ShuRugal Posted January 12, 2017 Posted January 12, 2017 So, I have finally made the move from gaming laptop to gaming desktop... And the performance improvement in DCS is non-existent. All of the components in my new desktop spec 2-3 times the benchmark scores of my laptop, yet my Oculus framerate (using identical settings) has not changed at all. Other applications, however, have improved dramatically. I have also heard reports from other players with even better systems (SLI 1080s, as opposed to my singular 1050ti) that they also have an extremely hard time finding a balance of quality and framerate when using Oculus. What gives? I thought we solved the "DCS sucks at framerates" problem with the migration to DX11?
feefifofum Posted January 12, 2017 Posted January 12, 2017 Hey Shu, is this in both Caucuses and Nevada? I think the main issue at the moment is DCS is still very much CPU-dependent, and while it now uses more than a single core it still doesn't fully exploit all of your processor's capabilities. This can especially be an issue in AMD processors, which tend to use larger numbers of cores with slower clock speeds. Can you post your hardware specs? THE GEORGIAN WAR - OFFICIAL F-15C DLC
ShuRugal Posted January 12, 2017 Author Posted January 12, 2017 haven't tried it on Nevada yet. New rig is as follows: I7-6700K MSI GTX 1050 TI 4GT OC 6GB DDR4 Win10
PreussLee Posted January 12, 2017 Posted January 12, 2017 I guess you meant 16 gb ddr4 ram? If not i may have an idea whats the problem... i7 6700k @ 4,5 Ghz | MSI 1080ti Aero | 32 GB RAM 2133 | 500 GB SSD | TM Warthog | MFG Crosswind | HTC Vive |:pilotfly:
Art-J Posted January 12, 2017 Posted January 12, 2017 Well, we did solve the "sucks at framerates" problem after getting rid of DX9-related overhead problems and on flatscreens performance is twice better indeed. Your 1050 (not very "gaming-grade" to begin with) would be great for single 1080p, maybe even 1440p with some settings compromises - only 4GB of VRAM is not what this very VRAM-hungry sim will be happy with. Not quite good enough for triples or VR, however. You might get somewhat increased performance in 2.0, which utilizes modern cards much better than 1.5.x. But that one is even more VRAM-hungry, so I wouldn't expect much. Flight sims are still much more resource heavy than all other types of games, and looking at experiences of guys here with 8GB cards like 480s and 1070/1080s I don't think we're there yet as far as the whole VR-solutions are concerned. I'd say we'll still have to wait 3-4 years to be able to crank up eyecandy to max and maintain the dreaded 90 fps in these. i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.
NeilWillis Posted January 12, 2017 Posted January 12, 2017 SLI isn't going to help either. It isn't supported, so they will also be disappointed for very good reasons. DCS World has some very specific requirements, so just throwing a "powerful" PC at it will not always show great results. For example, what clock speed is the CPU running at? That's a pretty fundamental guide to performance, and that wasn't even mentioned in the spec you gave. If the figure of 6GB of RAM (if that isn't a typo) is also well below optimal, as is the graphics card you're running, as has already been stated. All in all, probably not fishy at all.
boedha68 Posted January 12, 2017 Posted January 12, 2017 Ram 6 gb is too low. No ssd and a low spec gpu. Ask for trouble. Sorry Newest system: AMD 9800X3d, Kingsting 128 GBDDR5, MSI RTX 5090(ready for buying), Corsair 150 Pro, 3xSamsung 970 Pro, Logitech X-56 HOTAS, Pimax Crystal Light (Super is purchased) ASUS 1200 Watt. New system:I9-9900KS, Kingston 128 GB DDR4 3200Mhz, MSI RTX 4090, Corsair H150 Pro RGB, 2xSamsung 970 EVO 2Tb, 2xsamsung 970 EVO 1 TB, Scandisk m2 500 MB, 2 x Crucial 1 Tb, T16000M HOTAS, HP Reverb Professional 2, Corsair 750 Watt. Old system:I7-4770K(OC 4.5Ghz), Kingston 24 GB DDR3 1600 Mhz,MSI RTX 2080(OC 2070 Mhz), 2 * 500 GB SSD, 3,5 TB HDD, 55' Samsung 3d tv, Trackir 5, Logitech HD Cam, T16000M HOTAS. All DCS modules, maps and campaigns:pilotfly:
ShuRugal Posted January 12, 2017 Author Posted January 12, 2017 6 was typo, 16 GB installed. GPU may not spec near as high as a 1080, but it blows the pants off my mobile 780, and DCS is the only application in which i have not seen significant gains so far. Will try 2.0 this afternoon and report back if that made a difference.
rrohde Posted January 12, 2017 Posted January 12, 2017 Have to say, my rig struggles with the current unoptimized version of the Caucasus map as well, while NTTR on the current iteration of 2.0 is buttery smooth. I guess we have to wait until 2.5 when both maps are brought to the same, highly optimized standard. Just for comparison sake - on NTTR I get easily up to 90% GPU utilization, while on the current Caucasus map it seems to hover around 30% or less. That makes a huge difference imho. PC: AMD Ryzen 9 5950X | MSI Suprim GeForce 3090 TI | ASUS Prime X570-P | 128GB DDR4 3600 RAM | 2TB Samsung 870 EVO SSD | Win10 Pro 64bit Gear: HP Reverb G2 | JetPad FSE | VKB Gunfighter Pro Mk.III w/ MCG Ultimate VKBcontrollers.com
ED Team NineLine Posted January 12, 2017 ED Team Posted January 12, 2017 I think the 1050 might be a big weak point, I just did a quick search and performance wise it rates lower than a GTX 770. I can only imagine OR kicks its butt... Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**
ShuRugal Posted January 12, 2017 Author Posted January 12, 2017 I think the 1050 might be a big weak point, I just did a quick search and performance wise it rates lower than a GTX 770. I can only imagine OR kicks its butt... yeah, i'm starting to think i may have goofed with the 1050, been near to a decade since i was in the market for a desktop graphics card. Still, i'll see what i can squeeze out of it.
ShuRugal Posted January 12, 2017 Author Posted January 12, 2017 (edited) UPDATE: When launching with DCS2, I get into the main menu fine, but when i try to get into a mission, i get black screened to death. UPDATE2: solved the above, but it's even more of a slideshow in Nevada. Gonna be sad if i have to buy a new new graphics card... Edited January 12, 2017 by ShuRugal
ShuRugal Posted January 12, 2017 Author Posted January 12, 2017 Well, after more testing, it looks like if I use low presets, disable AA and terrain shadows, and set pixel density to 1.5, I can hold 45 FPS in Nevada... as long as Vegas is not in sight. In vegas i get 15 fps no matter what i do.
ED Team NineLine Posted January 13, 2017 ED Team Posted January 13, 2017 Yeah when it comes to nVidia, you want to avoid anything lower than a xx70 for gaming... My step-kid got himself a 960 a while back, now he is using my 780 after I bought a 1070. Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**
Oceandar Posted January 13, 2017 Posted January 13, 2017 Yeah when it comes to nVidia, you want to avoid anything lower than a xx70 for gaming... My step-kid got himself a 960 a while back, now he is using my 780 after I bought a 1070. How is your step-kid FPS in DCS 2.0 ? Is it acceptable enough ? Mastering others is strength. Mastering yourself is true power. - Lao Tze
ED Team NineLine Posted January 13, 2017 ED Team Posted January 13, 2017 How is your step-kid FPS in DCS 2.0 ? Is it acceptable enough ? He doesnt play DCS, but when I ran with the 780, it was decent, but the 1070 is much better. Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**
SkateZilla Posted January 13, 2017 Posted January 13, 2017 a 1050 isnt recommended for VR Either. 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
Oceandar Posted January 13, 2017 Posted January 13, 2017 He doesnt play DCS, but when I ran with the 780, it was decent, but the 1070 is much better. Ok thanks for the info Mastering others is strength. Mastering yourself is true power. - Lao Tze
Art-J Posted January 13, 2017 Posted January 13, 2017 Oceandar, I still use a 780, on a single 1200p 24" monitor. "Decent" performance is good description. I aim at constant 60 fps in both 1.5.x and 2.0.x with high-to-medium settings and I usually get it, with some drops to 50-few in hardware-demanding situations. Going to upgrade to 1060 at least, though, to be locked @ 60fps no matter what. i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.
=Pedro= Posted January 13, 2017 Posted January 13, 2017 (edited) SLI isn't going to help either. It isn't supported Since when ? Edited January 13, 2017 by =Pedro= Gigabyte Z390 Gaming X | i7 9700K@5.0GHz | Asus TUF OC RTX 4090 | 32GB DDR4@3200MHz | HP Reverb G2 | TrackIR 5 | TM Warthog HOTAS | MFG Croswinds
ShuRugal Posted January 13, 2017 Author Posted January 13, 2017 (edited) a 1050 isnt recommended for VR Either. Amusingly enough, it runs other VR apps just fine. I can put Elite up to 1.5 pixel density with no slowdown, using the same settings that had my mobile 780 stuttering at 1.0 density. No joy increasing graphics options in DCS, though. Oh well. Guess I'll be ordering a 1080 with my next paycheck. Actually... 1070. Passmark scores the 1080 at 11,900, and the 1070 at 10,900, but the 1070 is half the cost. Half the cost for less than a 10% difference in performance? hell yes. Edited January 13, 2017 by ShuRugal
Recommended Posts