Poor Performance Highend PC?!

[Murey2]

Hello,

 

 

So, as you can read in the Title relativity poor performance, The PC specs are:

 

 

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X.

KFA2 RTX 2080Ti EX 11gb VRAM.

32gb RAM.

Sandisk Extreme Pro 500gb M2 NVMe SSD.

ASUS TUF B450-PLUS Motherboard.

Windows 10 Pro obviously.

WMR Samsung Odyssey + VR Headset 1600x1440 DPi per eye.

 

Below Nvidia settings:

 

NVIDIA_System_Information_04-11-2020_02-44-46.txt

 

 

Below are the Settings and FPS:

 

So, in the vid. below he achieved 90FPS in VR! Any idea why the FPS seams to be locked on 45 FPS, flying on screen the FPS is about 60-70 (where it should be way higher like 140...), Where is the bottleneck?! How to achieve 90 FPS in VR?

 

 

BTW 45 FPS in VR was only achieved after shader optimization by a guy on YT Lukas S./Wolta. before that was between 30-40! Something is wrong!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edit: Even on the Lowest Setting in the game it's still 45 FPS, that's a Freaking bad joke...

 

 

 

I appreciate your help.

Edited April 12, 2020 by Murey2

[flankerjun]

I have RTX2070,32G RAM,1 TB SSD m2,before 2.5.6 i have fps around 90,now i have only 40,and quite slow loading the game

 

通过我的 ONEPLUS A5010 上的 Tapatalk发言

[Murey2]

I have RTX2070,32G RAM,1 TB SSD m2,before 2.5.6 i have fps around 90,now i have only 40,and quite slow loading the game

 

通过我的 ONEPLUS A5010 上的 Tapatalk发言

 

 

Well, Thanks for your input very comforting to know that it's the game and not the system...

 

 

Other people can you also confirm this?

[Svsmokey]

There are dozens , if not hundreds , of posts regarding performance issues with 2.56 in vr .

 

Further , you may need to dial down your expectations a tad . 90 frames is almost impossible to achieve in DCS VR , unless you are looking up to a cloudless and empty sky , regardless of what version you are running .

[Murey2]

There are dozens , if not hundreds , of posts regarding performance issues with 2.56 in vr .

 

Further , you may need to dial down your expectations a tad . 90 frames is almost impossible to achieve in DCS VR , unless you are looking up to a cloudless and empty sky , regardless of what version you are running .

 

 

Just seen this madness now UNBELIEVABLE WTH ED?! Like come on!!!

 

 

 

If ED to do fix the Game-Engine every damn thing except the Game-Engine Development should be put on hold. Seriously. I know I'm dreaming.

 

 

Edit: To rush out Vulkan and other game-engine fixes...

Edited April 12, 2020 by Murey2

[Svsmokey]

We do get frustrated at times :) But consider that the graphics qualiity in vr games is cartoonish in comparison to DCS . Those that do have better textures/shaders than cartoonish , have limited view distances . Add in systems modeling , weapons , and the highest-level flight-dynamics modeling in the industry , to name just a few , and you begin to see what ED is dealing with .

We all await Vulkan , and it is coming , though likely not soon .

Finally if ED were to put everything but game-engine development on hold , they would have to layoff everyone else , and lose forever the expertise of artists , system and weapons modelers , terrain guys , AI people and others .

[mkiii]

I don't think anyone here is suggesting that all EDs attention be assigned to improving graphics quality, or comparing DCS to some cheap VR crap, but they are saying that in recent builds the performance they HAD before was much higher than it is now.

 

 

 

It did get to a stage where I could use VR with some lowering of settings on my PC, but in the last couple of updates, even in Non VR mode, with settings turned down much lower than they were a couple of months ago, I'm getting about 2/3 the framerate, so does that not suggest that there is a problem somewhere, and not just in achieving a decent VR framerate?

[Murey2]

We do get frustrated at times :) But consider that the graphics qualiity in vr games is cartoonish in comparison to DCS . Those that do have better textures/shaders than cartoonish , have limited view distances . Add in systems modeling , weapons , and the highest-level flight-dynamics modeling in the industry , to name just a few , and you begin to see what ED is dealing with .

We all await Vulkan , and it is coming , though likely not soon .

Finally if ED were to put everything but game-engine development on hold , they would have to layoff everyone else , and lose forever the expertise of artists , system and weapons modelers , terrain guys , AI people and others .

 

 

I have a not bad programming background and I can understand what they are going through! but seeing the kind of bug we're having I start to wonder about the cleanness of the code and about that they should redo the code from ground up with the experience they have now!

 

 

So yeah. And also the business model that they trapped them selves in (Free to Play), is also questionable whether it's good long term (no it's not!). but finally it's noticed that there is change on the way. I hope it's for good.

[lobo]

that's a Freaking bad joke...

 

I appreciate your help.

 

Open beta...

[flankerjun]

I don't have VR,BUT a monitor,also have fps lower compare to 2.5.5

 

通过我的 ONEPLUS A5010 上的 Tapatalk发言

[despinoza]

i have exactly the same system than you but i run the rift s

 

With medium shadows and no MSAA i can achieve 80 in flight in SP. on the ground is impossible.

 

throw some other aircraft around and is back to 40

[Aluminum Donkey]

Hehehehehe welcome to DCS World man, where people blow more money on their gaming rigs than many people would ever spend on a car, then come on here and complain about lousy performance :)

 

If your top-of-the-line system isn't choking and wheezing, and your GPU isn't running hot enough to start a nuclear fusion reaction on your desktop, then you just ain't playing DCS. :thumbup:

 

AD

[GunSlingerAUS]

I think the most realistic solution to this problem is faster hardware. We’re going to need at least a doubling in PC performance to maintain the intended refresh rate/FPS of today’s HMDs, which is approx 72 to 90 Hz/FPS. Methinks that’s at least three years away! I’d love to be wrong, but have been playing DCS / LOMAC for over 15 years.

[Charly314159]

I think the most realistic solution to this problem is faster hardware. We’re going to need at least a doubling in PC performance to maintain the intended refresh rate/FPS of today’s HMDs, which is approx 72 to 90 Hz/FPS. Methinks that’s at least three years away! I’d love to be wrong, but have been playing DCS / LOMAC for over 15 years.

 

 

Unfortunately it is not a matter of hardware. Even people with the best PC money can buy are reporting unacceptable performance. The problem is piling up features on top of a fundamentally un-optimized/broken core.

Edited April 13, 2020 by Charly314159

[Hippo]

I start to wonder about the cleanness of the code and about that they should redo the code from ground up with the experience they have now!

 

[Svsmokey]

Unfortunately it is not a matter of hardware. Even people with the best PC money can buy are reporting unacceptable performance. The problem is piling up features on top of a fundamentally un-optimized/broken core.

 

Very well and succinctly put , and precisely how i view the problem as well .

[Murey2]

Thank you for your feed back very helpful. :thumbup:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Good share Thanks a lot.

[Eldur]

It's well known that 256 butchered the VR performance a lot. Hopes are up they get it going ASAP, especially since we do want to enjoy the upcoming supercarrier module. I literally have dropped any military actions in DCS, just do the flying stuff, because anything more than that simply is impossible now. But it never hurts to practice the general flying skills, so I won't get back to 255 and save me ages of time patching down, up, down and up again etc with those MASSIVE terrain files. And life has enough different things to cope with, so having less time with DCS isn't a real problem for me.

 

I have a not bad programming background and I can understand what they are going through! but seeing the kind of bug we're having I start to wonder about the cleanness of the code and about that they should redo the code from ground up with the experience they have now!

 

Well, they have officially stated on another platform that shall not be named that they do have lots of spaghetti code, rooting back to at least LOMAC, probably even further. Considering that, DCS does run pretty well actually, I mean it did in 255 and we'll be back there sooner or later.

 

The high hopes for Vulkan aren't just there for Vulkan itself, but for general improvements as multi-threading or generally better VR implementation. At the moment, AFAIK DCS simply renders 2 viewports at the same time, completely on their own. Optimized renderers however do render the whole scene but once and just show it from two different viewports at the same time which alone saves lots of ressources. BTW the same thing is the very reason those mirrors and also MFD images hit so hard on the frame rate.