fixed Huge SP performance degradation with 2.9.7.58923 and 2.9.6.58056 compared to DCS 2.9.5.55918

[SharpeXB]

10 minutes ago, A Hamburgler said:

So with that aspect they might as well cancel the dynamic campaign. Two four ship flights and 10 ground units for a thrilling environment. 

As far as I know the DC does some sort of virtual modeling of the armies which aren’t seen. No game is going to run these at anything close to their real life numbers and actually model all of that. You gotta have realistic expectations here. DCS can do quite believably large missions though, look at the WWII bomber flights and such. 

Edited September 3, 2024 by SharpeXB

[av8orDave]

7 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

As far as I know the DC does some sort of virtual modeling of the armies which aren’t seen. No game is going to run these at anything close to their real life numbers and actually model all of that. You gotta have realistic expectations here. DCS can do quite believably large missions though, look at the WWII bomber flights and such. 

 

I know it has already been said, but I also think you're missing the point. Retribution ran just fine prior to the last update. Additionally, it isn't just Retribution that is currently screwed up, it is paid campaigns that have taken a performance hit.

Set Retribution aside for a moment; Prior to the last couple updates, I could run the paid First in Weasels Over Syria campaign with no issues with more than acceptable framerates. Now, it is a stuttery mess.

I run a Ryzen 9 7950X, RTX 4090, 64GB DDR5, and a Quest 3; my system shouldn't be the issue here. 

[SharpeXB]

2 minutes ago, av8orDave said:

I know it has already been said, but I also think you're missing the point. Retribution ran just fine prior to the last update. Additionally, it isn't just Retribution that is currently screwed up, it is paid campaigns that have taken a performance hit.

Set Retribution aside for a moment; Prior to the last couple updates, I could run the paid First in Weasels Over Syria campaign with no issues with more than acceptable framerates. Now, it is a stuttery mess.

I run a Ryzen 9 7950X, RTX 4090, 64GB DDR5, and a Quest 3; my system shouldn't be the issue here. 

Perhaps the campaign creators need to consider the evolving game demands. I haven’t had trouble with any DLC campaigns so far. And if the benchmark mission from the OP is supposed to be “demanding” there are other problems involved besides that mission.

You should realize that since you’re running VR you need to turn down the settings substantially. My guess is the DLC campaigns are designed around 2D. 

19 minutes ago, tmz said:

What’s your config for my information?

Specs are in my signature, you might need to enable that in the forum options to see it. 

[Darcaem]

Don't feed the troll

Enviado desde mi SM-A346B mediante Tapatalk

[av8orDave]

5 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Perhaps the campaign creators need to consider the evolving game demands. I haven’t had trouble with any DLC campaigns so far. And if the benchmark mission from the OP is supposed to be “demanding” there are other problems involved besides that mission.

You should realize that since you’re running VR you need to turn down the settings substantially. My guess is the DLC campaigns are designed around 2D. 

Specs are in my signature, you might need to enable that in the forum options to see it. 

And how would a campaign creator do that? They design the campaign to run in the environment it currently operates in, I assume. Should they dial the demands of their campaigns back to accommodate some future yet-to-be-determined performance-impacting change coming down the pipeline in some future update? What is your solution here?

I've run similar VR settings for a while. As the game changes, I should dial the settings back? That, or should ED optimize their code to accommodate their planned changes? 

While the campaigns may be designed around 2D, which I don't know to be factual but is your assumption, the campaign in question ran fine prior to the last update, so what does how it was designed have to do with anything?

Seems like a stretch, sir. 

[SharpeXB]

9 minutes ago, av8orDave said:

And how would a campaign creator do that? They design the campaign to run in the environment it currently operates in, I assume. Should they dial the demands of their campaigns back to accommodate some future yet-to-be-determined performance-impacting change coming down the pipeline in some future update? What is your solution here?

The campaigns are updated all the time. So yes it’s plausible that they can take performance changes into account. Some do have unit density options already. 

11 minutes ago, av8orDave said:

I've run similar VR settings for a while. As the game changes, I should dial the settings back?

If you’re running at the very limit of your system, yes. That’s just the fact of life in PC gaming. Most people have enough performance headroom that they don’t need to make constant adjustments like that but it becomes necessary every so often to upgrade your hardware or dial back settings. 

[Darcaem]

Guys, the issues have been acknowledge by ED. There is no point on discussing it. Yes, there are issues. In a 10-pages post of people sharing the very same problem and marked as "investigating" there is no point on saying "nah, it is your fault!! if works for me!!".

As we have said several times answering to this kind of posts: yes, we know we can downgrade and that it is normal that as the sim upgrades our systems do get obsolete. That is not the point of the thread, the point is there have been a huge performance drop. You can read the previous 10 pages and ED's posts acknoledging it and saying they are working on it if your are bored.

Just my 2 cents. Don't wanna see this thread closed due to non-sense off-topic discussions  

[SharpeXB]

3 minutes ago, Darcaem said:

there is no point on saying "nah, it is your fault!! if works for me!!"

I don’t mean to derail the thread, these things are important to look into. Sometimes it might help to know who isn’t affected as well as who is. 

[Canada_Moose]

You only have to see the thread distribution graphs and the frame time spikes to know something has dramatically changed in the code.

Along with this is the evidence from the previous campaigns that worked fine in terms of units.

There also hasn't been any major step forward in DCS visuals / graphics features that would warrant such a change in perf between 2.9.5 and 2.9.7.

My guess is that its part of the MT improvements project that has gone wrong along the way somewhere.

Im sure ED will get to the bottom of it. Its just how long it takes......

 

Edited September 3, 2024 by Canada_Moose

[nooneyouknow]

Not just a VR issue. Running a single monitor. Frames Have tanked since 2 updates ago. Really badly. 2 fresh installs, no mods, all that crap. Syria and Sinai are most impacted. Rotors are the worst as well. They "fixed" something or "improved" it. Fail. Used to run 60fps+ at 1440p constant (60hz monitor, couldn't care less about 120+), lucky to get 35-40 now. Same settings. Had to reduce resolution to 1969x1108 to even make it playable. Doesn't matter what my specs are, it was great, then it's not. It's an issue with DCS. No other programs on my machine have suffered, operating normally, except DCS.

[escaner]

ED MUST enable a roll back function on the LOAD page. It should not be up to us to have to puzzle for days to try and recover a broken Sim. Or the other option is to bring back OPEN BETA and STABLE. what ever they do, this mess needs fixing, for me DCS is in the Bin until it becomes playable again.

Go to the bin directory in your dcs installation and type: DCS_Updater.exe update 2.9.5
I am back at 2.9.5 because I was fed up with those constant freezes. And so are my friends who fly with me because I always serve the missions.
As a bonus, fps have also increased dramatically.

[Rene Coulon]

9 hours ago, escaner said:

Go to the bin directory in your dcs installation and type: DCS_Updater.exe update 2.9.5
I am back at 2.9.5 because I was fed up with those constant freezes. And so are my friends who fly with me because I always serve the missions.
As a bonus, fps have also increased dramatically.

Is that all we need to do ? Please give us a step for step....where is the bin directory ?

Thank you so much ...definately going back

 

[Rene Coulon]

13 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

As far as I know the DC does some sort of virtual modeling of the armies which aren’t seen. No game is going to run these at anything close to their real life numbers and actually model all of that. You gotta have realistic expectations here. DCS can do quite believably large missions though, look at the WWII bomber flights and such. 

 

I have gone from Bomber missions of 24 plus escorts....in total around 40 aircraft airborne with 1000 + units, do 20 aircraft airborne and 300 ground units....this is NOT PROGRESS from ED

[pixie]

10 hours ago, escaner said:

Go to the bin directory in your dcs installation and type: DCS_Updater.exe update 2.9.5
I am back at 2.9.5 because I was fed up with those constant freezes. And so are my friends who fly with me because I always serve the missions.
As a bonus, fps have also increased dramatically.

Thank you for the information. Does it work for Steam users as well ?

 

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, Rene Coulon said:

I have gone from Bomber missions of 24 plus escorts....in total around 40 aircraft airborne with 1000 + units, do 20 aircraft airborne and 300 ground units....this is NOT PROGRESS from ED

A real bombing mission in WWII might have 400 bombers, 300 escorts and 400 enemy fighters. A ground battle had several infantry and armored divisions of 14,000-15,000 troops on each side.
So we’re still not even close. Why worry? DCS can do missions with enough units to make them believable and interesting. 

[av8orDave]

13 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

A real bombing mission in WWII might have 400 bombers, 300 escorts and 400 enemy fighters. A ground battle had several infantry and armored divisions of 14,000-15,000 troops on each side.
So we’re still not even close. Why worry? DCS can do missions with enough units to make them believable and interesting. 

Here’s the simple answer: if you spawn into even just a scenario that will make the mission look “real”, it’ll be a stuttery mess. If using VR especially, you basically have to spawn into an empty, lifeless airfield or your framerates will be jumping all around. We’re talking basically ANY aircraft on the airfield. And it won’t matter what your graphics settings are. I have all the headroom in the world, but if I spawn onto Kandahar with the AH-64 or CH-47 and there are any other planes or choppers present, it’ll stutter. It is entirely unrelated to settings and entirely about CPU usage.

 

[SharpeXB]

9 minutes ago, av8orDave said:

Here’s the simple answer: if you spawn into even just a scenario that will make the mission look “real”, it’ll be a stuttery mess. If using VR especially, you basically have to spawn into an empty, lifeless airfield or your framerates will be jumping all around. We’re talking basically ANY aircraft on the airfield. And it won’t matter what your graphics settings are. I have all the headroom in the world, but if I spawn onto Kandahar with the AH-64 or CH-47 and there are any other planes or choppers present, it’ll stutter. It is entirely unrelated to settings and entirely about CPU usage.

I don’t experience that. In order to stay on topic you should post your specs, settings, logs, dxdiag, track etc. if not already done. FWIW the counter in the game apparently says I’m GPU limited, not CPU

Edited September 4, 2024 by SharpeXB

[Moezilla]

30 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I don’t experience that. In order to stay on topic you should post your logs, dxdiag, track etc. if not already done. FWIW the counter in the game apparently says I’m GPU limited, not CPU

Checked all the logs that were posted for specs:
 

tmz 		- R7-7800X3D 	64GB RAM 	4090 	Win1123H2
Kahless_uk 	- R7-5700X 	64GB RAM 	4070Ti 	Win1123H2
Rene Coulon 	- i7-8700K 	64GB RAM 	2080Ti 	Win1022H2
A Hamburgler 	- i7-10700K 	32GB RAM 	3090 	Win1123H2
DragonSoulkin 	- R5-3600XT 	64GB RAM 	3060 	Win1022H2
Semaphore 	- i9-14900K 	64GB RAM 	4090 	Win1123H2
Sveppur 	- R7-5800X3D 	64GB RAM 	4080 	Win1123H2
Bounti30 	- i9-9900K 	32GB RAM 	3090 	Win1022H2
SignorMagnifico - i7-14700K 	96GB RAM 	3080Ti 	Win1123H2
The_Nephilim 	- i7-12700K 	64GB RAM 	4070Ti 	Win1123H2
mobot 		- R7-5800X3D 	32GB RAM 	6750XT 	Win1123H2

Doesn't seem to be any pattern for AMD vs Intel, RAM amount, GPU vendor, or Windows version. There could be something in the dxdiags, if GPU drivers, BIOS, chipset drivers, etc were also looked at, but that's a bit much.

It's interesting that Semaphore with a similar spec to yours, was seeing issues, and had a Core Parking warning in their log. So it could come back to a core scheduling issue but I think this whole thread is in a holding pattern until the next patch.

[Bounti30]

14 hours ago, Darcaem said:

Guys, the issues have been acknowledge by ED. There is no point on discussing it. Yes, there are issues. In a 10-pages post of people sharing the very same problem and marked as "investigating" there is no point on saying "nah, it is your fault!! if works for me!!".

As we have said several times answering to this kind of posts: yes, we know we can downgrade and that it is normal that as the sim upgrades our systems do get obsolete. That is not the point of the thread, the point is there have been a huge performance drop. You can read the previous 10 pages and ED's posts acknoledging it and saying they are working on it if your are bored.

Just my 2 cents. Don't wanna see this thread closed due to non-sense off-topic discussions  

with the first point i agree with you.
But I would have preferred more communication from ED rather than a simple "investigating"
As for the fact that it is normal that as SIM  upgrades progress, our systems become obsolete
Personally I do not have the means to invest astronomicals sums in equipment in addition to the price of the different products

I think it would be wise to take a break from the race for new things and optimize what already exists
for my part I came back in 2.9.5.55918 and will not invest further without significant software improvements

[Rene Coulon]

Can someone please post a step for step procedure on exactly how to go back to 2.9.5.55981  I have looked at previous threads on this and they just dont work or make sence to me

Pretend I am almost PC illiterate, just so I dont create more carnage.

The short video, shows how at around the same time in a mission, the stuttering and FPS has increased . Prior to the last 2 upgrades at this point in the mission I would get tiny spikes and stutters, and an almost steady 100 to 110 FPS.

What does restore the FPS and reduce the stutters, is the Time frame...1/2 is much better, 1/4 is good, and 1/8th is perfect.

Something new has hurt my systems ability to cope with the load of DCS, and also Chaps with more updated CPUs and GPUs, so the drop is not Rig specific.

Thanx

[Pillowcat]

2.9.6, MT, W10, Ryzen 5900x 64G ram 4060ti 16Gb, tacview off, no mods, no VR, 'CPU Bound':

Spoiler

 

null

 

~75k of sync handlers is a bit hilarious imo. Next in frame time consuming to timers interthread mess are follows something about calculations with roads and terrain, but its not precise currently, maybe some misnamed anonymous functions in same module memory batch.

Spoiler

 

 

Edited September 4, 2024 by Pillowcat

[diego999]

[Moezilla]

9 minutes ago, Pillowcat said:

Next in frame time consuming to timers interthread mess are follows something about calculations with roads and terrain, but its not precise currently, maybe some misnamed anonymous functions in same module memory batch.

So pathfinding or LOS calculation, maybe? Both of which have constantly been changed and worked on since 2.9.0 due to bug reports from the community, and LOS/detection was specifically called out in the 2.9.6 changelog.

[SharpeXB]

4 minutes ago, diego999 said:

You’re hilarious. Again it’s actually helpful to know who’s not affected as well as who is. How am I getting 117FPS on that OP Scenic-Bench.miz when others are getting 25? @Pillowcat you’re getting 10-35FPS on that? It’s just an empty deck of the Supercarrier. 

[av8orDave]

11 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

You’re hilarious. Again it’s actually helpful to know who’s not affected as well as who is. How am I getting 117FPS on that OP Scenic-Bench.miz when others are getting 25? @Pillowcat you’re getting 10-35FPS on that? It’s just an empty deck of the Supercarrier. 

You're running a top of the line system that most playing the game don't have. Additionally, you don't appear to be running VR. Throw VR into the equation and your tune will probably change, even with your system.

Again, I run a Ryzen 9 7950X, 4090, and 64 DDR5, and DCS in VR with any reasonable number of units can bring my system to a crawl. Running on a monitor, few if any issues whatsoever.

I've posted my specs, logs, etc ad-nauseum over the years. I actually don't believe they are that helpful, to be honest. 

Edited September 4, 2024 by av8orDave