74]

Has everyones experience with this improved, those that were having issues?

 

As I stated after the patch to 1.5.1x I have experienced a improvement.

[Gary]

Happy to say I've noticed an improvement too. Now the mav screen only drops my fps down by about 10 - from mid 50's down to mid 40's

 

I'm guessing this is to be expected??

 

Not related but just wanted to say - for us older guys who's eyes are not perhaps as good as they used to be the new enlarged model option is really great.

 

Regards,

 

Gary

[TAW_Impalor]

Has everyones experience with this improved, those that were having issues?

 

No! If anything, updating to 1.5.1 reduced my baseline FPS from 110 to 85, and FLIR+Mav from 50 to 40. Ran the test twice... I use quick-easy-fall mission on active pause from the first second. Why, DCS, why?

 

Edit: loss of baseline FPS was due to No Tree Shadows mod being removed by the update. Now restored, but the "FLIR problem" is still very much there ((

Edited November 9, 2015 by impalor

[L0op8ack]

DCSW Ver 1.5.0/1.5.1

Su25T have the same problem

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=152060

[TAW_Impalor]

I further noticed that FLIR/MAV kill FPS even when I look away from the MFDs. I suspect that the bug is not video related, but some algorithmic bottleneck. CPU utilization drop may be an indicator of this.

Edited November 10, 2015 by impalor

[NineLine]

I further noticed that FLIR/MAV kill FPS even when I look away from the MFDs. I suspect that the bug is not video related, but some algorithmic bottleneck. CPU utilization drop may be an indicator of this.

 

Which would be reasonable to believe if it effected everyone, the problem is it doesnt.

[TAW_Impalor]

Which would be reasonable to believe if it effected everyone, the problem is it doesnt.

 

Do all the guys who see improvement from 1.5.1 have 16 Gb of RAM?

[NineLine]

Do all the guys who see improvement from 1.5.1 have 16 Gb of RAM?

 

I have 16 Gb of Ram, but I never saw an issue, even with 1.5.0