Viggen Performance

[Emilio_Ger]

Hello everybody,

 

I run into some performance issues with the Viggen lately, especially compared to other modules. I used the mission 3 of the AJS-37 free sample Red Flag, and fps are noticeably lower than in any other AC. To compare I opened the mission in the ME and simply changed my Viggen flight with other modules.

First fps with the Viggen:

 

Now harrier:

 

and L-39C

 

and my settings (sry for the german)

 

41 in the Viggen, smooth 60 in the Harrier and 57 in the L-39C. I picked these Aircraft because they are somewhat heavy on performance aswell, but we can see, same settings, same situation, but lower fps. I run a GTX1060 6GB, an I5 4670 and 16GBs of RAM. This might be an issue on my side, so if there are any settings, which can be lowered to boost performance in the Viggen, I would appreciate any help. The performace difference is only apparent in a complex mission with alot of AI. The Viggen is an awesome module, HB did a splendid job, but the "bad" performance is an immersion breaker in more complex missions.

Edited February 12, 2018 by Emilio_Ger

[imacken]

+1. Yes, I completely agree, the fps in the Viggen is really poor compared to other aircraft, even in the same mission. Puts me off using it.

[Cobra847]

We're working on identifying an issue in the ternav that is causing performance drops under 600m altitude.

[Cobra847]

Just to update everyone on this:

 

We believe the FPS issue lies in a different system. We're working on isolating the cause and fixing it.

[QuiGon]

Just to update everyone on this:

 

We believe the FPS issue lies in a different system. We're working on isolating the cause and fixing it.

Different system than TERNAV you mean?

[Rhino182]

+1 also having this issue with no other problems in any other jet

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Flappie]

Just to update everyone on this:

 

We believe the FPS issue lies in a different system. We're working on isolating the cause and fixing it.

Thank you. :thumbup:

I can't use the Viggen anymore, and I'm missing it very much. :joystick:

Edited February 20, 2018 by Flappie

[Emilio_Ger]

Great, looking forward to a fix :thumbup:

[Emilio_Ger]

Any news on the performance? Is the fix already implemented, because the Viggen is still my worst performing module.

[Mizzy]

It's such a beautiful module, I hope they can solve the problem !

 

Mizzy

[Emra]

Wow. I am glad I read this thread. I`ll pass on buying the Viggen right now.

[Cobra847]

Wow. I am glad I read this thread. I`ll pass on buying the Viggen right now.

 

This issue only applies to a very small subset of users currently. Consider that before making any decisions.

[toilet2000]

I just upgraded from an i7-2600 to an i5-8600K, same everything else (apart from MB and RAM), same Windows install, same DCS install. I was experiencing this stutter before, but it seems to be gone now. Maybe it's hardware related?

 

If you want more info, don't hesitate to ask! Thank you and Heatblur in general for your great module and great work/support!

[Emilio_Ger]

Yea, it might be hardware related, as not everybody is affected by this "issue". I`ve just run an other test and placed some AC on Kubelti RWY07 and this is the result:

 

 

 

 

 

We can see ~50% more fps on any other module. I can understand that performance differs from system to system and I understand that the Viggen, being the best looking module IMHO does not perform as good as others, but the difference is huge and the great looks do not justify the difference in performance. If my rig is too bad to run the Viggen, that would be a shame, especially as any other dev can develop a module which doesn`t require high end hardware.

[philstyle]

If my rig is too bad to run the Viggen, that would be a shame

 

 

 

I would suggest that 66 FPS is totally playable, I cap my game at 60!

I don't think your system is "too bad to run the Viggen" if you're getting 66 FPS. It might not be butter-smooth, but that's not in the "unplayable" category IMO.

[droopy114]

I would suggest that 66 FPS is totally playable, I cap my game at 60!

I don't think your system is "too bad to run the Viggen" if you're getting 66 FPS. It might not be butter-smooth, but that's not in the "unplayable" category IMO.

 

Sure it's playable, with only a few units on the map...go in multiplayer or launch the RedFlag Campaign and you will not feel this as playable as it is in soloplay...

[TOViper]

Sure it's playable, with only a few units on the map...go in multiplayer or launch the RedFlag Campaign and you will not feel this as playable as it is in soloplay...

 

absolutely true!

in red-flag campaign, my frames drop to 40, while having 100 (depending on where I am) when alone on the map.

A campaign is where the fun really starts IMHO.

But I have a power machine ... others actually might not have ... poor guys!

Edited March 27, 2018 by TOViper

[RagnarDa]

We have been looking into this and it’s difficult figuring out the best approach. One problem is that neither me nor Cobra actually see any degraded performance on our machines, but we do kind of have powerful computers. Cobra tried swapping out the cockpit for Su-25 and didn’t see any improvement. I did a profiling analysis of the code and Viggen FM and avionics account for 2-3 percent of total CPU-time in DCS according to the analysis. I did notice that my FPS seemed to improve when going to external view so I tried turning off all the displays in Viggen (which it has a lot of: HUD, waypoint indicator, data indicator, radar, kneeboard) and at first I did see ~5 FPS improvement but when I tried it again it didn’t show any improvement. There are definitely areas that could be improved code-wise but it is difficult to tell if it would have any measurable effect at all. I’ll update you if I find anything.

[Emilio_Ger]

As mentioned, the performance becomes really bad as soon as AI or any other units are incorporated into the mission. Anyhow thanks for looking into it Ragnar!

 

Hey, excuse me, but how did you take off your HUD block for your L-39? But yes that seems to correlate with hardware performance and more the Viggen may have more poly counts or shapes to load in than any other in particular.

 

Check the special options for the L-39, you should be able to remove the guncam.

[TOViper]

We have been looking into this and it’s difficult figuring out the best approach. One problem is that neither me nor Cobra actually see any degraded performance on our machines, but we do kind of have powerful computers. Cobra tried swapping out the cockpit for Su-25 and didn’t see any improvement. I did a profiling analysis of the code and Viggen FM and avionics account for 2-3 percent of total CPU-time in DCS according to the analysis. I did notice that my FPS seemed to improve when going to external view so I tried turning off all the displays in Viggen (which it has a lot of: HUD, waypoint indicator, data indicator, radar, kneeboard) and at first I did see ~5 FPS improvement but when I tried it again it didn’t show any improvement. There are definitely areas that could be improved code-wise but it is difficult to tell if it would have any measurable effect at all. I’ll update you if I find anything.

 

Hello RagnarDa!

 

First: Only step by step and together we make this module even better (since it is already number one for me without any discussions).

Second: It just takes some time to terminate inconvenient/annoying bugs.

And: Things indeed grow.

Example: The last days I had a lot of fun and some interesting experiences during flying the red flag campaign. The frame-drop on my machine compared to other users is for example like 110 (F-15) to 90 in Viggen (which is about 20 percent). I put this drop to the box "Things that make Viggen look like the most sexiest module on the planet", beard it. :smartass:

 

When flying red flag, I sometimes have ~45, but thanks god never below 40. I understand this as necessary account for the mass of other flights within the mission (I think about 30 AI aircraft or so ...) which indeed need processor power. I am happy to have a machine capable of handling them, and being able to play at least 95% of my time with the 60 (vsync on) good frame rates.

 

Looking deeper into the code from time to time is necessary and sometimes worth the efforts, at least this is my experience from years ago when I was programming this and that. :D

[Lithion]

If it helps to identify the issues noted: please see my specs below, no fps issues for me.

 

The last few weeks I've built missions flying 2.5 through the mountains, trees and low ground level amongst multiple (>20) ground vehicles and/or boats. Both nighttime and daytime, and in the twilight hours. Dropping high-drag M/71 >100m and watching the explosions and launching RB-04Es don't drop frames noticeably.

 

I realise I have an upper-aspect GPU, but do note the nowadays inferior CPU.

[merlin851526]

absolutely true!

in red-flag campaign, my frames drop to 40, while having 100 (depending on where I am) when alone on the map.

A campaign is where the fun really starts IMHO.

But I have a power machine ... others actually might not have ... poor guys!

Totally agree Red flag campaign is a slide show for me, granted I may not have the fastest computer but all the rest of my aircraft are generally fine.

[unknown]

I don't think it is a hardware problem because i had no performance problems in 1.5 and 2.2 beta/alpha. But i noticed in 2.5(not sure since 2.5 or later with an update to 2.5) i get worse performance at the ground compared to other planes. For example starting in the Viggen at Sochi in my little test mission i get ~35fps at my cold start(36fps in the Mirage), taxiing to runway 24 my fps drop to 22-27fps in the Viggen(while staying at 33-34fps in the Mirage, same mission/time/settings). As soon as i get airborne my fps range from 40+ to 70+ relative to my flight level. I know my GPU is to weak for my game resolution/settings but i fly 99% of my time offline. My game settings are attached, system is in my sig, latest drivers installed.

[toilet2000]

@RagnarDa

 

IIRC you talked about TERNAV causing troubles at one time. I don't know if it has any links, but it does seem like the performance drop happened at low altitudes and on the ground, but not at higher altitudes. Moreover, it seems like the TERNAV system is stuck on status "2" (TERNAV OK, mode rough search. System is attempting to orient itself in a particular area).

[TOViper]

@RagnarDa

 

IIRC you talked about TERNAV causing troubles at one time. I don't know if it has any links, but it does seem like the performance drop happened at low altitudes and on the ground, but not at higher altitudes. Moreover, it seems like the TERNAV system is stuck on status "2" (TERNAV OK, mode rough search. System is attempting to orient itself in a particular area).

 

If your answer is related to Nevada - and I'm just only guessing here - the TERRNAV will have its problems finding the corrections, since much of the landscape is more or less flat. If I understood correctly this works with mathematic correlation, which depends on two things that are compared to each other. If both "curves" are flat ... -> :cry: the computer will not make out where this fu.... flat area belongs to ... but this is only guessing around ... OK :pilotfly:

I indeed have nav status 5 on Nevada when flying within range of the radar altimeter very much of the time. And believe me, I am flying really low. Low that my radar altimeter is shit scared ... :p (highest altitude is when landing gear is extended ... it has kinematically touch the ground somehow ... what a bad invention)

Edited March 27, 2018 by TOViper