VR Performance in DCS World

[Buckeye]

VR Performance in DCS World

 

What is the general consensus on the extra $$$ for a 1080 Ti over a 1080?

 

I just ordered a Ti but I'm starting to think (based on some things I've read) that in DCS I won't see any sizable improvement over the regular 1080. Thoughts? Thanks boys!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[=DECOY=]

What is the general consensus on the extra $$$ for a 1080 Ti over a 1080?

 

I just ordered a Ti but I'm starting to think (based on some things I've read) that in DCS I won't see any sizable improvement over the regular 1080. Thoughts? Thanks boys!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

I went from a 1080 to a 1080ti and yes I saw an improvement of approx 10%

 

I know it's not massive but it I had the chance I would definitely do it again.

[dburne]

What is the general consensus on the extra $$$ for a 1080 Ti over a 1080?

 

I just ordered a Ti but I'm starting to think (based on some things I've read) that in DCS I won't see any sizable improvement over the regular 1080. Thoughts? Thanks boys!

 

In VR, I saw a nice improvement going from a 1080 to a 1080 Ti.

 

Whether the amount is worth it to you would be another thing, especially as DCS 2.1 is still very resource hungry and there is no way to achieve great performance especially over Normandy.

For me, I am glad I got it.

[rrohde]

For me, I am glad I got it.

 

:thumbup:

[JallieFR]

Turn off all shadows.

Textures and Visibility to Medium.

Reduce grass/clutter almost all way to left.

You might can run 2xMSAA, if still that low turn it off.

 

The above is about how I have mine set, and can run it also with 8X AF and get at least doable performance.

Hopefully 2.1 will get some performance improvements as it progresses. It is still an early alpha product.

 

I tried a differenent choice

 

TEXTURES on HIGH ( the both)

SHADOW Rigth --> FLAT

SHADOW Left --> LOW

 

SS --> a bit lower

but ...

the immersion and visuel are better than before :thumbup:

[pimp]

Is it necessary to run PC in high performance mode with VR? I've noticed my cpu temp gets pretty high around 74-78C in this mode. It's OC'd to 4.7Ghz but in PC Balanced mode and non-VR setup it never reached 70C. For the sake of VR, is it ok to run in Balanced Mode?

Edited August 12, 2017 by pimp

[dburne]

Is it necessary to run PC in high performance mode with VR? I've noticed my cpu temp gets pretty high around 74-78C in this mode. It's OC'd to 4.7Ghz but in PC Balanced mode and non-VR setup it never reached 70C. For the sake of VR, is it ok to run in Balanced Mode?

 

You are talking CPU not your graphics card ( GPU) ?

 

If so, I am surprised it would be getting that high running a Corsair H100i cooler as listed in your PC specs?

[FragBum]

VampireNZ gave me a tip for VR and that is to keep textures high and run terrain textures low. So currently:-

 

textures high

 

Terrain Textures low

 

As for the rest I have

 

water high

 

shadows flat/low

 

Visible range low (I'm a ground huger anyway :D )

 

deferred shading off

 

MSAA @2

 

AF @ 4

 

PD @1.1

 

My clutter and preload distance trees etc are also set to fairly low values.

 

Turning terrain textures to low allowed me to actually run MSAA all be it at 2, I get some moire on some edges and trees at a distance the corrugated iron roofs can have some beat patterning but in Normandy the Gazelle/Huey fly well in single player with good frame rate and minimal stuttering NTTR and Normandy seem about the same.

 

Actually resolution in Normandy seems better than NTTR??

 

i7 5930 @ 4.2Ghz

980Ti

32GB DDR4 @ 2.4Ghz

SSD OS/DCS

Rift

 

:thumbup:

[pimp]

You are talking CPU not your graphics card ( GPU) ?

 

If so, I am surprised it would be getting that high running a Corsair H100i cooler as listed in your PC specs?

Yes CPU. I'm surprised also. I adjusted my curves a little in Link. Hopefully this will keep the temps down. But is it necessary to run the PC in High Performance power mode?

Edited August 13, 2017 by pimp

[VirusAM]

Hey guys, so my specs are: i74790k @4.5ghz, gtx 1080, 16gb of RAM, 250gb ssd for windows, 1tb ssd for games. I'm using the oculus cv1, in 2.1 and am getting low frames as low as 28fps. I've tried following the guide Matt Wagner put out there but still no success in fps improvement.Is anybody here with similar specs who could help me please it's putting off my experience in dcs 2.1. Many thanks.

 

 

 

Where is the Wags guide?i can't find it...would you please point me out to it?

Thanks

[ram0506]

Yes CPU. I'm surprised also. I adjusted my curves a little in Link. Hopefully this will keep the temps down. But is it necessary to run the PC in High Performance power mode?

 

No, it is not. You can use the balanced setting. When playing DCS the CPU is switching automatically to full frequency, in my case 4,4 Ghz. After finishing DCS the CPU will clock back to lower frequencies after a while.

I tried DCS with performance power mode but couldn`t see any improvements in frame rates.

[Snacko]

Is there a way to change the resolution of the onscreen game window when using VR? It's that tall(1080?) x 600? Whey is it that shape in the first place?

[Charlie-1]

I'm really liking this game the more I get into it, especially for the VR experience with Vive.

 

The main issue I'm finding confusing is the variation in FPS performance. So far I'm only playing 'Instant Action' or 'Quick missions' but finding massive difference in FPS.

 

The first thing I did of course is drop all the graphics setting to minimum, no shadows mirrors etc, but still finding some games run at super smooth 45 - 90 FPS and others a stuttering 20 - 30 FPS.

 

I'm monitoring my PC performance and can see no difference between background processes/ resources etc when experiencing the extremes of FPS, but the one sure repeatable way to initiate the two is by choosing certain games/locations.

 

As an example the only instant action available for A10-A in Caracus runs 20 - 30 FPS every time even with lowest settings, but the top choice for the A10-C in Caracus runs 45 - 90 FPS even with high graphics settings. The next scenario down the list for the A10-C (Russia I think) runs at 20 - 30 FPS every time again even with the lowest settings.

 

I found the similar thing with quick missions. With all settings left alone, and using the same plane throughout, FPS performance seems to depend on where the battle is based on the map.

This is usually evident with the FPS display in the 'Fly Now' hold screen before the game starts. Some say 30 FPS and some say 45 FPS. The latter is almost always a perfectly smooth game.

 

I'm going to do a bit more digging and find out if its the actual location that makes the big difference or active contents, i.e planes tanks etc.

 

System: AMD FX4300 3.8GHz, Nvida/PNY GTX1070, 8G RAM

[metzger]

I'm really liking this game the more I get into it, especially for the VR experience with Vive.

 

The main issue I'm finding confusing is the variation in FPS performance. So far I'm only playing 'Instant Action' or 'Quick missions' but finding massive difference in FPS.

 

The first thing I did of course is drop all the graphics setting to minimum, no shadows mirrors etc, but still finding some games run at super smooth 45 - 90 FPS and others a stuttering 20 - 30 FPS.

 

I'm monitoring my PC performance and can see no difference between background processes/ resources etc when experiencing the extremes of FPS, but the one sure repeatable way to initiate the two is by choosing certain games/locations.

 

As an example the only instant action available for A10-A in Caracus runs 20 - 30 FPS every time even with lowest settings, but the top choice for the A10-C in Caracus runs 45 - 90 FPS even with high graphics settings. The next scenario down the list for the A10-C (Russia I think) runs at 20 - 30 FPS every time again even with the lowest settings.

 

I found the similar thing with quick missions. With all settings left alone, and using the same plane throughout, FPS performance seems to depend on where the battle is based on the map.

This is usually evident with the FPS display in the 'Fly Now' hold screen before the game starts. Some say 30 FPS and some say 45 FPS. The latter is almost always a perfectly smooth game.

 

I'm going to do a bit more digging and find out if its the actual location that makes the big difference or active contents, i.e planes tanks etc.

 

System: AMD FX4300 3.8GHz, Nvida/PNY GTX1070, 8G RAM

Everything is affecting FPS. Big cities and trees are more demanding than plain fields or water. Missions with too many ground units will also have less FPS.

 

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

[crowebar]

There have also been reports of different frame rates depending on the sun position. i.e dawn, mid day & dusk

[BeastyBaiter]

I've never noticed such a thing. What determines fps is trees and buildings. Shadows, textures and so on seem to have no measurable impact on performance in either 1.5 or 2.x because the choke point is the single CPU thread running the graphics engine. The only thing the CPU does there is send geometry data to the GPU.

 

This is with any graphics card equal or greater than the RX480 or GTX1060. Below that it maybe different.

[metzger]

I've never noticed such a thing. What determines fps is trees and buildings. Shadows, textures and so on seem to have no measurable impact on performance in either 1.5 or 2.x because the choke point is the single CPU thread running the graphics engine. The only thing the CPU does there is send geometry data to the GPU.

 

This is with any graphics card equal or greater than the RX480 or GTX1060. Below that it maybe different.

Shadows are the single most FPS affecting think in dcs.

 

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

[fargo007]

Not all cities or areas of the map are created equal in FPS terms either.

 

Create a mission where you put one helicopter in each city, turn the counter on, and fly around for five minutes each.

 

I guarantee you will find a noticeable difference.

 

For me on 1.5 the best city is Tbilisi (which is also the largest). Mineralnye Vody is good too.

 

On 2.1, Boulder is terrible, but Pahrump is very good.

[Charlie-1]

Having flown some more around the map in 1.57 this evening whilst monitoring FPS I found buildings cause the biggest change in FPS in game. With high graphics settings I'm getting smooth 45 FPS +, but as soon as I either head towards, look towards or fly over buildings there's a significant drop in performance.

 

Whilst they look impressive, I wonder if built up areas are worth the FPS penalty when flying?? It would be great to be able to switch buildings 3D off as a VR graphics option or even change them to 2D once at a certain altitude where the 3D is lost anyway. After all, who's looking at the buildings when dodging missiles?

 

For now I found I can improve game play choosing locations away from them. 45 + with super sampling at 2.5,shadows on etc.

[metzger]

Having flown some more around the map in 1.57 this evening whilst monitoring FPS I found buildings cause the biggest change in FPS in game. With high graphics settings I'm getting smooth 45 FPS +, but as soon as I either head towards, look towards or fly over buildings there's a significant drop in performance.

 

Whilst they look impressive, I wonder if built up areas are worth the FPS penalty when flying?? It would be great to be able to switch buildings 3D off as a VR graphics option or even change them to 2D once at a certain altitude where the 3D is lost anyway. After all, who's looking at the buildings when dodging missiles?

 

For now I found I can improve game play choosing locations away from them. 45 + with super sampling at 2.5,shadows on etc.

Try turning off the shadows and see if buildings will still kill the FPS. More buildings = more shadows = less fps

 

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

[Charlie-1]

I mostly played with shadows flat and found differences in FPS but the same is true with all shadows off.

Flying around Batumi it's smooth 45 + until I look/ head towards the town when it still drops to 30.

 

The cockpit looks bland without shadows so best fix is to just avoid built up areas.

Edited November 17, 2017 by NAKE350

[SpeedStick]

I suddenly got a new annoying issue the last week. When flying after about 30 sec to a minnute tracking gets really jerky or laggy. But fps counter doesnt seem to be effected. Altough it feels very laggy. Dont know how to fix it. Anybody had anything similar? Sorry dont mean to hijack the thread.

[dburne]

I suddenly got a new annoying issue the last week. When flying after about 30 sec to a minnute tracking gets really jerky or laggy. But fps counter doesnt seem to be effected. Altough it feels very laggy. Dont know how to fix it. Anybody had anything similar? Sorry dont mean to hijack the thread.

 

I am assuming a Rift?

 

If so, it is a bit of a pain but may be worth running sensor setup again. Sometimes that can help clear things up, especially if not have done it in a while.

[SpeedStick]

I am assuming a Rift?

 

If so, it is a bit of a pain but may be worth running sensor setup again. Sometimes that can help clear things up, especially if not have done it in a while.

 

Sorry. Just got so frustrated that I forgot to mention. Yes CV1.

Yeah sure can try it, but that doesnt ussualy effect lag/tracking in this extreme.

[dburne]

Sorry. Just got so frustrated that I forgot to mention. Yes CV1.

Yeah sure can try it, but that doesnt ussualy effect lag/tracking in this extreme.

 

Also check your devices in the Oculus Home menu on your monitor. Sometimes a sensor can drop out without realizing it, make sure they both ( if you have two ) show good tracking with a green light.