Judder problems in DCS?

[keem85]

Hi guys

 

I've just started out with DCS in my Rift.. I almost never get 90 frames per second, unless I use the lowest graphic settings available.. Even the "VR Preset" is way too taxing on the framerate... Is this problem limited to DCS 1.5 engine? Will the 2.0 be any better?

 

I read further in this forum, and it seems that everyone is having a great time in DCS, but I'm struggling to do so myself.. I will add that the ATW works great with the Rift, but I can't play it with constant animation judder. I want it to stay at 90 frames per second.. I'm just way too sensible to framedrops, even with ATW active.. Just wondering if this will get better in time, if it's a limitation to 1.5, and if it's better in 2.0.. And if so, when can we expect a performance increase? After all, I do have a pretty decent rig.

 

MOBO: GA-Z87X-UD4H

Processor: i7 4770K @4.4

GFX: MSI 1080 Gaming X

RAM: Corsair Vengeance Pro 2400

OS: Windows 10 x64

[funkyfranky]

Hmm, with your rig you should be able to get 90 FPS in DCS 1.5 even if you go higher than the lowest settings. Maybe not all the time but at least in most/many situations. I can give you the settings, which work fine for me. Maybe that helps a bit to figure our the optimal values for your system - without too much testing and fiddling around ;)

 

So, for good FPS you should definitely turn shadows off, in case you had them on. ED will implement cockpit shadows only. But until that is happens, shadows are a real FPS killer.

Also visib. range should be set to low or medium. With your graphics card you can probably go to pixel density between 1.8 or 2.0. Try MSAA 2x or 4x. Water medium or low. Textures you can both set to high without nearly any FPS loss. Anisotropic filtering 8x or 4x. Depth of field off. Trees 5000. Personally, I use HDR on, heat blur low, lens effects dirt+flare.

 

With that and your rig you should get pretty good FPS while keeping some eye candy and good readability of the instruments. But there are areas, e.g. near bigger cities like Batumi, where (at least for me) it is not possible to get 90 FPS even with pixel density 1.0 and everything else on the lowest setting.

 

BTW, I don't think 2.0 is any better than 1.5. It's basically the same graphics engine with a different map technology for Nevada. We'll see what 2.5 brings in terms of optimizations.

 

PS: Welcome to the forum!

[keem85]

Thank you thank you! I will definitely try these settings! But are ED going to improve framerate at all? I can't ever imagine to play this sim without my VR headset.. car games like iRacing, I can run it with high graphics and x2.0 pixel density without problem, and that with a full grid.. I would imagine that a sim like DCS would be able to acheive the same performance.. I really hope they improve this in the near future.

[cichlidfan]

...car games like iRacing, I can run it with high graphics and x2.0 pixel density without problem, and that with a full grid.. I would imagine that a sim like DCS would be able to acheive the same performance.. I really hope they improve this in the near future.

 

How much terrain and how many models is iRacing using? Probably about 1% of what DCS is rendering. You are comparing blueberries to watermelons.

[keem85]

Actually a lot more object rendered at once than what I've seen of DCS so far.. As soon as just a few buildings and complexities begin to build up in DCS, frames drops drastically.. These iRacing tracks are made very detailed outside of the track aswell, because of live competition and stuff.. DCS really doesn't have that many object at once in it's lod radius when playing.. At least it should have been smooth on medium at least.. That's just what I've seen so far though.. I don't have a lot of experience with DCS

[keem85]

With the new Asynchronous Spacewarp, I can now run DCS at 1.8 pixel density and extreme graphic setting without a sweat! It's magic!

[funkyfranky]

Splendid! I have not tried it yet, but good to hear!