DCS is expensive, but it dont have to be

[Wali763]

I wanted to write this quite some time now, so here it is:

 

 

I came into DCS by stumbeling over a Heatblur-F-14-Clip about one year ago.

 

 

By that time I had a Laptop with a Gefore 940MX which allowed me to fly DCS in 1024-768 at 15fps....

 

 

Since I was not sure, how my future in DCS would turn out, I then bought some used stuff (I5-3570, RX570 and a 27inch-FHD-monitor along with Saitek X52 and a TrackIR4 for about 500 Euros. Im not talking about the DCS-modules I purchased here though.

 

 

That gave me decent 35-45 fps in medium to high settings and the realization, that DCS and I could have a good future.

 

 

Slowly I upgraded my system, first adding a 1660Ti, then totally new PC (see below) and went for a 32 Inch WQHD-Monitor, new Joystick and so on. Overall I spent about 2000 Euros on the new setup. I even considered a 2080Ti, that I rejected for the very reason of this post. Big investment vs little gain in overall experience.

 

 

I now have something like 70-90 fps in 2560x1440 in highest settings (exept for SS).

 

 

I cant say, that having this new setup did change my overall experience big time. Yes, the improvements might be nice, but actually I dont think, they make a considerable difference.

 

 

Getting the newer CPU made a difference in fps, but going from FHD to QWHD and from the 1660Ti to the 2070S, were much smaller than expected.

 

 

So to anyone getting frustrated looking at the specs of peoples PCs on this forum (especially of those in the VR-section), you dont have to be. When choosen carefully a kit for 500 Euros will deliver 95% of the enjoyment, most of the high spec PCs are offering....

 

 

When upgrading the videocard I also had the step to VR in mind. But giving the Rift S a try, I have to say, it was nice, but far from overwhelming for me, so I kind of postponed that a bit and will wait, how the newer sets like Vive Cosmos or Acer OJO will turn out. But actually Im quite happy with my current state and am not sure, if I shold make the step to VR anyway.....

 

 

But coming back to my initial thought: if you have little money, get a I5-4570, a SSD and a 1060 with 6GB and youll be fine for FHD.

 

 

But if you have the money for course, buy what you want...

But dont be fooled thinking, paying 4-6 times as much will give you a much better experience...

[rrohde]

DCS is really rather inexpensive. The modules only cost a fraction of the amount we shell out on a regular basis to keep our gaming rigs up-to-date, including the needed controllers and/or sim pits.

 

I believe what you're trying to convey is the old addage that "Software sells Hardware", which is still true to this day if you want to get the most out of the hobby, but saying that DCS is expensive in your thread title is skewing the perception imho.

 

As a side note, I would love to see ED raising the prices for their DCS modules quite a bit for them to get some more revenue. Modules for certain civilian flight sims are more expensive from the get-go...

[WinterH]

Interesting to see this, as I've been thinking last few days about building a desktop pc with oldie parts that can be bought for fairly cheap for running DCS better.

 

Currently I am on a laptop with i5 4210H (about 2.8ish GHz), Nvidia 860M, a mechanic HDD, and only 8GB of RAM. Running the sim at high-ish settings at 1920x1080, but load times are quite sad. Also sometimes I do get big frame drops when something is loading for the first time, or I am firing a whole bunch of rockets for the first time etc. CPU has 2 cores, 4 with HT, but currently DCS doesn't do multicore processing aside from sounds, thus clock speed is more important for it. Only 8gigs of RAM and not having a SSD are probably the worse offenders in my case though.

 

There are many oldie CPUs with clock speeds in excess of 3 Ghz, some of them with many cores, and they can be gotten for pretty cheap, depending on where you live.

 

Then comes the GPU, even a GTX 770 would be performing much better than my 860M, and it is quite affordable. It is an oldie card yes, but most comparisons seem to rate it head-to-head or better than 1050ti.

 

Such a system wouldn't do VR, but I am not thinking of going into VR until it is much more matured, and much cheaper.

 

This can look iffy from future proofing, but, as far as we know multi-core and Vulkan API are both under work for future of DCS. Unless they decide to turn graphics up to eleventyone, multi core and Vulkan support may end up improving DCS' performance even for these oldie systems considerably.

 

I didn't look into AMD GPUs yet, but I'm pretty sure that there are many attractive options there as well.

 

Also, unlike in laptops, you can update GPU as you get good deals, or amass disposable income.

[Wali763]

DCS is really rather inexpensive. The modules only cost a fraction of the amount we shell out on a regular basis to keep our gaming rigs up-to-date, including the needed controllers and/or sim pits.

 

I believe what you're trying to convey is the old addage that "Software sells Hardware", which is still true to this day if you want to get the most out of the hobby, but saying that DCS is expensive in your thread title is skewing the perception imho.

 

As a side note, I would love to see ED raising the prices for their DCS modules quite a bit for them to get some more revenue. Modules for certain civilian flight sims are more expensive from the get-go...

 

 

Hi.

 

 

Your actually right. The wording in the title was wrong....

 

 

Since I bought/upgraded my PC soley for DCS (I play the odd PC-Game once in a while, but that was ok with my Laptop too) I considered the Hardware-costs as "DCS-costs".

 

 

My actuall DCS-costs as of now are "only" 300 Euros, but Im expecting for this to rise with the arrival of newer maps and modules. I dont have a problem with that.

 

 

What I meant to say was, that DCS if not played in VR, does not need ultra-high equipment to be enjoyable. Of course 35fps for someone is enjoyable, for other not. Having better equipment does make a difference, but overall enjoyment of DCS does not rise drastically over a well-selected 500-Euros-system, at least in my experience.

 

 

@WinterH I can only speak for the equipment I had/have, but right now I think a 4-core-CPU is enough for DCS. Since 5xxx and 6xxx series from Intel did not offer (big) performance-gains, Id say a I5 from 4xxx or even a higher 3xxx series still does ok. If you compare CPU go for single-thread-Benchmarks, since DCS still dont use many CPU-cores.

 

 

Regarding GPU, I cannot comment on GTX 770 etc, but I know, that 1060s are on sale for 100-150 Euros; I sold my RX 570 for 80,- Euros, which is faster than a 1050Ti. But if the GTX770 is faster than the 1050Ti, then I could be ok.

 

 

I cannot say, what your "threshold" is, but the I5-3570/RX579/SSD-combo did it for me quite well in FHD, thats why I recommended a bit faster I5-4570/1060/SSD-combo to satisfy a bit higher expectations than mine.

[WinterH]

Yeah right now DCS only cares about single core clock speed as far as I know, CPUs with 6 or more cores can be potential future investments if DCS comes up with good multicore implementation later.

[Rowan]

I just upgraded from gen 4 i5 to a gen 9 i7, I nearly started weeping with joy at how smooth and fast DCS became.

Edited September 27, 2019 by Rowan

[draconus]

It always entertain me a lot when I see whining about module prices usually coming from people that already have PCs running DCS decently enough - which indicate its price in hundreds of dollars :D

 

 

 

I am still on budget rig and just last year was even lower on C2D@3/8GB/GTX660 while having really good time flying. Such old config comes with limitations though:

- forget about MP

- stutters/pauses a lot

- if you use textures:medium/low you can end up with blurry unreadable cockpit in some modules

- no 4K/VR, usually FHD (depends on GPU only)

- no smooth high fps

 

 

 

Every one generation of CPUs comes with performance gains so pure freq means nothing. There are also cache differences, bus speeds and architecture changes coupled with both chipset and RAM improvements. Try that P4@4GHz now... good luck :)

 

 

 

I really don't understand people still on HDD - it's masochism these days.

[BitMaster]

I re-started with DCS after Flanker 2.x era and since 2012 I am enjoying the ongointg support for an already long ago released product/modules.

 

This is very very rare in this industry and it makes DCS cheaper every day I can enjoy it.

 

OK, you could say I am usi9ng the rig and it's HOTAS/VR/TiR etc. for other flight sims too, just there are only very few that cover similar fields of simming, actually NONE with this depth.

 

DCS is cheap in the long run but the rig can be costly if you dont have a machine that can be refitted to serve the need.

 

For everyday use, an old Core i5 is all you need for email, YT, reading news etc.., that wont help much in DCS, those guys need to invest some serious money. If you have a quite capable machine already since you game other titles, it's only the Hotas and some other optional gimmicks.

 

I think it's a good investment over time

[draconus]

For everyday use, an old Core i5 is all you need for email, YT, reading news etc...

Wow! So the whole Celeron/Pentium/i3 lines are for what? Calculator? Digital photo frame?

[Devrim]

I always think that ED programmers should work hard on DCS code. Something wrong with coding I believe.

 

Why not multicore using? Why sudden FPS drops? Why not stable online experience?

 

My system is this: i7-2600 @3.4GHz | Corsair Veng. 16GB @1600MHz. | MSI nVidia GTX970 | Samsung 850EVO 256GB SSD (Win7HPx64)

 

I see good FPS, even in online servers, around 40~60 and my settings are not middle or low.

 

But when everything is great, FPS suddenly goes deep, freezes etc. and everything comes back to 50~60 FPS. Why? Why is that???

Especially, at the moment touchdown Stennis, DCS freezes for 4 seconds! Wh.. what?..

 

My problem isn't FPS at all in DCS. It's freezes, pauses, microstutters.

 

***

 

By the way; you people are complaining the expensiveness? :) Well, what about me? Because of poor economic management of my country, I pay ~6 times more for a hardware or a DCS module. :) $1=5.66TL.

 

Think like that: Tomcat's price is $80 for you but it's $453 for me. :joystick:

[Wali763]

Wow! So the whole Celeron/Pentium/i3 lines are for what? Calculator? Digital photo frame?

 

Hi.

 

Celerons are good for webbrowsing and standard-use but not for DCS, but even some I3s (like 8350K or 9350K) are great for DCS (as of now) since only good single-threaded performance is required. But I guess, those owning a i9-9900 dont want to hear that. :smilewink:

 

My thought, when opening this thread was, that Ive invested quite a bit into hardware, but the overall experience only got better a bit.

 

Its all a very personal thing, but I stopped (mostly) using Afterburner since it dont matter, if I have 45 or 75 or 115 fps if it feels ok to me.

 

Its not about fps, its about personal experience. And for me, even my fps doubled from FHD to QWHD, the experience now is in no relation to the investment. As I wrote above, big investment, little actual gain.

 

On one dicussion RTX2080 vs RTX2080Ti, some people argued that the 700+ euros/dollar investment gave them overall 8fps more and it was worth it........ I not sure, if those people if blindly testing two systems with 8fps difference, could tell them apart!

 

My intention was not to tell people not to upgrade (or that expensive hardware is not great), but to tell people irritated by seeing, what other peoples hardware is (like it was for me 10 months ago), that also rather cheap hardware can achieve a good experience.

 

And as written above, that i5-3570 with an RX570 also did it for me. Even I like my new system and am happy with it. Still Id never not use a SSD again. DCS from a HDD is truely painful!

Edited September 27, 2019 by Wali763

[BitMaster]

Wow! So the whole Celeron/Pentium/i3 lines are for what? Calculator? Digital photo frame?

 

I said "OLD" i5, back in those days there was no "i3"

 

Who would with intention use a Celeron or Pentium for DCS, you should check the HW requirements listed by ED.

 

I never bought, sold or suggested anything lower than an i7 and neither me nor the clients have regretted it. I do charge more to fix an "old" system with a SLOW CPU just because it takes soooo much more time to get things done, add a HDD to the mix and it will take 12-24h to patch Win7SP1 alone, done this many dozen times and I refuse to do it meanwhile. It's nonsense unless they pay me 3-5x the value that I charge for a modern system with a modern CPU + SSD, time is money and my nervs are not for free as well, that is how business runs.

[draconus]

Think like that: Tomcat's price is $80 for you but it's $453 for me. :joystick:

Funny, but no. It's $80 for you too :) That's how currency market works. What you want to say is "purchasing power".

[schroedi]

I always think that ED programmers should work hard on DCS code. Something wrong with coding I believe.

 

Why not multicore using? Why sudden FPS drops? Why not stable online experience?

 

My system is this: i7-2600 @3.4GHz | Corsair Veng. 16GB @1600MHz. | MSI nVidia GTX970 | Samsung 850EVO 256GB SSD (Win7HPx64)

 

I see good FPS, even in online servers, around 40~60 and my settings are not middle or low.

 

But when everything is great, FPS suddenly goes deep, freezes etc. and everything comes back to 50~60 FPS. Why? Why is that???

Especially, at the moment touchdown Stennis, DCS freezes for 4 seconds! Wh.. what?..

 

My problem isn't FPS at all in DCS. It's freezes, pauses, microstutters.

 

That's usually a RAM/pagefile problem. If you have 16GB of RAM set 24GB pagefile, if you have more RAM set it to 16GB pagefile.

I suffered with the same problem in the days i used 16GB RAM, what really helped was to add another 8GB. With 24GB (or more) all stutters were gone.

[BitMaster]

Funny, but no. It's $80 for you too :) That's how currency market works. What you want to say is "purchasing power".

 

either way, he pays far more in relation to what his milk & butter costs than compared to what your milk and butter costs. So you are both right, technically, but I wouldnt be sarcastic and call it funny.

[BitMaster]

It's the cheapest hobby I ever had tbh.

 

Given the longevity of DCS it pays back over time and I can crash those planes over and over and dont have to repair or replace them, something my R/C planes unfortunately dont feature.

 

Any decent MTB is the well above the price of a premium DCS rig if you do serious MTB.

 

Sure, you have to have the money, but it is not elite, elite is a Twin Turbine R/C jet for 25k€ that may crash on its first flight. At that point, I stopped R/C and thought, go fly sims again, it is THAT much cheaper and I can use the rig for so much more.

 

Or take hunting or fishing, aint much cheaper if at all, which I doubt.

 

It is just mega expensive if you come from a country with economic crisis and high taxes or if you are young and study, have to pay school and university...or have many kids that all want their share of fun in life.

 

I started with a MacBookPro and a 70€ Joystick and had GREAT fun back in 2012.

 

If you are comitted, it is easy to sink 5k€ in a rig and another few K's in controls and extra gear, but that is not needed to have fun.

[Svsmokey]

If you are comitted, it is easy to sink 5k€ in a rig and another few K's in controls and extra gear, but that is not needed to have fun.

 

As my system attests...and yes , comparatively speaking , DCS is a relatively inexpensive hobby . Even the ultimate rig price pales against say one high-performance motorcycle . I also shudder to think of what the price-per-pound of the fish my wife catches is .

Edited September 27, 2019 by Svsmokey

[draconus]

@BitMaster: I'm IT guy too and my experience is that a lot of money is wasted on PC h/w - always bored CPUs, big cards never seeing 3D in their life. Who runs DCS on Pentium? Me, because I choose performance per money ratio. Can I afford i7? Yes, I do, but choose not to spend more than $100 for CPU or GPU, still having fun in DCS.

 

btw: I can be sarcastic since my country is on par or even lower in GDP ranks :P

[BitMaster]

@BitMaster: I'm IT guy too and my experience is that a lot of money is wasted on PC h/w - always bored CPUs, big cards never seeing 3D in their life. Who runs DCS on Pentium? Me, because I choose performance per money ratio. Can I afford i7? Yes, I do, but choose not to spend more than $100 for CPU or GPU, still having fun in DCS.

 

btw: I can be sarcastic since my country is on par or even lower in GDP ranks :P

 

as I said above "If you are comitted, it is easy to sink 5k€ in a rig and another few K's in controls and extra gear, but that is not needed to have fun."