2.9 with lower end CPU - your experience?

[HILOK]

hi all, since i haven't read too many reports from people with weaker pcs, i thought this might be of interest to some of us.

personally i run an old overclocked i5-4690k with a 2080ti. after reading some reports i am reluctant to jump to 2.9.  (until now i am getting solid 50fps on 4k in the stock instant action hornet/caucasus free flight mission on 2.8.)

maybe some of you with similar specs want to share their experience? i think more people would benefit. thanks.

Edited October 23, 2023 by HILOK

[Droning_On]

Its good enough for me but don't expect miracles...  i'm on an AMD PC and DLSS is by all accounts better than FSR2 so if your getting better than what i'm seeing then you should see a difference.... see below post i done on an AMD thread

My GPU is a RX6700xt (R5 5600x) and the move to MT and now FSR2.0 is a game changer in most cases with this lower spec GPU... with FSR2.0 I now have all textures/distances/clouds etc set at high or ultra with shadows on high but left off all the other AA options off and its just amazing how this has transformed the 'majority' of visuals...crisp lines.. no edge shimmer etc   I'm even getting a solid and smooth 75fps on my 2k monitor on a mod'd single player Battle of Britain.. with lots of fighters/bombers etc on the channel map.

 

down side.....  some really nasty artifacts on other aircraft when dogfighting ie ghosting as mentioned previously and sometimes the plane im chasing is a ghost biplane oh and I cant read the text in the cockpit without moving in closer..  but either way im happy... its Open Beta afterall and im sure it will get much better over time....  

 

2.8 - high textures, med/low shadows... MSAAx2 SLAAx1.5 = 57-65fps

2.9 - high textures, high shadows... FSR2 0.85/0.7 = solid 75fps (framerate capped at 75 on my monitor) other than the above it looks good.... slightly softer lines with FSR from native but i have read posts where people have had a small performance boost without the DLSS/FSR upscaling.   but on a 4k monitor ?? i think you'll be pleasantly surprised.

 

Edit: I'll post some screen shots later..... the above sounds worse than it actually is

 

Edited October 23, 2023 by Droning_On

[HILOK]

@Droning_On thanks for your comment  i see you have a stronger CPU, also more cores -frankly, i fear my processor might not be able to take advantage of MT, and i am wondering how 2.9 will perform in ST...

[Droning_On]

@HILOK yeah your processor might be an issue.... GPU is great though.  Reading between the lines on the forums it looks like the ST version is nearing 'end of line' and at some point (probably still got a few years but who knows) ED will stop supporting it,  the MT and ST versions seem to be diverging already with regards performance/graphics/features.  From your comment on 'i fear my processor might not be able to take advantage of MT'  you should try it in 2.8 If you haven't already...  just run the DCS.exe file from the /bin-mt folder, and save your graphic settings so you can revert back if all goes a bit pear shaped. 

if the i5 4th gen struggles just go back to the ST mode and start saving pennies for a new Motherboard and CPU.   The good news is a few $100 will give you a good upgrade path as that 2080ti is good for years yet.

with regards ST 2.9 my processors single core speed is not hugely better tbh....  I'll underclock it and try on 2.9 tonight on ST & MT

Edited October 23, 2023 by Droning_On

[HILOK]

@Droning_On  thanks. regarding MT: that's the point, i saw absolutely no gain in fps with MT, no loss either, but some weird latency. hence my apprehension...

[Droning_On]

If you seen no performance gain then yes. your cpu is limiting your performance….  Think you might need to upgrade the CPU

[HILOK]

16 hours ago, Droning_On said:

If you seen no performance gain then yes. your cpu is limiting your performance….  Think you might need to upgrade the CPU

yep, that's what i am suspecting too. guess i'll just stick to 2.8 till then. thanks for your thoughts! 

[cgjimeneza]

On a similar note: 

I have a I5 9600K, 32 GB  of DDR4 Corsair RAM, a Geforce GT1660 super (6gb) and the game and all saves are on an M2 solid state 

would increasing ram to 64 GB have a positive impact? I do single player mostly

I would consider getting a 3060 graphic card and leaving the 32 GB Ram (I live outside the US so any upgrade would have to pay shipping and duties or pay the vendors here a lot more than the regular listed AMAZON prices, so anything considered is at least 25% more that Amazon.

comments are more than welcome

Thanks

 

 

[twistking]

45 minutes ago, cgjimeneza said:

On a similar note: 

I have a I5 9600K, 32 GB  of DDR4 Corsair RAM, a Geforce GT1660 super (6gb) and the game and all saves are on an M2 solid state 

would increasing ram to 64 GB have a positive impact? I do single player mostly

I would consider getting a 3060 graphic card and leaving the 32 GB Ram (I live outside the US so any upgrade would have to pay shipping and duties or pay the vendors here a lot more than the regular listed AMAZON prices, so anything considered is at least 25% more that Amazon.

comments are more than welcome

Thanks

Check your RAM usage with windows task manager during mission. If DCS does not fill up your RAM completely after or during a more complex mission, you will not see any benefits from more RAM. If DCS creeps towards ~30 GB, but the whole system keeps being responsive when alt-tabbing and/or directly after closing DCS, you're probably still fine, but might see some minor improvments in certain cases. If however DCS takes ~30 GB and your whole computer gets less responsive when alt-tabbing, or when your computer takes a few seconds to be responsive again after DCS closes, you will most certainly see benefits with more ram.
Another indicator that you "need" more ram, would be that DCS performance gets worse, the longer you play. If you however see DCS perform badly in certain situation, while DCS RAM usage sits well below 30 GB then again RAM size is NOT the problem!

I would guess (but that's really just a guess) that for Singleplayer you should mostly be fine with 32 GB. It depends mostly on the complexity od the scenario. Only way to know for sure, is to check RAM usage yourself.

Edited October 24, 2023 by twistking

[draconus]

14 hours ago, cgjimeneza said:

I would consider getting a 3060 graphic card and leaving the 32 GB Ram

I'd go with this however you should first tell us what resolution you play at on your monitor.

[Scotch75]

I'm running i5-6600K CPU, 32GB DDR4 ram, DCS and saves on SSD, 3060 12GB, 2D TrackIR 5 on a 1080P 22" monitor. MT is unplayable no matter what settings I try (DLAA, DLSS, SSS on or off, CPU unparked etc.). When I run ST back on MSAA x4, all smooth again. Such a drastic difference.


Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

[Mike145]

I have a Ryzen 5, AMD RX590  with 8GB and 16gb of DDR4.

Love 2.9, I`m using TAA and saw an increase of FPS.  So much so that I now have shadows(low, was off) grass(was off) and now SSS.  The graphics look so much better and I`m loving the flying.  Yes there's a little blurring but only if I look for it.  Just had the motherboard replaced and I got 16GB due to limited funds, was worried it wasn't going to be enough but most I`ve seen used was 75% .

I mostly fly the UH1 and A4 and have no problems getting 70-90 FPS depending on the missions I`ve made.  Not too many other aircraft but enough to make it interesting.  I only fly single player, no interest in MP.

Christmas is approaching so maybe santa will bring some more  RAM.

[cgjimeneza]

On 10/24/2023 at 12:20 PM, twistking said:

Check your RAM usage with windows task manager during mission. If DCS does not fill up your RAM completely after or during a more complex mission, you will not see any benefits from more RAM. If DCS creeps towards ~30 GB, but the whole system keeps being responsive when alt-tabbing and/or directly after closing DCS, you're probably still fine, but might see some minor improvments in certain cases. If however DCS takes ~30 GB and your whole computer gets less responsive when alt-tabbing, or when your computer takes a few seconds to be responsive again after DCS closes, you will most certainly see benefits with more ram.
Another indicator that you "need" more ram, would be that DCS performance gets worse, the longer you play. If you however see DCS perform badly in certain situation, while DCS RAM usage sits well below 30 GB then again RAM size is NOT the problem!

I would guess (but that's really just a guess) that for Singleplayer you should mostly be fine with 32 GB. It depends mostly on the complexity od the scenario. Only way to know for sure, is to check RAM usage yourself.

 

I play 1920 x 1080 on a 27" Viewsonic (its the native resolution)... I have another 27" and a 12" hooked to the 1660Super but not running anything on them when I play