[REPORTED] Performance Issues

[mayns414]

Statremike I totally agree and understand your point. But I'm looking at how this person is trying to prove an issue when there is more at play that most are not seeing. Like Minsky you wanna do some real trouble shooting. What is a full list of all your hardware. Full detailed specs including PSU, Mainboard, Ram speeds, XMP profiles, as for the GPU, what model of 960 is it. is it over clocked. then you have to look at what is your full PC doing when this is happening. What is your CPU running at for Ghz for all cores including Temps, what is the CPU usage%, What is the GPU usage%, what is the Vram usage of your GPU, what is the Mhz of the GPU, what are the Temps, what is your system ram usage. Like you need to consider all those factors before just jumping to DCS has an issue. Once again Im looking at both sides not just one. This thread started with Minsky's issue so ya its the focus in this discussion. Doesn't mean we cant have other discussions towards DCS being better optimized. Like if you had shown that information I would be able to have a better educated idea of the possibilities on your direct issue with performance. You guys can be as blunt as you want with me. I have thick skin but You need to investigate all avenues. I'm going off my experience with PC hardware and software. So that information would honestly help us a group figure out...is this a "your PC" problem or is this a DCS problem. Or is it both

Edited August 3, 2020 by mayns414

[statrekmike]

Statremike I totally agree and understand your point. But I'm looking at how this person is trying to prove an issue when there is more at play that most are not seeing. Like Minsky you wanna do some real trouble shooting. What is a full list of all your hardware. Full detailed specs including PSU, Mainboard, Ram speeds, XMP profiles, as for the GPU, what model of 960 is it. is it over clocked. then you have to look at what is your full PC doing when this is happening. What is your CPU running at for Ghz for all cores including Temps, what is the CPU usage%, What is the GPU usage%, what is the Vram usage of your GPU, what is the Mhz of the GPU, what are the Temps, Like you need to consider all those factors before just jumping to DCS has an issue. Once again Im looking at both sides not just one. This thread started with Minsky's issue so ya its the focus in this discussion. Doesn't mean we cant have other discussions towards DCS being better optimized.

 

We know that Minsky's system is old. We know that it is a serious contributor to his performance issues. There is no reason and nothing to be gained by dwelling on that. This thread is largely about the overall performance issues with the Supercarrier and fighting over how old a user's system is isn't going to move that discussion in any useful direction.

 

There is objectively a serious performance hit with the Supercarrier on EVERY system. It might not render the experience unplayable (especially for those with very high-end systems) but it is still a issue that needs to be looked at seriously by ED.

[mayns414]

Personally I never saw a performance hit with my system when the Supercarrier module came out and I got it from day one. I'm not denying that others have or are experiencing this happening. If the Module can be improved for the people having issues then ya I hope ED takes a serious look at it and works through it. But I still stand by my previous posts. Is what it is I guess

[statrekmike]

Personally I never saw a performance hit with my system when the Supercarrier module came out and I got it from day one. I'm not denying that others have or are experiencing this happening. If the Module can be improved for the people having issues then ya I hope ED takes a serious look at it and works through it. But I still stand by my previous posts. Is what it is I guess

 

So when you use the Supercarrier, do you not see a framerate drop at all? Is your framerate the same as it would be when using the older Stennis model or even a airbase? Even my friends with extremely high-end systems are encountering notable FPS loss even if it doesn't really impact the playability.

[mayns414]

No its never dropped. Maybe when I load a SC up with static aircraft, static objects and full flight ops maybe it drops 5FPS tops. and I'm using a Ryzen 9 3900X, X570 main board, 32GB 3600Mhz ram and a RTX 2080 Super. and my rez is at 1440p too and its never bogged down on me once since release. even when I stream on twitch using my GPU for the video encoder it doesn't drop. Maybe my PC is some golden child of performance i Don't know but just saying I've never seen more then 5FPS drop on my MSI afterburner overlay. I'm not saying I don't believe you guys i totally do I just haven't experienced any of those issues

[Minsky]

I'm not dismissing there could be an issue with DCS

 

Glad we're finally on the same page.

 

Asking ED to optimize your GPU Architecture is kinda unfair

 

I'm not asking for this.

At least not anymore.

 

I'm asking for some kind of a resolution.

Either they say "yup, found the bug, gonna fix it".

Or "nope, no bugs, it's just slow by design".

 

Seriously mate. Just forget about my GPU for a moment. Focus on what statrekmike is trying to explain.

[...]

i7 7700 + GTX 1060 6GB here runs Supercarrier with no problems. It is true that the FPS are low. In my case, I move between 30 and 35 in a stable, smooth and smooth way.

Edited August 3, 2020 by La Unión | Atazar

[Cornelius]

The problem isn't if it is playable or not. The problem is that the Supercarrier goes above and beyond DCS World's base-level system requirements to such a degree that either there is something wrong in terms of optimization that really should be dealt with (perhaps shadows need to be tuned for the Superstructure area, I don't know) or the system requirements for DCS need to go up quite a bit to keep up.

 

^^This

 

 

Stop trying to kill off the subject by blaming it on older hardware.

[speed-of-heat]

the issue is with shadows largely, if you run with them you get a big FPS rate drop if you dont run with them you dont

[Minsky]

We don't know this for sure.

Removing the animated crew (fully or partially) can more or less solve this issue as well.

[Mr. Big.Biggs]

the issue is with shadows largely, if you run with them you get a big FPS rate drop if you dont run with them you dont

 

Fyi I’m running flat shadows and to be honest doesn’t run any better. Sometimes 45 ish but def stutter.

[marcoscosta]

Sorry mayns414, but Minsky is right. I have a GTX1070 and my 2D performance is very very good with 130fps in med/low settings, but fall to 45 in SC. A performance 65% lower just for SC crew is beyond of acceptable. In VR is just impraticable.

 

I'm quit this module and use only the Stennis when I need to takeoff from carrier. I really don't care anymore.

[speed-of-heat]

any shadows seems to have a big FPS impact , and no we don't know it for sure... but simple observed behavior says removing them make the perf issue go... and yes removing the crew also works ... if you have shadows... of course you are reducing the number of shadows cast by removing the crew...

[Minsky]

Well, hello again.

 

Just replaced my GPU with the 2060 Super.

Reinstalled video drivers, cleaned shaders etc - the usual stuff.

Left my previous (pretty conservative) DCS settings.

Loaded the same "Supercarrier - Cold Start" mission.

And what do we see?

 

Less than 30 fps on the deck:

 

 

More than 100 fps away from the deck:

 

 

 

 

I look forward to the experts saying that now I should upgrade my CPU, memory or headphones.

[TOViper]

Well, hello again.

 

Just replaced my GPU with the 2060 Super.

Reinstalled video drivers, cleaned shaders etc - the usual stuff.

Left my previous (pretty conservative) DCS settings.

Loaded the same "Supercarrier - Cold Start" mission.

And what do we see?

Less than 30 fps on the deck:

More than 100 fps away from the deck:

I look forward to the experts saying that now I should upgrade my CPU, memory or headphones.

 

Hey Minsky, just for my understanding: What happens if you turn OFF shadows (not terrain shadows!).

I had/have issues with shadows when flying to/from/nearby the SC, but currently I have much better hardware than you. Thanks for infos!

Edited August 6, 2020 by TOViper

[Minsky]

What happens if you turn OFF shadows (not terrain shadows!).

 

Massive performance increase, as stated in the first post.

[...]

Where is the problem? We all get the same FPS on the Supercarrier that we would get with a PMDG 737 anywhere on the map of any other flight simulator. Welcome to reality. You get excellent performance on the rest of the map because the trees and buildings are low-quality textures, and you come back to reality when you zoom into an ultra-detailed environment. If we don't want details on performance impact, let's go back to Stennis.

[TOViper]

Since day one I suspected the deck crew as "the problem".

Shadows at any equal or higher setting than FLAT is super critical for my computer.

Even with shadows set to FLAT its not working satisfyingly.

 

I really hope the guys at ED find something to optimize regarding shadows.

I really do! :noexpression:

 

BTW: Minsky, thanks for the hard work you have done so far, I appreciate this, even if you earn "bashing" because of your old hardware.

 

It is always easy to say this. What is happening in the background in the engine is sometimes something completly not understandable from outside.

I know I most probably will earn bashing too for standing on your side, but I don't care about that too much.

For me its much more interesting to find the technical reason/problem behind it, or at least help out with my experiences using the sim.

I did a post somewhere in the forums about shadows beeing projected several times through matter, which is physically wrong behaviour.

But I fear that e.g. limiting this would require the engine to take into consideration material and other things to render this corretly, so the engine might deliver more frames not doing this.

 

Cheerz

Edited August 6, 2020 by TOViper

[Minsky]

You get excellent performance on the rest of the map because the trees and buildings are low-quality textures, and you come back to reality when you zoom into an ultra-detailed environment.

 

Not gonna argue with you over this nonsense, buddy.

[Minsky]

BTW: Minsky, thanks for the hard work you have done so far, I appreciate this, even if you earn "bashing" because of your old hardware.

 

Well, it's not that old anymore :)

At or above the recommended system requirements for the "high" graphics settings.

Although the SC is barely usable even on "medium".

 

For me its much more interesting to find the technical reason/problem behind it, or at least help out with my experiences using the sim.

 

What amuses me the most, is that people in this topic talk as if there never been any paradoxical or anecdotal bugs in DCS. Like this one.

Edited August 6, 2020 by Minsky

[...]

Well, it's not that old anymore :)

At or above the recommended system requirements for the "high" graphics settings.

Although the SC is barely usable even on "medium".

 

 

 

What amuses me the most, is that people in this topic talk as if there never been any paradoxical or anecdotal bugs in DCS. Like this one.

 

 

Nor do I pretend to argue with Dmitriy. The point is that all DCS maps have been developed with low-detail textures. The trees and buildings are modeled in such a way that they don't have a huge impact on performance, but when we hit the Supercarrier we get the same FPS that we would get in any other airplane simulator like PMDG's 737. Have you tried the Presets? Maybe that helps more than looking for manual settings, because in DCS 2 + 2 they are not 4. Did you know that the SA page performance issues were actually caused by an NVIDIA driver version? Most of the people who came out of tunnel vision managed to fix it by reverting to an older version of the driver.

 

 

I don't mean to argue and respect your point, but please understand the more graphic detail, the more impact on performance.

[...]

The main one interested in a performance improvement would be me, but while the miracle comes, I can be grateful to be able to move in the Supercarrier in a stable and fluid way thanks to the realization that my PC cannot afford to fill the supercarrier platform with static elements that increase the graphic load.

 

 

EDIT: I just saw, furthermore, that you don't put much of your share with a visual range in ULTRA and vegatation to the maximum.

Edited August 6, 2020 by La Unión | Atazar

[Minsky]

I don't mean to argue and respect your point, but please understand the more graphic detail, the more impact on performance.

 

Please re-read the first post. This issue has nothing to do with the amount of polygons or textures, or visual range, or vegetation, or whatever.

 

My point is that this issue:

 

1. exists

 

2. can be caused by literally anything, even something stupidly obvious or seemingly unrelated

 

But some people here acting like there's no problem at all. Like this humongous performance hit is totally normal. And that we must "solve" it by adding disproportionate amounts of computing power.

 

We're not asking for Stennis-like performance.

 

We're asking why is this thing is so godawfully slow.

Edited August 6, 2020 by Minsky

[fagulha]

Well, it's not that old anymore :)

At or above the recommended system requirements for the "high" graphics settings.

Although the SC is barely usable even on "medium".

 

 

 

What amuses me the most, is that people in this topic talk as if there never been any paradoxical or anecdotal bugs in DCS. Like this one.

 

I tested and i my FPS in VR drop as soon i turn on the Batteries on the Hornet. With the SC i have a good performance overall (i use a crowded deck with mods). but i can say it´s far from good because as soon i take off my fps stay at 45. Poor optimization. And the patch before gave me better performance in the SC. Then get worse. When i look to the island the frames suffer, and more at night with the lights. It´s not only hardware issue, it´s optimization. That´s my humble opinion. Of course it´s a little subjective because everyone have different rigs and DCS configs, but overall we all can agree it needs better optimization.

I have Shadows to FLAT, going to try without Shadows to test.

MSAA x2, SS 1.5 (in DCS VR Options), Textures High, Visibility High, AF 16x, SS 1.0 (in SteamVR).

 

I7 4790k 4.5ghz, 32 DDR3 Ram, SSD´s M.2, ZOTAC GTX 1080Ti 11gb, Valve Index.

 

Best regards,

F.

[...]

Please re-read the first post. This issue has nothing to do with the amount of polygons or textures, or visual range, or vegetation, or whatever.

 

My point is that this issue:

 

1. exists

 

2. can be caused by literally anything, even something stupidly obvious or seemingly unrelated

 

But some people here acting like there's no problem at all. Like this humongous performance hit is totally normal. And that we must "solve" it by adding disproportionate amounts of computing power.

 

We're not asking for Stennis-like performance.

 

We're asking why is this thing is so godawfully slow.

 

 

From my point of view it is not as "tremendously" slow as you put it. I repeat, 30/35 FPS is what you would get in other simulators flying a PMDG 737.