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

[Darcaem]

1 hour ago, The_Nephilim said:

Well it was a bit of a curiosity and I am not saying this is a fix for these issues but I ran the mission posted here with settings much like yours and got stutters in the DCS FPS Counter, I then checked and put my Terrain on medium and it seemed to have went away and the mission was smooth again..

 

So have you tried running the mission posted here with the F18 on the carrier? I had similar issues last night with MP missions where in themission the Frametimes were high. I put the Terrain on medium and it all went away..

YMMV but give it a shot, cant hurt at this point but it fixed it for me

Yeah, if you downgrade the graphics settings to a certain threshold depending on each one's hardware you can avoid stutters. That is not what we are reporting on this thread, what we are reporting is in fact that we have to downgrade the graphics settings a lot to play the very same mission with the very same quality we could play it before the update.

And obviously we do not have any 100% certainty here, but most of our tests tend to show this is directly related to the sim being unable to handle the same number of units than before.

Please do understand our frustration with posts of the type "it works for me, have you tried to downgrade?", yes, we have, but that is not what we are showcasting in this thread. Probably if we all buy a new rig with a state of the art hardware the stutter will be solve too, but what we are reporting is that while it is normal that the sim requires higher and newer hardware over time, we are experiencing a huge jump since the lasts updates.

EDIT: and also, what it is more worrysome for some people (myself included), awesome campaign missions such as the ones by Reflected are now not enjoyable due to this

Edited August 27, 2024 by Darcaem

[av8orDave]

1 hour ago, The_Nephilim said:

Well it was a bit of a curiosity and I am not saying this is a fix for these issues but I ran the mission posted here with settings much like yours and got stutters in the DCS FPS Counter, I then checked and put my Terrain on medium and it seemed to have went away and the mission was smooth again..

 

So have you tried running the mission posted here with the F18 on the carrier? I had similar issues last night with MP missions where in themission the Frametimes were high. I put the Terrain on medium and it all went away..

YMMV but give it a shot, cant hurt at this point but it fixed it for me

Yeah, I tried terrain set to medium (along with almost every other options tweak possible) to no avail. There are two issues being discussed, as far as I can tell:

1) Stuttering. This is new as of the last few updates and has nothing to do with anything, settings or otherwise, other than the fact that something was introduced during the last couple updates that prevents running smooth gameplay. I'd describe it as a microstutter.

2) A major decrease in FPS. This, to me, seems to be entirely related to the number of units. I can set the units to a min number and maintain 72 fps with high settings, or I can add a lot of units and cripple the FPS even with low settings. In my experience most of the DCS options hit the GPU... I personally am not GPU limited, so reducing the settings has no effect on the FPS when a high unit count is in play.

 

41 minutes ago, Darcaem said:

Yeah, if you downgrade the graphics settings to a certain threshold depending on each one's hardware you can avoid stutters. That is not what we are reporting on this thread, what we are reporting is in fact that we have to downgrade the graphics settings a lot to play the very same mission with the very same quality we could play it before the update.

And obviously we do not have any 100% certainty here, but most of our tests tend to show this is directly related to the sim being unable to handle the same number of units than before.

Please do understand our frustration with posts of the type "it works for me, have you tried to downgrade?", yes, we have, but that is not what we are showcasting in this thread. Probably if we all buy a new rig with a state of the art hardware the stutter will be solve too, but what we are reporting is that while it is normal that the sim requires higher and newer hardware over time, we are experiencing a huge jump since the lasts updates.

EDIT: and also, what it is more worrysome for some people (myself included), awesome campaign missions such as the ones by Reflected are now not enjoyable due to this

 

This 100% sums up where we are. A major frustration of mine is when people post that they are seeing a major FPS decrease when using missions with a large number of AI units where they used to have smooth framerates, and someone chimes in and says "my FPS is fine, post your settings, a track file, your DCS log, tell us what your system spec is, and give us a blood sample from your first born child" but when you ask them to post evidence that their FPS is "fine" in a very complex mission with high unit counts, it is radio silence. Very frustrating.

[av8orDave]

1 hour ago, Glide said:

Well, as the AI improves, it's going to need more resources, so yes, it's getting bigger and better.

Quadviews currently breaks OpenXR (in this sim and others) and it's no longer supported.  Neither is the OpenXR Toolkit supported, as the dev indicated.  However, it's a problem now because just removing Quadviews does not fix the issue.  You must remove it, restore defaults in OpenXR in Safe Mode, then disable the toolkit and remove it. 

DCS cannot be tangled up with that code anymore.  DCS works much better without it now.  I have my Crystal at full resolution with GPU bound at around 60fps.  As long as it's smooth, that frame rate is just fine for me. 

And the last bit here is maybe an example of where this thread gets confusing; your Crystal at full resolution gets a smooth 60 fps in what type of mission? Can you post a trackfile or screenshot showing high, smooth framerates while sitting in a newer module (say AH-64D, CH-47F, etc) at Nellis AFB Nevada surrounded by 30 or 40 other aircraft, or do you mean you are getting a smooth 60 fps alone in free flight over the Caucasus?

To be clear, I can get a rock-solid 72 fps in non-resource intensive (older) modules with very few AI assets in play over some maps; or I can cripple things with DCS Retribution, or particularly frustrating on some paid-DCS Third-Party Campaigns, where I used to be able to get smooth framerates.

Edited August 27, 2024 by av8orDave

[Glide]

7 minutes ago, av8orDave said:

what type of mission?

I have a variety of missions for testing, including busy apache battles.  I don't do the massive dynamic campaigns or multiplayer missions, so my needs are simpler.  I can tell when I've got a mission that's either too heavy with units or too heavy with smoke and particles.  The blue chevrons are about equaled by the number of red units that are on the board.  There's a busy air battle as well.  This is my busy testing mission, and it's pretty fun too.  The screenshot is life after quadviews. 

 

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3337508/

[av8orDave]

9 minutes ago, Glide said:

I have a variety of missions for testing, including busy apache battles.  I don't do the massive dynamic campaigns or multiplayer missions, so my needs are simpler.  I can tell when I've got a mission that's either too heavy with units or too heavy with smoke and particles.  The blue chevrons are about equaled by the number of red units that are on the board.  There's a busy air battle as well.  This is my busy testing mission, and it's pretty fun too.  The screenshot is life after quadviews. 

 

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3337508/

Thanks @Glide, I'll give your mission a try, both to gauge performance and for some fun.

[A Hamburgler]

15 minutes ago, Glide said:

I have a variety of missions for testing, including busy apache battles.  I don't do the massive dynamic campaigns or multiplayer missions, so my needs are simpler.  I can tell when I've got a mission that's either too heavy with units or too heavy with smoke and particles.  The blue chevrons are about equaled by the number of red units that are on the board.  There's a busy air battle as well.  This is my busy testing mission, and it's pretty fun too.  The screenshot is life after quadviews. 

 

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3337508/

The thread was created concerning "massive dynamic campaigns or multiplayer missions" not just a small FPS decrease. I play a complex mission in 2.9.5 with 160 FPS and that same mission runs in 2.9.7 with 9 FPS. Thats over a 100 FPS loss. That is what we are talking about here. Lowering settings or anything of that nature will not have you regain a 100 FPS. In small missions my game runs fine. 

[Glide]

12 minutes ago, A Hamburgler said:

The thread was created concerning "massive dynamic campaigns or multiplayer missions" not just a small FPS decrease.

Sorry, I jumped in mid stream.    Well, we can find the upper limits of the MT engine for the average user by testing a variety of workloads.  The thing is, when you pass that performance barrier, it really tips over.  So, if you are 100 units over the limit, you might not know.  I think some of the dynamic campaign generators can vary the number of units generated. 

[A Hamburgler]

14 minutes ago, Glide said:

Sorry, I jumped in mid stream.    Well, we can find the upper limits of the MT engine for the average user by testing a variety of workloads.  The thing is, when you pass that performance barrier, it really tips over.  So, if you are 100 units over the limit, you might not know.  I think some of the dynamic campaign generators can vary the number of units generated. 

All good but ya when you hit that barrier or threshold it never returns. Gone forever.

[CaptHawk]

1 hour ago, A Hamburgler said:

The thread was created concerning "massive dynamic campaigns or multiplayer missions" not just a small FPS decrease. I play a complex mission in 2.9.5 with 160 FPS and that same mission runs in 2.9.7 with 9 FPS. Thats over a 100 FPS loss. That is what we are talking about here. Lowering settings or anything of that nature will not have you regain a 100 FPS. In small missions my game runs fine. 

Have you tried Marianas? My Sinai, PG MP Campaigns fall apart after about 20 minutes in, where before they ran fine. 

Marianas on the other hand, no issues at all and it has 3 large Carrier Groups, Subs, 5 Airwings, CTLD, etc.

 

[The_Nephilim]

7 hours ago, Darcaem said:

Yeah, if you downgrade the graphics settings to a certain threshold depending on each one's hardware you can avoid stutters. That is not what we are reporting on this thread, what we are reporting is in fact that we have to downgrade the graphics settings a lot to play the very same mission with the very same quality we could play it before the update.

And obviously we do not have any 100% certainty here, but most of our tests tend to show this is directly related to the sim being unable to handle the same number of units than before.

Please do understand our frustration with posts of the type "it works for me, have you tried to downgrade?", yes, we have, but that is not what we are showcasting in this thread. Probably if we all buy a new rig with a state of the art hardware the stutter will be solve too, but what we are reporting is that while it is normal that the sim requires higher and newer hardware over time, we are experiencing a huge jump since the lasts updates.

EDIT: and also, what it is more worrysome for some people (myself included), awesome campaign missions such as the ones by Reflected are now not enjoyable due to this

 

well I am not trying to frustrate anybody with my posting just offering my suggestion on what I noticed. but if you post the mission you all say there is an issue with I would be glad to try it out and report my findings..

 

 

[av8orDave]

Well, just wanted to report for anyone with an AMD processor that is FPS-challenged, the reports of the increase in FPS for Ryzen processors with the Windows 11 24H2 preview build seem to be accurate at least in my case. I updated this evening and the performance increase in indeed noticeable, although I think ED still has quite a bit of work to do to make the game perform as it should.

The preview build is not a "beta" or anything like that for those wondering... it is more like an "imminent release" candidate.

[tmz]

8 hours ago, The_Nephilim said:

well I am not trying to frustrate anybody with my posting just offering my suggestion on what I noticed. but if you post the mission you all say there is an issue with I would be glad to try it out and report my findings..

 

 

Could you try to run the mission at the top of the thread?

Runs at my headset refresh rate 72FPS in 2.9.5 (more than 100 pancake), runs with 10-40 FPS Pancake or VR with 2.9.6+. On a 4090 + 7800X3D. I get the same perfs in VR and pancake, this is not a graphics problem. Same mission has planes litterally going backwards running on a server with 2.9.6+, no FPS issues then on the client but unplayable as well.

[Moezilla]

1 hour ago, tmz said:

Could you try to run the mission at the top of the thread?

Runs at my headset refresh rate 72FPS in 2.9.5 (more than 100 pancake), runs with 10-40 FPS Pancake or VR with 2.9.6+. On a 4090 + 7800X3D. I get the same perfs in VR and pancake, this is not a graphics problem. Same mission has planes litterally going backwards running on a server with 2.9.6+, no FPS issues then on the client but unplayable as well.

Yeah, your mission is a saw-tooth pattern between 6-60 FPS for me in SP, pancake, on 2.9.7.59263 (5800X3D/32GB RAM/6750XT) but when I hit Esc, pausing the simulation, the framerate immediately jumps to my cap of 95 and is flat. I opened the miz in the editor and, apart from the carrier group, there are no moving units that I could see, so it kinda points the finger at the target detection/LOS calculations that saw changes in 2.9.6, rather than route path-finding issues:



The log portion for the mission run has several ANTIFREEZE ENABLED lines and one SAME MODEL TIME entry:
null

2024-08-28 08:46:27.027 DEBUG   LuaGUI (Main): ----onSimulationResume---
2024-08-28 08:46:27.692 WARNING WORLD (Main): ModelTimeQuantizer: ANTIFREEZE ENABLED
2024-08-28 08:46:28.863 WARNING LOG (2964): 1 duplicate message(s) skipped.
2024-08-28 08:46:28.863 WARNING BACKENDCOMMON (15172): Need to reprocess [DDS] image '/textures/Deck_Normal.dds'. Reason: Conversion requires - expanded pixel size, setting alpha to known value. Source is an 8:8:8 (24bpp) format
2024-08-28 08:46:28.964 ERROR_ONCE DX11BACKEND (15172): texture 'wet_map_map' not found. Asked from ''
2024-08-28 08:46:29.446 WARNING WORLD (Main): ModelTimeQuantizer: ANTIFREEZE ENABLED
2024-08-28 08:46:29.902 ERROR_ONCE DX11BACKEND (7732): texture 'carrier_miniboss_roughmet' not found. Asked from ''
2024-08-28 08:46:30.763 WARNING WORLD (Main): ModelTimeQuantizer: ANTIFREEZE ENABLED
2024-08-28 08:46:34.469 WARNING LOG (2964): 2 duplicate message(s) skipped.
2024-08-28 08:46:34.469 WARNING BACKENDCOMMON (15172): Need to reprocess [DDS] image '/textures/Deck_Normal.dds'. Reason: Conversion requires - expanded pixel size, setting alpha to known value. Source is an 8:8:8 (24bpp) format
2024-08-28 08:46:34.938 WARNING WORLD (Main): ModelTimeQuantizer: ANTIFREEZE ENABLED
2024-08-28 08:46:34.942 WARNING WORLD (Main): ModelTimeQuantizer: SAME MODEL TIME
2024-08-28 08:46:36.488 WARNING WORLD (Main): ModelTimeQuantizer: ANTIFREEZE ENABLED
2024-08-28 08:47:41.096 WARNING LOG (2964): 20 duplicate message(s) skipped.
2024-08-28 08:47:41.096 INFO    EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41 (16476): SHM_TERRAIN_SHADOWMAP
2024-08-28 08:47:41.096 INFO    EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41 (16476):        SHM_TERRAIN_SHADOWMAP
2024-08-28 08:48:10.712 INFO    EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41 (16476):     surface5 gc() LOD 0 21 squares
2024-08-28 08:48:10.712 INFO    EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41 (16476):     surface5 gc() LOD 1 38 squares
2024-08-28 08:48:10.712 INFO    EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41 (16476):     surface5 gc() LOD 2 37 squares
2024-08-28 08:48:10.712 INFO    EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41 (16476):     surface5 gc() LOD 3 73 squares
2024-08-28 08:48:10.712 INFO    EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41 (16476): surface5 gc() 1.180100 ms
2024-08-28 08:48:12.100 INFO    EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41 (16476): SHM_TERRAIN_SHADOWMAP
2024-08-28 08:48:12.100 INFO    EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41 (16476):        SHM_TERRAIN_SHADOWMAP
2024-08-28 08:48:12.311 WARNING WORLD (Main): ModelTimeQuantizer: ANTIFREEZE ENABLED
2024-08-28 08:48:20.181 DEBUG   LuaGUI (Main): ----onSimulationPause---
2024-08-28 08:48:26.854 INFO    Dispatcher (Main): Stop
2024-08-28 08:48:27.110 DEBUG   LuaGUI (Main): ----onSimulationStop---    false    nil    nil
2024-08-28 08:48:27.110 DEBUG   LuaGUI (Main): ----DCS.isMultiplayer()---    false
2024-08-28 08:48:27.519 INFO    TERRAIN (Main): lSystem::CleanScenes()

[The_Nephilim]

8 hours ago, tmz said:

Could you try to run the mission at the top of the thread?

Runs at my headset refresh rate 72FPS in 2.9.5 (more than 100 pancake), runs with 10-40 FPS Pancake or VR with 2.9.6+. On a 4090 + 7800X3D. I get the same perfs in VR and pancake, this is not a graphics problem. Same mission has planes litterally going backwards running on a server with 2.9.6+, no FPS issues then on the client but unplayable as well.

Well I ran the mission found in the 1st post "Scenic Bench" and I was getting 30-55FPS but the Frametimes were well under 16.6ms so right there something is wierd.. here is my log and I need to update my sys specs I now have the following system:

 

1. 12700K @ 5GHZ.

2. MSI Pro Z790-P DDR4 Motherboard.

3. Win 11 Pro.

4. HP Reverb G2 VR Headset.

5. SoundBlaster Z

6. Buttkicker Gamer 2

 here is my log.

dcs.log

Edited August 28, 2024 by The_Nephilim

[Dustbag1969]

I am also seeing big performance drop since last update. I used to like playing Liberation dynamic campaign generator but since last update it is unplayable with frame rates of 30 to 40.

7800X3D

4080

32gb DDR6000

2tb M2 drive

Hp g2 reverb 

I have parked DCS for now as it is pretty much unplayable for me currently.

[BIGNEWY]

team are working on issues and tweaking, hopefully in the next patch we will see improvement

thank you 

[buceador]

@BIGNEWY I have asked this question before but haven't had any explanation, what is ANTIFREEZE ENABLED?  I had never seen it in my logs previous to the last couple of updates.

[BIGNEWY]

3 hours ago, buceador said:

@BIGNEWY I have asked this question before but haven't had any explanation, what is ANTIFREEZE ENABLED?  I had never seen it in my logs previous to the last couple of updates.

 

basically its letting you know the CPU maybe struggling with processing logic, maybe to many units in the mission or slow lua scripts ect creating a bottleneck for the CPU and DCS is doing its best to ensure the logic isnt broken.  

We are working on some optimisations and fps issues currently for the next patch which will hopefully help.

thank you 

[Canada_Moose]

Just reading this thread and noticing that quadviews and OpeXR toolkit should no longer be used in DCS?

Is this just one persons opinion or fact?

I use quadviews fixed in Quest 3 and seems to be fine.......

[BIGNEWY]

31 minutes ago, Canada_Moose said:

Just reading this thread and noticing that quadviews and OpeXR toolkit should no longer be used in DCS?

Is this just one persons opinion or fact?

I use quadviews fixed in Quest 3 and seems to be fine.......

Im using quadviews and eye tracking without any issues on the PIMAX. There was some quadview issues that were resolved in an earlier patch. 

thanks

[Moezilla]

6 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

basically its letting you know the CPU maybe struggling with processing logic, maybe to many units in the mission or slow lua scripts ect creating a bottleneck for the CPU and DCS is doing its best to ensure the logic isnt broken.  

We are working on some optimisations and fps issues currently for the next patch which will hopefully help.

thank you 

Using @tmz's miz from the first post I ran back-to-back tests in 2.9.5 and 2.9.7 with the same options.lua. The results were as described before with the 2.9.5 running as expected and spending plenty of time at the set fps cap of 95. The 2.9.7 run struggled to get out of single-digit fps. I then ran the test again with RTSS overlay running in order to use presentmon to gather frame metric data. I think the CPUBusy metric points to what many have already suggested, which is that whatever new "logic" was added in 2.9.6/2.9.7 has resulted in missions that were playable becoming completely CPU-bottlenecked and unplayable.

2.9.5

2.9.7

[Bounti30]

I admire this entire community who are trying to find solutions. On the other hand, I am tired of having software that is less and less efficient with each update.
And this despite the investment in ever more efficient equipment. DCS is the only program I have invested this much money into.
Because like many people I am someone who would have wanted to be a pilot.

but today I no longer enjoy flying.
Without radical change, I am sadly considering stopping.
What a waste

[av8orDave]

13 minutes ago, Bounti30 said:

I admire this entire community who are trying to find solutions. On the other hand, I am tired of having software that is less and less efficient with each update.
And this despite the investment in ever more efficient equipment. DCS is the only program I have invested this much money into.
Because like many people I am someone who would have wanted to be a pilot.

but today I no longer enjoy flying.
Without radical change, I am sadly considering stopping.
What a waste

It's a real bummer, indeed. All the tweaking and tuning wears you out. Stuff like "delete your FXO and Metashaders" after each update (which I think is a "wive's tale" anyway)... if it is that important, why doesn't the program do it itself during the update process? 

"Upload a trackfile" and "submit your dcs log"... for crying out loud, my computer is a top-end system, what the heck? The game ran almost fine until the last update. The only thing that changed was the software itself.

"Turn on vsync", "Turn off vsync", "Turn down the shadows setting", "turn textures to medium", "turn terrain textures to low", "reduce your PD", "Have you looked into core parking?"... It's exhausting. It really makes you question your own sanity.

[SharpeXB]

6 hours ago, av8orDave said:

Stuff like "delete your FXO and Metashaders" after each update (which I think is a "wive's tale" anyway)... if it is that important, why doesn't the program do it itself during the update process? 

I think that is a bit of misapplied trouble shooting. It might be necessary rarely but yeah if it was that important the program would do this automatically. 

6 hours ago, av8orDave said:

Upload a trackfile" and "submit your dcs log

Well they do need actual information like a log or track. Too many people posting “my game doesn’t work” is really useless. Not everyone has performance problems and this information is very much needed to pin down the causes user by user. 

6 hours ago, Bounti30 said:

I am tired of having software that is less and less efficient with each update.

I don’t mean to hijack this topic since there very well may be some bug here or optimization which can be done. But it’s the reality of PC games like this to grow in sophistication over the years and therefore also become more demanding. That’s just the fact of life in PC gaming. The machine I ran DCS on 10 years ago would not run it well today. Players want the game to do more and more with every improvement but that carries a cost. 

[av8orDave]

5 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I think that is a bit of misapplied trouble shooting. It might be necessary rarely but yeah if it was that important the program would do this automatically. 

Well they do need actual information like a log or track. Too many people posting “my game doesn’t work” is really useless. Not everyone has performance problems and this information is very much needed to pin down the causes user by user. 

I don’t mean to hijack this topic since there very well may be some bug here or optimization which can be done. But it’s the reality of PC games like this to grow in sophistication over the years and therefore also become more demanding. That’s just the fact of life in PC gaming. The machine I ran DCS on 10 years ago would not run it well today. Players want the game to do more and more with every improvement but that carries a cost. 

Yeah, I’m aware and agree with your points from a general sense. Heck, you even just restated my first point (which by the way is an “official” recommendation from the ED team, so yes, the program should do that automatically). 
 

But the point is… it is no longer an “open beta” branch. The game ran fine enough til the last update, and then bang, were trying to troubleshoot so that paid campaigns are playable. Ugh.