DCS 1.5 vs 2.5 performance-wise.

[dundun92]

How fast does 2.5 run relative to 1.5? 1.5 (with every graphics setting on the absolute lowest) runs at 40-60FPS for me. Would 2.5 (under the same conditions) run from, say 30-4FPS? And, what advantages does 2.5 have over 1.5 in terms of more options/ease of use/etc.?

[Grafit164DK]

The same in my case. My PC fullfils minimal system requirements and 1.5 works fine (stable 60 FPS with VSYNC and 2.0 (with Nevada and Normandy) is playable too(with stable 40-50 FPS), but in 2.5 i have very unstable 30-40 FPS even with all graphic settings set to minimal values. Performance is especially bad with Caucasus terrain and the landscape with the lowest settings (without trees and with minimal amount of details) looks much worse than in 1.5. In my case game is now fully unplayable, what is strange because many users claimed, that performance of 2.5 is better than in 1.5 or 2.0.

[Shadow KT]

Depends on your GPU, it needs a lot of VRAM to run 2.5, but by the look of your signature, a laptop won't cut it

[dundun92]

Ok, thanks!

[aleader]

A laptop probably won't do it, but a real issue you have there is your system RAM. I was hesitant to buy more RAM until I saw some actual proof as most (99%) of games do just fine with 8GB, but DCS 2.5 needs 16GB. 1.5.8 works perfect with 8GB, but it does push the limit on high settings. I upgraded to 16GB and the performance (smoothness - less stuttering) improved significantly. As for VRAM, I don't even use half the 3GB on my GTX 1060 in 2.5.

[gaet]

Bonjour,

 

Moi aussi avec 16 Giga c'est beaucoup mieux ...