Low FPS with good hardware

[Ballantin]

Hi, I am new to DCS (came from Elite Dangerous) and I am quite lost yet. Yesterday I was able to do my first successful landing with the F/A 18C without crashing! But that's not the point of this post.

I am unable to get good stable FPS. Can someone recommend me some settings?

Hardware:

i9-9900X @ 4.5Ghz

64GB DDR4 - 3600

Game and Windows installed in separate NVMe SSDs

3090 GPU

TrackIR5

X-56 HOTAS (waiting on a Virpil set)

1440p - 144Hz G-Sync monitor.

 

My current settings are set to the "High" pre-set. My FPS varies from 80 to around 120, but most of the time it is 100+

 

Thanks!

[THERION]

4 minutes ago, Ballantin said:

My current settings are set to the "High" pre-set. My FPS varies from 80 to around 120, but most of the time it is 100+

Hi my friend and welcome

there are a lot of guys here who'd like to have your FPS experience. These are very good numbers. Did you try to cap your FPS
in the Nvidia Control Panel? To let's say 80 or 100. With this you may equalize your FPS and still have a very smooth experience.

Cheers

[speed-of-heat]

I'd have to agree on high presets, I assume in 2d those look like good performance numbers.  Settings are pretty personal, and what works for some wont for others, but dropping down to 2xmsaa and turning of SSAA, SSAO, SSLR, global cockpit illumination, and reducing shadows to medium, will likely have significant performance impacts.

If you are using Track IR i seem to remember that keeping the framerate in sync with track IR's refresh rates is a good ideas , so aim at multiples of 60... which would mean aiming at 60FPS, it introduces stuttering for some people if you dont.

[Nevyn]

In my experience you need a steady framerate for trackIR, 60 or 120, it doesn't seem to like anything else. You could also make sure you are in full screen, there are a couple of threads about that here the ED forums, not sure how it would effect you though, a trial and error session would be the best way to figure that one out.

Edited November 2, 2021 by Nevyn

[Hiob]

This is not a 1P-Shooter. Anything around 100 FPS is more than good and sufficiant for DCS.

The microstuttering that can come with trackir is a different story. I'd wish it was so easy as to fix the FPS to a multiple of 60 (the polling rate of trackir), but it isn't. Being above 60 is generally good advice though. But there are other factors, like how good does g-sync/freesync work on your system, which kind of v-sync are you using (if any), drivers, background processes,  and so on...

The graphic settings have some pretty taxing options btw., it is always a trade off. Don't expect being able to ramp all up just because you happen to use a 3090. DCS will easily defeat a 3090 if you want to.

Edit: there are several guides, on youtube, as well as here in the forum, on graphics settings. Even if the benchmark in question doesn't represent your setup, it will give you hints on how different options affects performance.

Edited November 2, 2021 by Hiob

[MAXsenna]

LOL! Here I'm chugging along happily with about 24 FPS, descent settings, no issue with Opentrack/(TrackIR), so I guess milage vary.
I have to admit though, that FPS detoriates wirh every update, and it sucks that SLI's not working after the cloud update, 'cause that gave me double FPS.
Not really complaining, just hope my 8 year old pulls through at least one more year.

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Ballantin]

Thanks guys I will play around with the different settings.

The main problem is when I look around with TrackIR, so will try disabling G-Sync and playing with the framerate limit and vsync.

I know, this is not a first person shooter but even so I want to try to achieve good stable performance

I have already watched several videos and read some guides on how different settings affect performance. The weird thing is that neither my GPU or CPU are at 100% use. And none of the guides mentions the TrackIR problem with G-Sync, I was not aware until I read you replies so thanks a lot!

[Hiob]

47 minutes ago, Ballantin said:

Thanks guys I will play around with the different settings.

The main problem is when I look around with TrackIR, so will try disabling G-Sync and playing with the framerate limit and vsync.

I know, this is not a first person shooter but even so I want to try to achieve good stable performance

I have already watched several videos and read some guides on how different settings affect performance. The weird thing is that neither my GPU or CPU are at 100% use. And none of the guides mentions the TrackIR problem with G-Sync, I was not aware until I read you replies so thanks a lot!

The CPU will never be used to 100%, since DCS is mostly single core. I think it uses 2 cores in certain circumstances, but that doesn't matter. Your GPU should be used to like 99% though, except, you opted for some very taxing options.

Have you tinkered with the nvidia control panel? If so, try to roll that back to default and then activate the following options one by one in the game settings and watch if your GPU utilization is limited be one of those: MSAA (2x; 4x), SSAA (1.5; 2). In general, choose one kind of anti aliasing and stay with it (I suggest MSAA). Otherwise it gets REALLY taxing.

Check if wake turbulences are activated in the game options. They can be taxing on the CPU (which then limits the GPU).

If you ever find a way to get trackir really smooth in all circumstances, PLEASE give advise! You'll probably be the first...

 

BTW: I ended up with dismissing any kind of v-sync (forced off in nvcp ans game) and just opted for g-sync. On my 120 Hz screen, that gave me the overall best results for trackir and overall smoothness. It still leaves something to desire though. But I think, that my TV doesn't have the highes tier of g-sync implemented.

 

Edit: Some gfx options that can be quite demanding and are of lesser impact (at least in an inside to outside cockpit view) are SSAO and Cockpit global illumination. Something I personally like to opt for is "ground shadows: flat". Which are not just less demanding, but also look better than default. But that is a very personal opinion! Oh, and viewing distance. The second to best option is sufficiant. The best option just unneccessarily caps fps.

Edited November 2, 2021 by Hiob

[cfrag]

3 hours ago, Ballantin said:

My current settings are set to the "High" pre-set. My FPS varies from 80 to around 120, but most of the time it is 100+

Is this what today's youth calls "humblebrag"? 

[Ballantin]

Disabling "Hardware accelerated GPU Scheduling" in Windows 10 have removed the stutter or micro-freezes that I was having every now and then when looking around.

I also did a full repair of DCS that removed a file, I believe inserted in there by the Tobii software, called "headtracker.dll). That did not fix the problem but made it better.

Thanks you so much to all of you who tried to help, really appreciate it  

Now it comes the pain, repeating the in-game trainings over and over until I have a hand of the A/F 18C. Today I landed successfully again on my 1st attempt (it was a shitty landing but I did not die xD).

 

6 hours ago, cfrag said:

Is this what today's youth calls "humblebrag"? 

Not a youth here so not sure, but I am not bragging about anything. Having better or worse hardware means nothing. Everyone have their own personal circumstances and priorities. How was I supposed to ask for help fixing a performance issue without mentioning the hardware?  

[Hiob]

1 hour ago, Ballantin said:

Disabling "Hardware accelerated GPU Scheduling" in Windows 10 have removed the stutter or micro-freezes that I was having every now and then when looking around.

I also did a full repair of DCS that removed a file, I believe inserted in there by the Tobii software, called "headtracker.dll). That did not fix the problem but made it better.

 

Generally good advise.

But my current trackir issue (not a big one though), is not stuttering but the blurry scenery when doing fast head movement. Can’t really describe it that well.

I really think it‘s a problem of my monitor more than trackir or dcs.

[cfrag]

10 hours ago, Ballantin said:

How was I supposed to ask for help fixing a performance issue without mentioning the hardware?

I don't know, but researching if a perceived issue is a real one would seem like a good start. Perhaps googling "dcs good frame rate" to get a base line. That could have been an opportunity to discover what in DCS terms is deemed "good". That currently, complaining about 100 fps is a bit off the mark, squarely into "oh gosh golly, I can't get any sleep with all these groupies crowding my bed" territory. 

Hence the humblebrag comment. Now if you excuse me, I have to complain to the mayor that these new recycling canisters are too small to receive magnum-sized bottles of Dom Pérignon. 

Edited November 3, 2021 by cfrag

[Hiob]

To his "defence": With a decent setup and pancake, opposed to VR, comes certain expectations regarding the FPS. And 100+ fps with a solid overall visual fidelity is not a problem in DCS with a beefy GPU. But as I said, it is as easy to tank the fps way below 60 fps with the same setup, so...here you go.

 

@Ballantin: Remember the times, when 60FPS were the aiming point in gaming? I'd say, though there are of course benefits from even higher FPS - no doubt, Anything from 60 FPS is well in the regime of a good DCS-experience. I wouldn't sacrifice visual fidelity to get to a 100!

Perhaps a better/less controversial titel for this thread would be "expected fps with good hardware?"

Edited November 3, 2021 by Hiob

[Ballantin]

I completely understand your comments @cfrag and @Hiob but there was a real and perceivable problem. When the stutter started the image would freeze for around a second, fps will drop to the bottom and then the image will come back alive with a big camera jump.

Now it is "smooth". There is still micro stutter with trackir but nothing I cannot live with and my fps is acceptable.

I can re-enable it and show you if you want!

 

Cheers.

[MAXsenna]

To his "defence": With a decent setup and pancake, opposed to VR, comes certain expectations regarding the FPS. And 100+ fps with a solid overall visual fidelity is not a problem in DCS with a beefy GPU. But as I said, it is as easy to tank the fps way below 60 fps with the same setup, so...here you go.
 
@Ballantin: Remember the times, when 60FPS were the aiming point in gaming? I'd say, though there are of course benefits from even higher FPS - no doubt, Anything from 60 FPS is well in the regime of a good DCS-experience. I wouldn't sacrifice visual fidelity to get to a 100!
Perhaps a better/less controversial titel for this thread would be "expected fps with good hardware?"

You're too young. I remember when 30 was the Holy Grail!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[cfrag]

2 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

You're too young. I remember when 30 was the Holy Grail!

Whippersnappers. In my youth, we boasted about our SPF!

On paper.

[Hiob]

7 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

You're too young. I remember when 30 was the Holy Grail!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk
 

I played my first games on C64 and had no concept of FPS at all. I doubt Falcon 3.0 on my 386DX33 ever reached more than 20, but even then I had no concept about it.

I just didn't want to overstretch the point...

[MAXsenna]

I played my first games on C64 and had no concept of FPS at all. I doubt Falcon 3.0 on my 386DX33 ever reached more than 20, but even then I had no concept about it.
I just didn't want to overstretch the point...

Haha! Yeah, I remember those days.
Didn't have a computer myself at the time but friends had.
Did some Falcon 1.0, but didn't really get into simming before BH1942 and F-19.
Like you said, FPS wasn't even a concept. In BF1942 it was literally a slide show, explosion sound came half a second after you saw it. But you could fly with the mouse.
F-19. Oh boy, time was slower than real time. Used to do 4-6 hour missions over the Kola peninsula. We made meals while autopilot on. Keyboard control, had to anticipate and plan every keystroke, before you could see what happened on screen. The feeling of accomplishment on my first successful landing. Kinda got the same after my first successful AAR in DCS.
Wait, did I tell you this was all in psychedelic 4 color CGA graphics on an 8088 or something?
Kids today...

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

Whippersnappers. In my youth, we boasted about our SPF!
On paper.

Haha! It's so funny you've started using that expression. It's my girlfriend's favourite. WSC is her hero. Think she picked it up by reading about him.

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[cfrag]

14 minutes ago, Hiob said:

I played my first games on C64 and had no concept of FPS at all. I doubt Falcon 3.0 on my 386DX33 ever reached more than 20, but even then I had no concept about it.

IIRC, the early sim games (Apple // for me) like Elite, the glorious A2FS1 (which then went on to be purchased by MS and developed into the original Flight Simulator) had screen refreshes at some 3-5 at maximum. In any event, those weren't really measured in "FPS" because it was seldom that the entire screen memory was redrawn: only a small portion of video mem (whatever changed: games like "Brickout" were mostly static and you only redrew the ball and whatever it touched), and the screen often was a representation of some memory locations (memory mapped video on the Apple // anyways). Redraw to screen was usually coupled to the video signal - 29.97Hz for NTSC, 25Hz for PAL, with some funky DMA circuitry that would access RAM during memory refresh (another old technology). Video devices (e.g. a CRT based TV or these cool green/amber monitors) where locked to these refresh rates, and (even though no game could) it would make no sense to try and exceed the Video Circuitry's refresh rate, because it meant that it was not going to be drawn on-screen anyway. 

If memory serves me right (it usually doesn't), FPS (as frames per second) became a thing only with the popularity of the other FPS (shooters), where a higher FPS could translate into a tangible benefits if you had a monitor that was capable of displaying it (i.e. boasted a higher refresh rate than NTSC/PAL)

 

[Boosterdog]

50 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

 I remember when 30 was the Holy Grail!


 

Still is for many in DCS

[Dzsekeb]

3 minutes ago, Boosterdog said:

Still is for many in DCS

An fps of 24 really helps drive home the cinematic experience in more complex missions.

[Boosterdog]

15 minutes ago, Dzsekeb said:

An fps of 24 really helps drive home the cinematic experience in more complex missions.

I do remember being awed that my first DVD could step though the action at one frame per second. Less impressed with the same feature in DCS when I drop a bomb. 

[Hiob]

I love, how the whole thread is evolving!

Anyone remember how crappy "The hobbit" looked in cinemas with the stupid double framerate? 24 FPS FTW!

[MAXsenna]

I love, how the whole thread is evolving!
Anyone remember how crappy "The hobbit" looked in cinemas with the stupid double framerate? 24 FPS FTW!

Hehe, yes I do. Have you seen the YT comparison video?

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Hiob]

1 hour ago, MAXsenna said:

Hehe, yes I do. Have you seen the YT comparison video?

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk
 

Will have a look, for sure! thx