CPU performance question for VR user

[grammaton_feather]

I'm running DCS 1.5 and 2.0 on an i5 2500k @ 4.8ghz with 32gb ram @ 2133mhz...

 

My GPU is a GTX 1070 @ 2035mhz.

 

HTC Vive.

 

Windows 10.

 

I understand that DCS uses a single core and that DCS 1.5 is more CPU hungry than GPU...

 

On DCS 1.5 I get an FPS drop below the required 90 (VR remember) when sitting on runway on for example the SU25T Anti Radar Missile Practice.

 

With zero AA and lowest settings I still get judder until I take off and fly clear of the airbase. My FPS on the runway is about 75. With Vive there is judder whenever FPS drops below 90.

 

We know that DCS 1.5 isn't overly demanding on GPU..

We know DCS 1.5 uses only 1 core...

 

However... windows still runs background processes and since I'm running an old CPU even at 4.8ghz with no Hyperthreading... I suspect my FPS isn't as high as it could be.

 

I recently read a post on another flightsim (IL2 BOS) with new experimental Vive support... Someone tested it and posted his feedback on a forum. IL2 is really unplayable at this stage on my system because even on lowest settings the judder is severe... The guy who posted his findings said he also needed lowest settings but found it playable. Didn't mention any judder. He has a GTX 980 but his CPU is much more modern and with HT: i7 4790K

 

Is my CPU holding me back?

[Kuky]

Well, i5 2500k is middle range, 4 generations of Intel CPU's behind. So I'd say yes, your CPU is inadequate.

[grammaton_feather]

Well, i5 2500k is middle range, 4 generations of Intel CPU's behind. So I'd say yes, your CPU is inadequate.

 

4.8ghz though... But I guess like you say... 4 generations behind... older fabrication, cache, lack of hyperthreading...

[Kuky]

I recently changed my system from i7 3930k to i7 6850k, and of course the m/b ram bits that pair with it. Granted I haven't tried VR with my old system, and I haven't actually even tried it yet with new one, I can't say what performance difference I get, but what I can say is that from looking into that very well done DCS benchmark thread by the guy from EK (http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=157374) I tested by system with same settings he did to compare with his results and I recall my min fps was 42 (this was with i7 3930k @ 4.4GHz), and latest gen i7 6700k @ 4GHz got at 56. So I decided to upgrade as I need all the FPS for VR as I can get. I think for you upgrade would be good choice also.

[grammaton_feather]

I recently changed my system from i7 3930k to i7 6850k, and of course the m/b ram bits that pair with it. Granted I haven't tried VR with my old system, and I haven't actually even tried it yet with new one, I can't say what performance difference I get, but what I can say is that from looking into that very well done DCS benchmark thread by the guy from EK (http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=157374) I tested by system with same settings he did to compare with his results and I recall my min fps was 42 (this was with i7 3930k @ 4.4GHz), and latest gen i7 6700k @ 4GHz got at 56. So I decided to upgrade as I need all the FPS for VR as I can get. I think for you upgrade would be good choice also.

 

Hmmm, looks like you're right. I'm gonna have to ditch my existing bits right down to my Swiftech waterblock :(

[Ricoo1]

Clock to clock min FPS is 49 for 2600K against 56 for 6700K

 

Very far from 90 with either CPU...

 

The problem is DCS optimization not CPU speed

 

I'm happy with my config. Not the fastest one, but ATW does wonder in Rift :)

[grammaton_feather]

Clock to clock min FPS is 49 for 2600K against 56 for 6700K

 

Very far from 90 with either CPU...

 

The problem is DCS optimization not CPU speed

 

I'm happy with my config. Not the fastest one, but ATW does wonder in Rift :)

 

Yes, the minimum in each case is significantly below 90 threshold. Average is much higher for latest gen CPU so the question is how much it would dip below that average.

 

But yes, as you say, problem is largely due to DCS lack of optimization.

 

I've been checking stats for other games and sims... Project Cars also fares much better with skylake 6700k compared to my gen CPU.

 

Some games as well.

[grammaton_feather]

Well... I've been on DCS 1.5 today with the same SU25T anti-sam practice mission and no sign of judder.

 

What's changed?

 

No GPU overclock. Default 1070 clocks.

[Kuky]

...but ATW does wonder in Rift :)

 

Since I've just used the Rift since last night, I am still a newb when it comes to it, so I feel stupid I have to ask but who cares, right... so about this ATW, is there something I need to install or use/change in DCS or somewhere else (maybe video card drivers) to get ATW to work? I don't know, maybe its working already but I wouldn't have a clue :)

[grammaton_feather]

Since I've just used the Rift since last night, I am still a newb when it comes to it, so I feel stupid I have to ask but who cares, right... so about this ATW, is there something I need to install or use/change in DCS or somewhere else (maybe video card drivers) to get ATW to work? I don't know, maybe its working already but I wouldn't have a clue :)

 

ATW works automatically since Oculus CV1. It's easy to see the effects of ATW... Your frame-rate might be below 90 but head-tracking will be smooth.

 

I was a DK2 user until a few months ago and ATW made a massive difference. DCS 1.5 had been unplayable on my then GTX 970. ATW made it much smoother. Head movement judder renders a game unplayable. It's so ugly to see and it totally ruins gameplay.

 

I don't think there's any switch to disable/enable ATW... you could install a pre CV1 runtime like .801 to see how VR was before ATW.

 

Unless your PC is grossly under-powered you shouldn't have any judder with Oculus on DCS.

[gagipro]

I think there's a big issue with this 3d engine, it seems to render every objects no matter if it's visible or not...

Since 2008 it had horrible performance, I wonder how I could put so much money in it!