Falcaw Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Hey guys, I am new to the forum and just started with DCS. Absolutely love it and I am already addicted. VR is just amazing. I am having one problem though and just wanted to see if anyone else is having the same. When flying the a10c I have a very good frame rate. Usually 75+ running pixel density 2 etc. I can improve it to stable 90 by turning down most things but high settings are completely fine using ASW it maintains 45 almost always. Then I switch to my newly purchased mig21bis (A lovely plane by the way) and suddenly I am struggling with the frame rate. I didn't change any settings just the aircraft. Then it drops quite consistently below 45 and even down into the 20's with ASW. Back to the a10c and everything is fine again. I have a pretty decent system with i7 3.4 16gb ddr4 gtx 1070, It is still fine to play purely because of the immersion factor but just wondering if I can somehow get the same frame rate i get with the a10c in the mig. Anyone else having a similar experience? -Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindyTX Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 Absolutely it depends on the module programming. So yes different modules all give different frame rate. Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk I7 3930 4.2GHz ( Hyperthreading Off), GTX1080, 16 GB ddr3 Hotas Warthog Saiteck Combat Pedals HTC Vive, Oculus CV1. GTX 1080 Has its uses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falcaw Posted November 18, 2016 Author Share Posted November 18, 2016 Thanks Windy, good to know it's not only my computer. Do you think it is useful if we create a list? So far I've tested for Oculus Rift In relative terms 1. Bf109 - 90FPS stable with only few exceptions 2. A10c - 75FPS Stable 45fps with asw. 3. mig21bis - 45 FPS but definite problems to maintain FPS. Dropping to 20 etc. Must lower settings quite a bit for this module. 4. Gazelle 30-45 FPS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firmek Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 The main impact on the FPS is probably related to the complexity of the cockpit as also quality of the mesh and textures. Older modules may be using textures with smaller resolution. I don't think creating the list will bring much of benefits. First it's quite hardware and setting dependent. After applying a mod with better quality textures the FPS will drop. Also 2.0 and 1.5 have different performances. Then, the FPS count is different depending on the mission setup and plane position - on the ground FPS drops substantially. At the end there are just too many variables. To draw some conclusion, the comparison should be run with exactly the same test mission which is flew in exactly the same way during the same time and under the same graphical settings. Otherwise the result will be confusing with wrong conclusions being made. F/A-18, F-16, F-14, M-2000C, A-10C, AV-8B, AJS-37 Viggen, F-5E-3, F-86F, MiG-21bis, MiG-15bis, L-39 Albatros, C-101 Aviojet, P-51D, Spitfire LF Mk. IX, Bf 109 4-K, UH-1H, Mi-8, Ka-50, NTTR, Normandy, Persian Gulf... and not enough time to fully enjoy it all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindyTX Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 (edited) I dont think the list is a bad idea given that any person is using their single hardware it gives you an idea of what to expect if you buy a new module. For me the Mig21 is indeed the worst for framerate and the Gazelle the worst of the Helos the F15 is the worst of the FC3 Aircraft no clue why. I am away right now but wiill try and put together a full list I know the Devs for the Hawk were being really careful because some of the lighting they tried to use killed the framerate. Anyway if we had a list then you would know what to expect prior to buying a new module based on the performance of another module in the list. Please be aware for those that spend a lot of time on multiplayer servers, the server has a massive effect on framerate along with the number of people on the server at the time. Effectivly the list will tell you what relative performance you can expect , still a useful guage. Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk Edited December 14, 2016 by WindyTX I7 3930 4.2GHz ( Hyperthreading Off), GTX1080, 16 GB ddr3 Hotas Warthog Saiteck Combat Pedals HTC Vive, Oculus CV1. GTX 1080 Has its uses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkateZilla Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 Polycount and Geometry Detail. Windows 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill (F4-3200C16D-16GTZR x2), ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate, XFX RX6800XT Merc 310 (RX-68XTALFD9) 3x ASUS VS248HP + Oculus HMD, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS + MFDs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
75th-VFS-Snakeye Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 I find the mig21 is the only aircraft that affects fps, and nttr is poorly optimised in vr Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haukka81 Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 Nttr runs much better than Georgia , least in my CV 1 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Oculus CV1, Odyssey, Pimax 5k+ (i5 8400, 24gb ddr4 3000mhz, 1080Ti OC ) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnco61 Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 I dont think the list is a bad idea given that any person is using their single hardware it gives you an idea of what to expect if you buy a new module. For me the Mig21 is indeed the worst for framerate and the Gazelle the worst of the Helos the F15 is the worst of the FC3 Aircraft no clue why. I am away right now but wiill try and put together a full list I know the Devs for the Hawk were being really careful because some of the lighting they tried to use killed the framerate. Anyway if we had a list then you would know what to expect prior to buying a new module based on the performance of another module in the list. Please be aware for those that spend a lot of time on multiplayer servers, the server has a massive effect on framerate along with the number of people on the server at the time. Effectivly the list will tell you what relative performance you can expect , still a useful guage. Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk I think it's different for most people, I find the Gazelle better optimised than the Ka50 on my setup!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simo1000rr Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 I find the mig21 is the only aircraft that affects fps, and nttr is poorly optimised in vr Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk Nevada on my CV1 runs so smooth and clean , way better than 1.5 . also the visuals in Nevada in VR is alot better . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muse458 Posted December 19, 2016 Share Posted December 19, 2016 Well just got the Spitfire and its awesome, but it has a little of this threads problem of not being optimised for VR. The only issue I have found is the massive prop...it looks awesome but if you have HDR on and looking at the sun through the prop, frame rates cut in half...usually I get around 40-45 frames... loaded up the spitfire with engine running, and got a juttery 18-22 frames. Seems the problem maybe the animation on the prop is a lot "thicker" than the P51.. .Also just running normally with ASW turned on, looking forward at the prop gives me the ASW jelly feature.. so Crtl +num 1 for this plane at the moment.. anyone else getting this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromhunt Posted December 19, 2016 Share Posted December 19, 2016 Same here. In dogfight frame rate goes down,so down that it's impossible to follow the target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fitness88 Posted December 20, 2016 Share Posted December 20, 2016 (edited) I realize this is a VR thread which one day I hope to be able to run but for now I think the biggest variable to hit FPS in my rig is having gone from 1 to 3 screens. I have an 8 year old computer quad core 2, upgraded to 8gig ram and 750ti 2mg video card. On a single screen I get 65-120 FPS flying Migs or F-15 [med settings]. When I go to 3 screens it drops to 25-70 FPS. I find a lot of people mention all their option settings for FPS but fail to say what hardware exactly they are using to view. Edited December 20, 2016 by fitness88 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts