Disappointing performance in 2.5

[klem]

Let me say up front that my Nvidia control panel profile is 'Use Global setting' and 'Application Controlled' where available.

 

I am using the Caucasus Spitfire instant action free flight mission (adopted as my 'test' mission because its much worse than the other maps). Normandy used to grind out about 10-20 fps in 2.2 but now it jumped to more like 30-40 in 2.5, some good news. Meanwhile Caucasus which used to run around 30-40 in 1.5 has dropped to about 10 in 2.5 leading me to lower my settings from generally high to medium or less. Meanwhile NTTR has dropped from 50-60 in 2.2 to 40-50 in 2.5. I have gained some fps by changing from 3 viewports to 1 widescreen viewport for my 3 main screens and dropping my 4th in-game monitor for instruments. That gets me about 30fps at 6000ft, 20fps at 200ft in Caucasus Spitfire instant action free flight. Still not good.

 

Of course the trees have taken their toll although in the Caucasus Spitfire instant action free flight mission they look positively anaemic.

 

I have also had several freezes but that may be because I kept Alt+Tabbing to look at CPU and GPU figures.

 

Strange thing is that in the Spitfire/Caucasus free flight mission when running Medium settings, nothing in CPU/RAM/GPU/GPU Memory is maxed out and still it only delivers about 30fps at 6000ft, 20fps at 200ft.

 

I am wondering if EDGE graphics is all it's made it out to be. I prefer the intentions of DCS (FMs, cockpits etc) over "another sim which shall not be named" but that sim consistently delivers good graphics on the highest settings at 40-60 fps in three screen surround with tree collision models and it's important that comparisons be drawn in this competitive world.

 

I expect a certain person here will think I am just whingeing again but that's only because DCS simply isn't delivering on graphics performance at reasonable settings on reasonable rigs. It has moved to a place where only the very highest spec systems can run it reasonably well and that narrows it's market. As it stands I would have to spend about $3000 dollars to get what I get in other sims.

 

I will continue to fly the best of the aircraft on the better performing NTTR map but only as a flight simulator. Multiplayer is out of the question. I had hoped 2.5 would bring my friends back to DCS but at the moment it isn't likely.

[Drag80]

turn off dept of field and try to enable sli as I can see u have two gpus. Sli will boost your performance. I have i7 4.8Ghz , 3200 MHz Ram 16 GB and dual 1070s. With single GPU I also get fps in 30s in high settings. with dual 1070 I get stable 60 fps everything maxed out.

 

Edit: Sli is a hit and try thing. I have managed to make it run perfectly. it depends on system to system. However, I can help you with that if u want.

Edited April 8, 2018 by Drag80

[FragBum]

Let me say up front that my Nvidia control panel profile is 'Use Global setting' and 'Application Controlled' where available.

 

I am using the Caucasus Spitfire instant action free flight mission (adopted as my 'test' mission because its much worse than the other maps). Normandy used to grind out about 10-20 fps in 2.2 but now it jumped to more like 30-40 in 2.5, some good news. Meanwhile Caucasus which used to run around 30-40 in 1.5 has dropped to about 10 in 2.5 leading me to lower my settings from generally high to medium or less. Meanwhile NTTR has dropped from 50-60 in 2.2 to 40-50 in 2.5. I have gained some fps by changing from 3 viewports to 1 widescreen viewport for my 3 main screens and dropping my 4th in-game monitor for instruments. That gets me about 30fps at 6000ft, 20fps at 200ft in Caucasus Spitfire instant action free flight. Still not good.

 

Of course the trees have taken their toll although in the Caucasus Spitfire instant action free flight mission they look positively anaemic.

 

I have also had several freezes but that may be because I kept Alt+Tabbing to look at CPU and GPU figures.

 

Strange thing is that in the Spitfire/Caucasus free flight mission when running Medium settings, nothing in CPU/RAM/GPU/GPU Memory is maxed out and still it only delivers about 30fps at 6000ft, 20fps at 200ft.

 

I am wondering if EDGE graphics is all it's made it out to be. I prefer the intentions of DCS (FMs, cockpits etc) over "another sim which shall not be named" but that sim consistently delivers good graphics on the highest settings at 40-60 fps in three screen surround with tree collision models and it's important that comparisons be drawn in this competitive world.

 

I expect a certain person here will think I am just whingeing again but that's only because DCS simply isn't delivering on graphics performance at reasonable settings on reasonable rigs. It has moved to a place where only the very highest spec systems can run it reasonably well and that narrows it's market. As it stands I would have to spend about $3000 dollars to get what I get in other sims.

 

I will continue to fly the best of the aircraft on the better performing NTTR map but only as a flight simulator. Multiplayer is out of the question. I had hoped 2.5 would bring my friends back to DCS but at the moment it isn't likely.

 

So your "old" hardware doesn't preform to your expectations and it's DCS 's fault? How? Oh and this isn't "other sims" this is what you paid for for DCS. :D

 

BTW I had an absolute ball on a MP server using VR today with friends, just saying.

 

YMMV

[norbot]

The i7-950 is a 9 years old CPU and you have it running on ddr3. I wouldn't really expect miracles out of that. If you want tho run DCS on "high" settings, you should think about upgrading your system.

Edited April 8, 2018 by norbot

[klem]

Drag80, thanks for the comments, I welcome any helpful advice for the system I have. In fact I am already running 2 x GTX980s o/c in SLi.

 

norbot, that's my point. I and probably many others don't have $3000 to upgrade to latest generation i5/i7, 32Gb DDR4 RAM and 1080Ti++. My rig is running other sims very well.

 

fragbum, that's what I mean by "It has moved to a place where only the very highest spec systems can run it reasonably well". And even with lowered settings when nothing on my rig is maxed out I get poor fps. My friends have long walked away from DCS for these 'beyond-reasonable' reasons which I hoped 2.5 would solve. In fact in some ways it has got worse. btw some of my friends are happily running VR in other sims where I am I am running Ultra settings.

 

But if anyone has any more helpful suggestions regarding my current rig I'd be glad to hear them.

[klem]

Well, I seem to have located the problem. Although performance is down on pre-2.5 the real problem is the Caucasus map. I chose to test on that map because from the start I could see it was the worst performer so optimising my settings for that map would leave the others running well. What I didn't realise is just how bad the Caucasus map is. Here are some FPS results using the Spitfire free flight mission on each map at only Medium pre-sets:

 

........................1 surround widescreen, res 5760 x 1080.............1 surround screen over central instruments monitor, res 5760 x 2160

......................................6000ft........1000 feet..................................................6000ft........1000 ft

...........Caucasus.................32.............27............................................................16.............15

...........Normandy.................70.............60............................................................40.............33

...........Nevada....................80.............64............................................................45.............37

 

Even running 5760 x 2160 the Normandy and Nevada FPS are good to acceptable. Caucasus is dire.

 

And there's not much wrong with my rig is there?

[FlightControl]

Don't expect miracles out of this rig with a double to triple screen render.

Check if both GPUs are active.

 

The 950 is very old, and could be the bottle neck. Also the DDR3 and the speed of the RAM is very important.

[Drag80]

U will have to use Nvidia profile inspector.

 

Create a new profile and name it anything u want. Locate and attach DCS.exe to it. In DX10 and DX11 compatibility select The one which starts with Diablo III, dark souls III, Ark survival........and so on.

 

Then scroll down and choose number of GPUs to be used in SLI TWO.

 

Apply changes on the top right corner and give it a try.

 

If u experience problems just delete the profile in NVIDIA inspector.

[FragBum]

 

...

 

fragbum, that's what I mean by "It has moved to a place where only the very highest spec systems can run it reasonably well". And even with lowered settings when nothing on my rig is maxed out I get poor fps. My friends have long walked away from DCS for these 'beyond-reasonable' reasons which I hoped 2.5 would solve. In fact in some ways it has got worse. btw some of my friends are happily running VR in other sims where I am I am running Ultra settings.

 

But if anyone has any more helpful suggestions regarding my current rig I'd be glad to hear them.

 

Sure however you haven't indicated what the system bottle neck is just that x therefore y.

 

Both Caucasus and DCS 2.5 have yet to be fully optimised so whilst I chase a different holy grail aka VR checking what is holding the performance back might be easy. You could use task manager to indicate whats slowing everything down. Whilst I get it that the performance of DCS doesn't meet that of AAA game titles, IMO it's a tad unrealistic to expect that.

 

For DCS on my rig

 

CPU utilisation About 10%

 

GPU utilisation Ave 85% but varies from 60 to 90 plus %

 

GPU RAM on Caucasus map about 8.5GB

 

RAM about 7GB

 

The above varies between maps and models so for me it's about finding what works acceptable within my systems capabilities and generally frame rate goes down if your pushing your system too hard. :)

[klem]

Sure however you haven't indicated what the system bottle neck is just that x therefore y.

 

Both Caucasus and DCS 2.5 have yet to be fully optimised so whilst I chase a different holy grail aka VR checking what is holding the performance back might be easy. You could use task manager to indicate whats slowing everything down. Whilst I get it that the performance of DCS doesn't meet that of AAA game titles, IMO it's a tad unrealistic to expect that.

 

For DCS on my rig

 

CPU utilisation About 10%

 

GPU utilisation Ave 85% but varies from 60 to 90 plus %

 

GPU RAM on Caucasus map about 8.5GB

 

RAM about 7GB

 

The above varies between maps and models so for me it's about finding what works acceptable within my systems capabilities and generally frame rate goes down if your pushing your system too hard. :)

 

Drag80 I will try that, I knew of the idea but I hadn't found any recommended profile to use for DCS. Also I keep hearing to 'go Global' with DCS Nvidia and set all up in game but I will try it.

 

Fragbum, FlightControl, this was my dilemma. I don't see a bottleneck. Even on Low settings Caucasus was only returning 32 fps at altitude and grinding at low level whilst Normandy and NTTR are hitting 50-80 and 50+ at low level. My utilisations in Caucasus are as follows:

 

CPU (4 cores, HT disabled) approx 60% on each of the four cores

RAM ~ 8Gb of 16Gb

GPU Utilisaton ~60%

GPU Ram ~ 60% (2.5Gb of 4Gb).

 

With so much in hand Caucasus map is still choking. I understand that memory speed may be less than optimal but the other maps are hammering much higher FPS on the three screens.

 

I'm a little comforted, yet disappointed, to learn that Caucasus is not optimised yet. I thought that the delay in releasing 2.5 was largely to do with that.

[FragBum]

I know it's kinda comparing apples to oranges but I fly mostly rotary and close to the ground and I lock VR in at 45FPS (there are good reasons for this) and find Caucasus map to be better than Normandy and Nevada to be slightly better than Caucasus performance wise.

 

I am surprised at the CPU usage however in effect I am only running about 4.5K monitor and VR.

 

Also I gave up using the Nvidia settings and put them all back to standard they really didn't improve anything for me. Again for VR AA and Deferred Shading use a lot of GPU grunt but I prefer the rendered image with DS on so I accept AA at by 2. Also there could be merit in upgrading, I have the following system.

 

i7 5930 6/12core @4.1Ghz

32GB RAM @ 2400Ghz

1080Ti @1.9HGhz

500GB SSD

 

A reasonable rig even by todays standards but I simply can not run everything maxed out on DCS. However from what I understand a faster CPU will improve performance of DCS. :cry:

 

Tuning DCS can be a fickle process but it needs to be done systematically starting form low settings and working up, keeping in mind some settings will interact and compound CPU and GPU requirements. It might be worthwhile looking into tweaking DCS settings to squeeze a bit more performance out of your rig.

[Sylosis]

I know it's kinda comparing apples to oranges but I fly mostly rotary and close to the ground and I lock VR in at 45FPS (there are good reasons for this) and find Caucasus map to be better than Normandy and Nevada to be slightly better than Caucasus performance wise.

 

I am surprised at the CPU usage however in effect I am only running about 4.5K monitor and VR.

 

Also I gave up using the Nvidia settings and put them all back to standard they really didn't improve anything for me. Again for VR AA and Deferred Shading use a lot of GPU grunt but I prefer the rendered image with DS on so I accept AA at by 2. Also there could be merit in upgrading, I have the following system.

 

i7 5930 6/12core @4.1Ghz

32GB RAM @ 2400Ghz

1080Ti @1.9HGhz

500GB SSD

 

A reasonable rig even by todays standards but I simply can not run everything maxed out on DCS. However from what I understand a faster CPU will improve performance of DCS. :cry:

 

Tuning DCS can be a fickle process but it needs to be done systematically starting form low settings and working up, keeping in mind some settings will interact and compound CPU and GPU requirements. It might be worthwhile looking into tweaking DCS settings to squeeze a bit more performance out of your rig.

 

Well I apologize for jumping in, unless I don't get your meaning, I'd say that I wouldn't call your rig "reasonable" by today's standard. It definitely is high end, that is for sure. Of course, if by "reasonable" you meant "it's a good rig", then I agree. It is good, very good even.

 

I think it's important to point out, in case somebody that isn't super tech savvy reads this thinking it's true.

 

Your video card alone is more expensive than most common desktops you'll find on the market.

Edited April 10, 2018 by Sylosis

[FragBum]

Well I apologize for jumping in, unless I don't get your meaning, I'd say that I wouldn't call your rig "reasonable" by today's standard. It definitely is high end, that is for sure. Of course, if by "reasonable" you meant "it's a good rig", then I agree. It is good, very good even.

 

I think it's important to point out, in case somebody that isn't super tech savvy reads this thinking it's true.

 

Your video card alone is more expensive than most common desktops you'll find on the market.

 

True however I was attempting to illustrate to the OP that my rig whilst still fairly relevant and for rendering and audio or CAD even AAA titles and even with a 1080Ti I still have to accept that it can't run DCS at max settings. ;)

[Sylosis]

True however I was attempting to illustrate to the OP that my rig whilst still fairly relevant and for rendering and audio or CAD even AAA titles and even with a 1080Ti I still have to accept that it can't run DCS at max settings. ;)

 

I understand your meaning better now.

 

And, therefore, I wonder who can max out those settings....

 

If I could, I'd try the computer I use at work for structural simulations... it's got 12 physical cores, 192 Gb of RAM and a 3000 dollars GPU...

 

If only I could haha...!

[Dav IRL]

Let me say up front that my Nvidia control panel profile is 'Use Global setting' and 'Application Controlled' where available.

 

I am using the Caucasus Spitfire instant action free flight mission (adopted as my 'test' mission because its much worse than the other maps). Normandy used to grind out about 10-20 fps in 2.2 but now it jumped to more like 30-40 in 2.5, some good news. Meanwhile Caucasus which used to run around 30-40 in 1.5 has dropped to about 10 in 2.5 leading me to lower my settings from generally high to medium or less. Meanwhile NTTR has dropped from 50-60 in 2.2 to 40-50 in 2.5. I have gained some fps by changing from 3 viewports to 1 widescreen viewport for my 3 main screens and dropping my 4th in-game monitor for instruments. That gets me about 30fps at 6000ft, 20fps at 200ft in Caucasus Spitfire instant action free flight. Still not good.

 

Of course the trees have taken their toll although in the Caucasus Spitfire instant action free flight mission they look positively anaemic.

 

I have also had several freezes but that may be because I kept Alt+Tabbing to look at CPU and GPU figures.

 

Strange thing is that in the Spitfire/Caucasus free flight mission when running Medium settings, nothing in CPU/RAM/GPU/GPU Memory is maxed out and still it only delivers about 30fps at 6000ft, 20fps at 200ft.

 

I am wondering if EDGE graphics is all it's made it out to be. I prefer the intentions of DCS (FMs, cockpits etc) over "another sim which shall not be named" but that sim consistently delivers good graphics on the highest settings at 40-60 fps in three screen surround with tree collision models and it's important that comparisons be drawn in this competitive world.

 

I expect a certain person here will think I am just whingeing again but that's only because DCS simply isn't delivering on graphics performance at reasonable settings on reasonable rigs. It has moved to a place where only the very highest spec systems can run it reasonably well and that narrows it's market. As it stands I would have to spend about $3000 dollars to get what I get in other sims.

 

I will continue to fly the best of the aircraft on the better performing NTTR map but only as a flight simulator. Multiplayer is out of the question. I had hoped 2.5 would bring my friends back to DCS but at the moment it isn't likely.

 

I'm afraid it's your rig, not DCS. I am playing 1080P maxed including 8XAA at 60fps.

[prccowboy]

Drag80, thanks for the comments, I welcome any helpful advice for the system I have. In fact I am already running 2 x GTX980s o/c in SLi.

But if anyone has any more helpful suggestions regarding my current rig I'd be glad to hear them.

 

Let me say up front that my Nvidia control panel profile is 'Use Global setting' and 'Application Controlled' where available.

 

If you are running "standard" settings in Nvidia Control Panel then you are NOT running SLI in DCS because the Nvidia profile doesn't work. Drag80, was correct that you can get more out of your system. I wrote a DCS and SLI guide here:

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3410823&postcount=65

 

Also, if you are getting better fps in other maps, then I suggest reducing "visible range" setting. There are a lot of objects in Caucasus map now. Changing that setting will reduce the workload on your system.

 

edit: I know that many people will say buy new hardware but honestly you can optimize your system to get decent performance out of it. I built my current gaming rig many years ago for DCS A-10 1.0 and I get better performance NOW with 2.5 and DS than back when I first built the rig (by finally figuring out optimal settings). In fact, I now have the performance with my "ancient" rig that I wish I had with DCS 1.0 when my rig was "bleeding edge". I run mostly high settings @1080p with FXAA and get about 90fps sitting @McCarran and around 60-70fps in Caucasus with "ancient" Fermi cards and a moderately overclocked i7-3930. Of course the fps drops with TDR on and "heavy" action but overall the performance is better than when I first started playing DCS standalones (long before DCS World). My cpu performs better than yours but you have faster gpu's - I suspect that once you have SLI working in DCS and you drop some of the CPU load by tweaking your settings, you will have much improved performance.

 

nothing in CPU/RAM/GPU/GPU Memory is maxed out

 

Check your CPU single core usage - you probably have one core that is maxed out while the rest of your i7 cores are nearly idle. I also have some examples of cpu/gpu relationship on performance in the thread I referenced above.

Edited April 12, 2018 by prccowboy

[erniedaoage]

Haven't read everything but try to run it in window mode so uncheck the fullscreen box. Won around 40 fps straight with this change. I don't know why because everything else performs better in fullscreen mode except for dcs :)

[FragBum]

OP is running 3 monitors on his rig.

 

 

 

If I could, I'd try the computer I use at work for structural simulations... it's got 12 physical cores, 192 Gb of RAM and a 3000 dollars GPU...

 

If only I could haha...!

 

Better still a few instances of DCS in server mode hopefully no lag! :music_whistling: