[REPORTED]VR Performance OB 2.5.6

[Charly314159]

Honesty, I am not asking for more than 45fps which used to work like a charm on 2.5.5 with much higher settings.

 

2.5.6 is constantly dropping below asw threshold regardless of the setting and optimization which makes it nauseating and instantly destroys the immersion for me.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

All of you with good fps in vr whats your nvidia drivers ?(if you have them that is)

 

This patch brought a dramatic frame rate improvement for me in the Falcon. Using nVidia driver 445.98 .

[imacken]

Accurately reporting VR performance in DCS is next to impossible. What is smooth for some (45fps with reprojection) feels terrible to others who are getting the exact same performance. That’s a user issue. However, actually testing performance is a nightmare as there is no standardised benchmark, with some people testing onffline with one mission, others with a different mission, while still more measure online performance. Then we have the huge impact of the various headset resolutions. Even if all things are equal, the variety of VR specific settings such as PD make it a nightmare to compare.

 

A good start would be a built in benchmark in DCS, but when I raised this issue in the past it was shot down. Yet it’s a relatively easy thing to implement, provided the game’s replay feature is working accurately. I’ve heard this is broken though.

 

Exactly. Different everything! I can get great performance by turning SteamVR render res down to 100%, but i normally run at 200% (equivalent to PD 1.4} and the performance on that level is worse in this patch than the previous one.

 

As you said, it’s almost impossible to compare one VR experience with another. Too many variables.

[VirusAM]

I recall that some days ago bignewy stated that vr users will see increased performance after monitor users but the good news was that they found the reason of the performance degradation...so we need to wait a bit more.

Let’s hope for the best.

[Hippo]

Performance notes 2.5.6.49314

 

Please see for reference:

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php...8&postcount=73

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php...&postcount=324

 

 

Running my usual mission.

 

We now have two new options under VR: bloom effect and MSAA Mask Size.

 

I flew the mission twice, first with bloom ON, and mask at 1.00 (second image), this gave performance indistinguishable from 2.5.6.47404.

 

I then ran the mission with Bloom off and mask at 0.42 (first image). This gave around 5%-10% less GPU util, so nearly as good as what I was getting with the last 2.5.5 OB.

 

I was (surprise, surprise) hoping to see more of an improvement. Still, this is definitely a (continuation of a) move in the right direction, and to be welcomed.

 

I think that finding as many graphics options as possible to offer to VR users to turn down to gain fps is an approach that is worth looking into further. Great to see the two new options - thank you. I cannot give up AA, as I find the shimmering jaggies from buildings, runways, and shiny cockpit edges unacceptable.

 

And thanks for getting the landing lights working again on the Stennis at night. Very nice to have the ship lighting as well, although perhaps it's a bit too bright.

Edited May 20, 2020 by Hippo

[Zarma]

What are those new settings doing exactly ??

[Charly314159]

Please see for reference:

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php...8&postcount=73

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php...&postcount=324

 

 

Running my usual mission.

 

We now have two new options under VR: bloom effect and MSAA Mask Size.

 

I flew the mission twice, first with bloom ON, and mask at 1.00 (second image), this gave performance indistinguishable from 2.5.6.47404.

 

I then ran the mission with Bloom off and mask at 0.42 (first image). This gave around 5%-10% less GPU util, so nearly as good as what I was getting with the last 2.5.5 OB.

 

I was (surprise, surprise) hoping to see more of an improvement. Still, this is definitely a (continuation of a) move in the right direction, and to be welcomed.

 

I think that finding as many graphics options as possible to offer to VR users to turn down to gain fps is an approach that is worth looking into further. Great to see the two new options - thank you. I cannot give up AA, as I find the shimmering jaggies from buildings, runways, and shiny cockpit edges unacceptable.

 

And thanks for getting the landing lights working again on the Stennis at night. Very nice to have the ship lighting as well, although perhaps it's a bit too bright.

 

OK so they basically integrated part of keygetis vr shader mod which has been around for 2 years and didn't fix anything in their core...

 

So for people who couldn't afford MSAA because of the awful 2.5.6 performance this update won't change anything...

[doclucio]

hi, do you guys think that is better run the update without shaders mod?!?i mean only using original parts....

and about msaa i have to select it in the VR page and in the graphic options page too?!?

[speed-of-heat]

I still have to turn off mirrors and shadows, but, kegetys mod currently produces some visual artefacts that I can’t seem to fix, and there isn’t a current workable ic pass version.

 

If you can live with outside ic pass , and without the pretty water, the kegetys mod reduces frame times for the gpu by between 2-3ms which is significant, even with the current patch.

[Burnie]

Hi all, since the latest update my overall VR performance has improved, but my frame timing falls apart when I look into the cockpit (tried viper and hornet) and while it's still reporting 40FPS on the counter, it's looking more like a vomit inducing 4fps.

 

I've tried lowering cockpit resolution, but it's made no difference. Not running any super sampling of any kind.

 

Anyone else having the same issue?

[Hippo]

What are those new settings doing exactly ??

 

Is an answer that ED really should provide in the patch notes. In its absence I can only speculate:

 

The AA mask limits AA to an area in the centre of your view, its size specified by the number. I assume 0.5 is a rectangle half of your screen area. I only briefly tested last night and I have to say that visually I did not think that this was doing anything. If you run Kegetys's mod, it's very easy to see his implementation of this working.

 

Bloom (sometimes referred to as light bloom or glow) is a computer graphics effect used in video games, demos, and high dynamic range rendering (HDRR) to reproduce an imaging artifact of real-world cameras. The effect produces fringes (or feathers) of light extending from the borders of bright areas in an image, contributing to the illusion of an extremely bright light overwhelming the camera or eye capturing the scene. It became widely used in video games after an article on the technique was published by the authors of Tron 2.0 in 2004. (with thanks to Wikipedia). Precisely how and where it's implemented in DCS - your guess is as good as mine.

Edited May 21, 2020 by Hippo

[mtd2811]

This patch brought a dramatic frame rate improvement for me in the Falcon. Using nVidia driver 445.98 .

 

 

Thanks will check them

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hippo]

OK so they basically integrated part of keygetis vr shader mod which has been around for 2 years and didn't fix anything in their core...

 

So for people who couldn't afford MSAA because of the awful 2.5.6 performance this update won't change anything...

 

Believe me, I feel your pain - please don't shoot the messenger. Your point re Kegetys is entirely valid, still - better late than never.

 

Personally I think VR DCS w/o AA does not provide an image quality that is acceptable. I would simply not use it if I had to turn off AA. And there's no way I'm going back to pancake.

 

I've felt let down (and even betrayed) by ED since 2018 when they made the (deferred rendering) engine change that killed performance for VR /w AA - how they could've inflicted a 50% fps drop on their users remains inexplicable. Unfortunately, performance-wise, it's been downhill ever since. I am not optimistic that things are going to get better. However, we are where we are. All I can do is make my views known on here: I will NOT be giving ED any more money until I see efforts (and results) being made in this direction. I will certainly not be giving them any more money for pre-purchase or early access stuff that might only be completed by the time it requires a future version of the engine that I may no longer be able to run because of future graphical enhancements that tank performance.

 

 

P.S. EDIT: From my very limited and specific test, performance appears to be getting close to what I was getting with 2.5.5. If you're not using AA, you'll probably see no difference - as I say, I feel your pain.

Edited May 21, 2020 by Hippo

[Charly314159]

I will NOT be giving ED any more money until I see efforts (and results) being made in this direction. I will certainly not be giving them any more money for pre-purchase or early access stuff that might only be completed by the time it requires a future version of the engine that I may no longer be able to run because of future graphical enhancements that tank performance.

 

I have made that decision as well. I have never been complaining for the 3 years that I played DCS but since the f16 release and this 2.5.6 things have taken a terrible direction.

DCS now looks like a ponzi scheme feeding on future promises that might never get correctly delivered. Buying EA means accepting that system.

[BIGNEWY]

Good to hear some have seen improvement, also acknowledge some have not.

 

There are many systems out there and headsets, we expected to see mixed results, we do have more changes coming in future patches.

 

For me I am back to a steady 45 fps in the vive cosmos, with the higher resolution of the cosmos I can lower settings and still get visuals I am happy with.

 

Thank you

[Charly314159]

There are many systems out there and headsets, we expected to see mixed results, we do have more changes coming in future patches.

 

Nice to hear, so maybe in 3-4 months we will be back at the level of performance we had at the beginning of the year....

[BIGNEWY]

If you are still seeing issues I would suggest trying a few things.

 

First would be make sure you are not using any unofficial mods.

 

Run a cleanup and repair. or verify for steam users.

 

Rename your dcs.openbeta folder in saved games ( keep it as a backup )

 

restart DCS Login and redo your settings and test.

 

this will ensure you have a vanilla install and new shaders.

 

You can return to the backup file after or copy over your inputs.

 

If you still have problems let us know your system specification and in game settings.

 

thanks

[imacken]

BN, perhaps you could advise us on the new MSAA mask option.

 

1) Does MSAA have to be switched on in the main system option, or does the mask conduct its own AA?

2) What do the values in the range mean. for example, does 0.1 mean that MSAA is only being applied to 10% of the screen, or does it mean that the mask is only masking 10% of the screen.

 

A bit of clarification would be really helpful.

[speed-of-heat]

done and done , i got a 5% perf improvement over the previous beta , the most notable aspect was a reduction in CPU frame times

[OG84]

On the supercarrier cold start mission shadow has a huge impact.

Between shadow off (8ms) and shadow low (18ms) there is a difference of 77fps (cockpit view)

2080ti/3900x

Edited May 21, 2020 by OG84

[imacken]

On the supercarrier cold start mission shadow has a huge impact.

Between shadow off (8ms) and shadow low (18ms) there is a difference of 77fps (cockpit view)

2080ti/3900x

Difference of 77fps in VR?

[OG84]

Difference of 77fps in VR?

 

This is just a calculated value to point out the difference. dcs fps counter shows 22fps vs 45fps.

[imacken]

This is just a calculated value to point out the difference. dcs fps counter shows 22fps vs 45fps.

 

Sorry, don't understand what you mean.

[Hippo]

A quick update. I just tried another test, this time with mask 0.1, and bloom off. Results are now on par with the last 2.5.5 OB. I didn't get a single drop out from 80 fps into ASW (40 fps).

 

I was expecting to see major shimmering jaggies around the outside of a small core, but to my surprise, I hardly noticed anything - nothing like what I get with AA off. I am running 2xAA in DCS, and enhancing in nVidia Control panel as detailed here. Who knows how the settings are interacting with each other. Whatever, the upshot is I'm getting a result I'm happy with.

 

It is entirely reasonable to point out that I could achieve a similar (or better) result with Kegetys. But it gets to be a drag setting up to work every time there's an update or when I want to test. And it does introduce issues.

Edited May 21, 2020 by Hippo

[Charly314159]

:book:

A quick update. I just tried another test, this time with mask 0.1, and bloom off. Results are now on par with the last 2.5.5 OB. I didn't get a single drop out from 80 fps into ASW (40 fps).

 

I was expecting to see major shimmering jaggies around the outside of a small core, but to my surprise, I hardly noticed anything - nothing like what I get with AA off. I am running 2xAA in DCS, and enhancing in nVidia Control panel as detailed here. Who knows how the settings are interacting with each other. Whatever, the upshot is I'm getting a result I'm happy with.

 

It is entirely reasonable to point out that I could achieve a similar (or better) result with Kegetys. But it gets to be a drag setting up to work every time there's an update or when I want to test. And it does introduce issues.

 

 

No shadows? OK saw your settings . from my point of view shadows even at low settings are essential for immersion...

Edited May 21, 2020 by Charly314159