New update (DCS 2.8.4.38947 Open Beta) causes even more performance loss (VR)

[zerO_crash]

The new update causes even more performance loss (HP G2):

 

Empty mission, only a Ka-50 BSIII with loadout hotstarted (for testing) on the ground:

 

Before (DCS 2.8.3.38090 Open Beta):

ST: 30-34 fps (F2-view - 48-60 fps)

MT: 28-32 fps (F2-view - 38-45 fps)

 

Now (DCS 2.8.4.38947 Open Beta):

ST: 28-30 fps (39-45 fps)

MT: 18-22 fps (31-38 fps)

 

I still get "CPU Thread Bound" flickering in the performance monitor. DCS has gone from unplayable (cannot fly like this), to PowerPoint. That is very mildly said.

 

Furthermore, like the last update, with anything vanilla (fresh installation - never used any mods), multiple complete repairs ("slow" & "delete all unnecessary files"), DCS ST still starts by default in SteamVR, whilst DCS MT starts in OpenXR... Why is there even a difference?!

dcs.log dcs.log.old DxDiag.txt

Edited April 14, 2023 by zerO_crash

[Kreutzberg]

I also note a slight performance drop since the most recent patch. I'm not quite seeing this much, though.

[TOViper]

Did you guys configure the OpenXR Toolkit right?
I use "Performance" > "Turbo Mode (Experimental)" > "ON", which reduces load on the CPU massively and increases fps massively.

Edited April 17, 2023 by TOViper

[Kreutzberg]

I'm not a big fan of the artifacts from Turbo Mode. But in any case, my OpenXR toolkit settings didn't change, yet I seem to have lost some performance!

[-Mop-]

Same here...

[zerO_crash]

On 4/17/2023 at 10:19 PM, TOViper said:

Did you guys configure the OpenXR Toolkit right?
I use "Performance" > "Turbo Mode (Experimental)" > "ON", which reduces load on the CPU massively and increases fps massively.

 

I am not too fond of OpenXR. Whilst SteamVR might have cost a couple of frames earlier, it was overall a smooth drive without artifacts. OpenXR, is more about testing, than actually having it work. I personally cannot understand the point of settings like "Turbo Mode", which while theoretically giving you better FPS., don't alleviate the issue of frametime (more, does not mean fluent). Furthermore, the glitching it introduces is astounding, seeing artifacts that resemble multiple magnifying glasses around the screen... There are options which are cosmetic, and at user discretion, however this is not one of them. Overall, it's a weak software in my mind. Whilst HP G2 seems to be a good VR-headset, the software on the other hand, falls short. I never had any of these issues with Vive, it simply worked out of the box. Granted, DCS has severe issues with performance right now. Still, it's a complete mess with the software. It doesn't help either that Windows 10/11 has had its fair share of performance-issues related to VR, I won't even mention WMR...

 

As to DCS, I give them time. This is afterall a beta-build. The problem isn't really that there is such a wide margin between performance increase/decrease that users report. I can understand that optimization is needed, as such, certain hardware will underperform until it get's optimized. The problem is really that there is no logic with regards to whether DCS will perform or not. You might as well throw dice as to DCS. People with the same operating systems (clean ones), and the same hardware are reporting widely different results. As such, getting a top-of-the-line pc doesn't even guarantee you the desireable outcome. That is the main issue. Why is the software so unpredictable in its current configuration?! It used to be better before.

 

I, for one, am not a fan for changing system-wide settings because of one app. I am firm a believer, that if other apps work without issues with default settings/setups (given that your power options are set for performance), then DCS should too. The moment you need to edit your registry, or change other peculiar settings, is the moment I'll state that the software is bugged, end of discussion! I have gone through a complete Windows-reinstall (ED got more from me than Microsoft-support could ever get), and nada. Same lack of performance. "Turbo Mode" is not going to fix that. The devs need to do it! I am a very patient man, I give ED the benfit of time.

Edited April 20, 2023 by zerO_crash

[frizball]

3 hours ago, zerO_crash said:

I am not too fond of OpenXR. Whilst SteamVR might have cost a couple of frames earlier, it was overall a smooth drive without artifacts. OpenXR, is more about testing, than actually having it work. I personally cannot understand the point of settings like "Turbo Mode", which while theoretically giving you better FPS., don't alleviate the issue of frametime (more, does not mean fluent). Furthermore, the glitching it introduces is astounding, seeing artifacts that resemble multiple magnifying glasses around the screen... There are options which are cosmetic, and at user discretion, however this is not one of them. Overall, it's a weak software in my mind. Whilst HP G2 seems to be a good VR-headset, the software on the other hand, falls short. I never had any of these issues with Vive, it simply worked out of the box. Granted, DCS has severe issues with performance right now. Still, it's a complete mess with the software. It doesn't help either that Windows 10/11 has had its fair share of performance-issues related to VR, I won't even mention WMR...

 

As to DCS, I give them time. This is afterall a beta-build. The problem isn't really that there is such a wide margin between performance increase/decrease that users report. I can understand that optimization is needed, as such, certain hardware will underperform until it get's optimized. The problem is really that there is no logic with regards to whether DCS will perform or not. You might as well throw dice as to DCS. People with the same operating systems (clean ones), and the same hardware are reporting widely different results. As such, getting a top-of-the-line pc doesn't even guarantee you the desireable outcome. That is the main issue. Why is the software so unpredictable in its current configuration?! It used to be better before.

 

I, for one, am not a fan for changing system-wide settings because of one app. I am firm a believer, that if other apps work without issues with default settings/setups (given that your power options are set for performance), then DCS should too. The moment you need to edit your registry, or change other peculiar settings, is the moment I'll state that the software is bugged, end of discussion! I have gone through a complete Windows-reinstall (ED got more from me than Microsoft-support could ever get), and nada. Same lack of performance. "Turbo Mode" is not going to fix that. The devs need to do it! I am a very patient man, I give ED the benfit of time.

 

Its normal for people not to like things they don't understand.

OpenXR is a standard.  OpenVR is a standard.  SteamVR is an application.  SteamVR supports both OpenXR and OpenVR.

OpenXR Toolkit is a .... Toolkit.  Written by a community member to enable users to tweak and tune and optimize to their hearts content.  In no way, shape or form is it required.

[TOViper]

3 hours ago, zerO_crash said:

.... People with the same operating systems (clean ones), and the same hardware are reporting widely different results. As such, getting a top-of-the-line pc doesn't even guarantee you the desireable outcome. That is the main issue. Why is the software so unpredictable in its current configuration?! It used to be better before. ...

 

I agree with you in some points, but regarding your statement above we should not forget that we never know which software on computers of such users is running besides DCS. Background services, trillions of small tools coming up after system reboot making the "user experience" as good as possible ... forgetting about that every tool uses system resources. And then there is Windows Update ... pfffff.

On this side it would be necessary to check each and every system on its own by going through a detailed checklist/trouble-shooting list to get rid of software and configuration problems that is conflicting with high performance.
If I may talk about my situation here, it took a long while to get my two rigs going, but now they run satisfactorily. I used several checklists during the last weeks, and to be honest: yeah, there were some issues which I got rid of which I never thought of before. On one rig I need turbo mode like a flower needs water, on my other rig i leave it turned off. Explanation: I have no fucking clue.

What I can say for sure is that VR performance is PITA, but seeking for the stable 45 was not that complicate, but indeed required some time.

16 minutes ago, mjfrisby said:

OpenXR Toolkit is a .... Toolkit.  Written by a community member to enable users to tweak and tune and optimize to their hearts content.  In no way, shape or form is it required.

Sorry to work against, but his statement is simply wrong.
I had the choice: 22fps and stuttering with Turbo OFF or stable 45 fps without stuttering and Turbo ON.
So to say "in no way it is required" is unfortunately far off and not helping anyone.

Edited April 20, 2023 by TOViper

[zerO_crash]

8 hours ago, mjfrisby said:

Its normal for people not to like things they don't understand.

OpenXR is a standard.  OpenVR is a standard.  SteamVR is an application.  SteamVR supports both OpenXR and OpenVR.

OpenXR Toolkit is a .... Toolkit.  Written by a community member to enable users to tweak and tune and optimize to their hearts content.  In no way, shape or form is it required.

"Its normal for people not to like things they don't understand." - (*It's - It is) That statement is not pointed at me. You clearly misunderstood what I wrote. I am fully aware of how different VR-software correlates. I have never mentioned OpenXR Toolkit as a standalone. Re-read what I wrote; "OpenXR" (as a whole component). The reference to OpenXR Toolkit, was because a member mentioned that "Turbo Mode" could help.

 

The problem is that after DCS started forcing OpenXR (it was there before, but for example DCS MT, will not start natively in SteamVR, even if you set that runtime in Steam. You need to add the shortcut suffix in order to force it in SteamVR), it simply doesn't present any good results. There is lag, there is stutter, etc...

 

7 hours ago, TOViper said:

I agree with you in some points, but regarding your statement above we should not forget that we never know which software on computers of such users is running besides DCS. Background services, trillions of small tools coming up after system reboot making the "user experience" as good as possible ... forgetting about that every tool uses system resources. And then there is Windows Update ... pfffff.

On this side it would be necessary to check each and every system on its own by going through a detailed checklist/trouble-shooting list to get rid of software and configuration problems that is conflicting with high performance.
If I may talk about my situation here, it took a long while to get my two rigs going, but now they run satisfactorily. I used several checklists during the last weeks, and to be honest: yeah, there were some issues which I got rid of which I never thought of before. On one rig I need turbo mode like a flower needs water, on my other rig i leave it turned off. Explanation: I have no fucking clue.

What I can say for sure is that VR performance is PITA, but seeking for the stable 45 was not that complicate, but indeed required some time.

Sorry to work against, but his statement is simply wrong.
I had the choice: 22fps and stuttering with Turbo OFF or stable 45 fps without stuttering and Turbo ON.
So to say "in no way it is required" is unfortunately far off and not helping anyone.

 

The problem with DCS, is really that atm., it is too "delicate" on the system. You can run other software (applications) on your pc, which won't have any problems with performance, regardless of the magnitude of other software you might have installed. You mention it yourself, you have two computers, which with some similarity, still have to be configured completely different (settings-wise), in order for DCS to run properly. There is neither any logical explaination, nor a systematic to what you should enable/disable for it to run well. That is precisely the problem that I am describing above. If your Office worked like that, no one would use it. If your games worked like that, you wouldn't waste time on them. The question is; why is DCS so sensitive to systems versus other software in general? Mind you, I reinstalled windows 10 and 11 two times (once each), and with no other apps than in the windows 10/11 "Pro"-version, it still didn't run properly. No amount of tweaking made it work anywhere close to what it used to back in 2.6./2.7. I am talking about ST/MT, not only one.

 

Worse yet, while it performs well in 2D, switching to VR becomes instantly PowerPoint. If synthetic benchmarks are anything to go by (which they are), as well as other software, my current pc is as healthy as it get's, so is my system (software). Everything that I currently have on my pc, works even faster than before, yet DCS has taken an inversly-proportional course over the last couple of updates. For analytical-me, that is a proof that it's DCS that has issues, and not my system. I am in general very careful with making decisive interpretations, however here, it is clear as day. I have tried anything between physically changing RAM (again, everything else works splendid), to going through different BIOS-settings and finishing off with reinstallation of OS, topping the cherry with different settings (system + DCS). Nothing. Same performance as before. The fact that I get around 60 fps stable, with absolutely everything on lowest settings (every single setting you can choose, except pixel-density in DCS (tried it at anything between 0.5-1.0), is ridiculous. Running the headset through SteamVR with native VR resolution (tried lower as well); 1.0 in DCS and 50% in SteamVR (that corresponds to native image resolution for HP G2, no upscaling involved), it still yields 60 fps maximum. This is just completely wrong. The issue is with DCS VR, that much I know for sure. 

Edited April 20, 2023 by zerO_crash

[TOViper]

Have you tried other VR applications like FS2020 or Falcon 4.0 the forbidden simulation?
I use all of them, and DCS is BY FAR not the worst of all these; on my rigs FS2020 is.
For FS2020 I have absolutely no chance of getting stable 45, even with choosing LOW or OFF for all settings. DCS offers some items to be increased for better rendering/picture quality.
I hear you, and I agree with you, but I think ED is to continue optimizing DCS. But it will take time I guess ... even more with the new MT core programming...
What we should not forget is that some features came up during the last 24 months ... clouds (now moving), wake turbulence, lighting, etc. So to compare the versions is a bit hard I think ...

Edited April 20, 2023 by TOViper

[zerO_crash]

I don't fly the others, physics is a prime aspect for me, thus I cannot settle for the lack of "inertia" in the other sims. I hear that MSFS2020 has its problems as well. I cannot compare it to the others. Still, I am not comparing DCS to other simulators, as that's an invalid comparison at best. DCS has much old code, as such, you cannot really compare it to something that came out in 2020. What I am getting at, is the decreased performance in DCS from one version, to the next. I know ex-SithSpawn has mentioned that there were some changed introduced in 2.8. which will worsen performance, and that is to stay (I assume it's essential to the core). ED will have to respond properly to the issue of optimization, that's why I give them time. However, it's important to make it clear that currently, the performance is not where it should be.

 

Vulcan isn't the easy answer either, as there are currently severe issues with proper allocations of threads, tasking and the general coordination between CPU-cores. Some have no issues (consider it a bonus), but the attention will have to fall on those that have problems. A simple thesis which will support the above, is as follows: "There is currently no hardware, which will bear with the lack of optimization or load of DCS currently, at an acceptable framerate." (VR). That alone, is undeniable, and we know that getting a beefier GPU for example, is no solution at all. Especially since there are people here with i9-13900KS (6GHz out of the box) and 4090TI, who are getting subpar performance. Again, it's a basic example, but it proves the point. I'll wait and see what they'll figure out, but the fact that the simulator remains so inconsistent in terms of performance, is not really something they can blame on "other software". The sim is way too delicate in its current configuration. When we get this solved, it's already going to be the best commercial military aviation simulator out there.

[PLUTON]

I also use Turbo mode (which boosts my fps)
and I have no artifacts

[zerO_crash]

What VR-headset do you have?

[Wolf8312]

On 4/21/2023 at 4:37 AM, zerO_crash said:

Vulcan isn't the easy answer either, as there are currently severe issues with proper allocations of threads, tasking and the general coordination between CPU-cores. Some have no issues (consider it a bonus), but the attention will have to fall on those that have problems. A simple thesis which will support the above, is as follows: "There is currently no hardware, which will bear with the lack of optimization or load of DCS currently, at an acceptable framerate." (VR). That alone, is undeniable, and we know that getting a beefier GPU for example, is no solution at all. Especially since there are people here with i9-13900KS (6GHz out of the box) and 4090TI, who are getting subpar performance. Again, it's a basic example, but it proves the point. I'll wait and see what they'll figure out, but the fact that the simulator remains so inconsistent in terms of performance, is not really something they can blame on "other software". The sim is way too delicate in its current configuration. When we get this solved, it's already going to be the best commercial military aviation simulator out there.

I'm kinda surprised the devs (if indeed VR performance is a big issue for them) don't spend more time on solving (as many mods can/have) the prop artifacts that come with motion smoothing. I think that would probably be more beneficial for perfomance in the short term as as of right now I cannot use MS with many modules because of the artifacts.