2022 vs 2024 setups

[kksnowbear]

1 hour ago, MJY65 said:

I don't live in a large city, so I'm not sure where I would find such an individual.  Since I'm not deep into the gaming community, my selection would be a total shot in the dark.  That's not to say I wouldn't seek out a custom build, but it probably is going to be someone recommended on this forum who may be located half a country away.

I don't mind learning new skills and can work with precision tools, but I simply lack the knowledge required to set something up from scratch.   I picture it turning into a $5,000 boat anchor due to some mismatch of components.  

Your situation is tricky, but not insurmountable.

I think the difference might be the support you get.  I can't speak for anyone else, but I have done "consults" where either I sold someone the guts or they bought their own, and I walked them through the build process "remotely".  Yes, this can take (and has taken) quite a bit of time - but that's where it matters that you're not working with someone who's doing it for profit.  I have built/shipped/worked with people all over the country in this fashion (CA, MO, NJ, FL, IN, OK, NC...yes, even MN).  The advantage is you control the selection of components entirely, as well as the build itself.   The disadvantage is that it can be a pain, and yes, things can go wrong.  Again, this largely depends on the support you get.

The fact is - as much as I may physically shudder at the thought - laypeople build their own computers all the time.  There's no licensing required, no permits needed, no regulation or oversight.  Just buy a box of parts and we're off to the races.  The (very) unfortunate reality is that it works in the overwhelming number of instances.  So, if you're anywhere near capable with precision tools, you're possibly not as ill-prepared as a lot of people who already did it.

Still...as mentioned above, given your circumstances, I'm afraid you can't rule out that a pre-built machine might be a more appropriate choice (and I'm choosing words very carefully here).  The advantage is it's about as straightforward as it gets: Order, open box, push button and (hopefully) click-click, whir-whir.  The disadvantages include that you're trusting low-level assembly labor (*very* low-level, trust me) and relinquish at least some control in terms of component selection.

Personally, the idea of a pre-built machine makes me cringe TBH...but it might be the 'lesser of evils' and that's a decision you'll have to make for yourself.  I would begrudgingly acknowledge it might be the only realistic choice in some cases - with the caveat that you get what you pay for (and I'm not talking about cost).

Me personally, if I'm anywhere near capable with building stuff and precision tools, I'd go for building myself over a prebuilt just about any day.  As was mentioned above, it seems your concerns are more about which components to choose - but I don't advocate letting someone else decide (prebuilt) just to avoid the effort involved in a careful selection process.  The control you sacrifice in quality isn't worth the effort you save in my opinion.

Edited October 15, 2024 by kksnowbear

[Aapje]

1 hour ago, MJY65 said:

I don't mind learning new skills and can work with precision tools, but I simply lack the knowledge required to set something up from scratch.   I picture it turning into a $5,000 boat anchor due to some mismatch of components.

It's not really that complicated to put a system together yourself and merely requires a Phillips screwdriver, sufficient patience and some Youtube video's or other guides. You can also just ask people whether parts work together (well) and the site pcpartpicker.com even tells you when the parts you select don't work together.

So pcpartpicker.com is a good place to start, also because it shows you what is popular. For example, the top two CPU coolers in its list are amazing value products that are perfect for most sensible builds.

Note that it's generally not that hard to find compatible components, and the more common mistakes are creating an unbalanced system, or simply spending way too much money on certain components. For example, you can spend a lot on very expensive motherboards that will not make your system any faster or noticably better than a much cheaper motherboard.

The biggest risk to self-building other than dropping stuff is that you don't have spare components to test with, so if you have faulty components, it can be hard to detect the cause in some cases. But faulty components are fairly rare and most of the time you can still figure out the cause. And you generally save so much money that even buying an extra component in rare cases still keeps you ahead financially.

Edited October 15, 2024 by Aapje

[kksnowbear]

Yeah...I just looked at prices on the Corsair prebuilts...damn near fell outta the chair (after I crapped my pants...).

Wow.  The *lowest* price I saw for a system with a 4090 was $3700.  Pay taxes on that where I live it's damn near $4000 (and our tax rate here is only 6%...MN can go as high as $4025).  Holy mother of pearl.  (And it's a 13900K, that has 64G RAM that's 5600MT/s...and only 2TB storage.  For that price, these are not specs to brag about TBH).

And, unless I'm mistaken, Corsair doesn't actually make (or even rebrand) motherboards or graphics cards...so they can cram whatever they want in there.  This is common among prebults, and exactly what I meant about not having control over component selection.

You could do much (much) better for that kind of money, I am absolutely certain.

It does demonstrate exactly what I said earlier, though:  If you get something that's built with decent quality parts, then the price isn't going to be all that great.  And this actually appears to be neither a great price nor control over the key parts being used.

So...worst-case cost and *still* lacking control over exact components used?  Can't say I would recommend that.

Edited October 15, 2024 by kksnowbear

[MJY65]

PC Partpicker looks like a good resource for someone like me if you guys think it is reputable information.  Even their "glorious" gaming set up is significantly cheaper than prebuilt.   Is there anything DCS specific that you would upgrade or change from their recommendation?

https://pcpartpicker.com/guide/cwv6Mp/glorious-intel-gamingstreaming-build

[SharpeXB]

24 minutes ago, Aapje said:

It's not really that complicated to put a system together yourself and merely requires a Phillips screwdriver, sufficient patience and some Youtube video's or other guides.

That’s a vast understatement

Seriously guys, I did get the impression that the OP is totally new to this in which case dumping $5,000 worth of computer parts on the dining table and giving him a screwdriver may not be the best option. 

[kksnowbear]

Just be really (really) careful with PCPartPicker...they are motivated by click-through revenue, and don't always recommend the best components, price, or value.

[LucShep]

Yes, the premium prebuilt systems by CORSAIR are very expensive (too expensive IMO), because they know they have direct advantage over most (if not all) in the market.
Yes, they don't make the CPUs, GPUs and motherboards, but they make everything else, and are good at it. That's another advantage for the warranty/assistance as well. 
Considering all factors (the market and competition) they have their reason to charge such a huge premium.
How much that is really worth is debatable, I agree. But then not everyone is into PC hardware, or has the will or desire to go and find their way into it, so there is that...

FWIW, other good alternatives to get a premium (custom) prebuilt PC in the US are:

•  https://www.pcspecialist.pt/
   
• https://www.cyberpowerpc.com/
   

Edited October 15, 2024 by LucShep

[kksnowbear]

Can't speak for anyone else, but I didn't advocate "...dumping $5000 worth of computer parts on the dining table and giving him a screwdriver..."

I specifically said that the support you retain makes the difference.  Buying parts alone obviously secures zero support and expertise.

I also didn't say I recommended a total DIY build.  I said laypeople do it all the time, as much as I cringe at the idea.

Edited October 16, 2024 by kksnowbear

[Aapje]

1 hour ago, MJY65 said:

PC Partpicker looks like a good resource for someone like me if you guys think it is reputable information.  Even their "glorious" gaming set up is significantly cheaper than prebuilt.   Is there anything DCS specific that you would upgrade or change from their recommendation?

https://pcpartpicker.com/guide/cwv6Mp/glorious-intel-gamingstreaming-build

Like I said before, AMD is the best for gaming right now and provides the best upgrade path in the future. This is roughly what I would suggest for a top tier DCS VR gaming build:

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/MGVmdH

Except that I would replace the 7800X3D with the 9800X3D which should come later this month, and the 4090 with a 5080 or 5090, if you are willing to wait until early next year. Going with the 5080 should probably cut the cost of the build by around $1000, for very similar performance. And the 5090 should be considerably faster.

For the components, I didn't optimize for value, but went with the better components even if it cost a bit more, when you actually get a meaningful improvement for that extra money. I chose lots of RAM, because DCS likes that. And a 4 TB drive should provide plenty of space to start with, and the motherboard has room for 3 more (slower) storage drives, so plenty of room to expand the storage.

For the case, it is a matter of taste whether you want the one with a glass side panel or a closed side panel.

And then pair it with a Pimax Crystal Light.

So all in with the headset that should come to around $4k if you wait until early next year and go for a 5080, or more like $5k if you get a 9800X3D/4090 or 9800X3D/5090 setup. Of course, getting it build would add the builders fees to the price, which can be considerable.

Edited October 15, 2024 by Aapje

[BitMaster]

1: Don't buy pre-built unless you can select each and every screw they use or you get screwed, matter of fact.

2: Any effort you spend in educating yourself during this process will payback in the future many times over.

3: You aren't the first one this forum convinces to dare the forum-assisted DIY project.

 

Many forum members have great advice ( as seen above ) and should have said enough meanwhile why to avoid the pre-built PC.

 

[SharpeXB]

49 minutes ago, BitMaster said:

Don't buy pre-built unless you can select each and every screw they use or you get screwed

Most any custom build PC vendor will allow you to select these. That’s the trouble with using the term “pre-built”. That could mean anything from a PC off the shelf of an electronics store where you indeed can’t select this to a premium custom build where you can. Trying to build a PC yourself is not a good choice for many people and there are lots of very capable companies which can provide this service. 

Edited October 16, 2024 by SharpeXB

[kksnowbear]

There is *zero* confusion about the term "prebuilt".  I already outlined this earlier.  Most people don't have any difficulty understanding it.

I'd really like to see a prebuilt vendor who allows a customer to specify every part of a build.  I've never seen one, although I'd have to admit I haven't spent a lot of time considering prebuilt vendors to begin with.

By all means, enlighten me - but be aware, allowing a customer to do things like pick "4090" from a drop down list of the GPUs they offer *is not* the same as allowing the customer to specify all the internal components.  Not by a mile.  These vendors won't do this because if they do, they can't make money by using things like off-brand power supplies and drives, feature-stripped motherboards, or the worst "4090" ever designed lol

However, even if there *is* such a thing, as I've already said, any advantage gained is going to be completely offset by cost that can easily approach *double* what a comparable machine can be built for. 

And even then, never mind the parts used, there is the matter of build quality, which I do have extensive, first hand experience with - and it's generally lacking, in my experience.  Others in this thread seem to echo that experience as well.

Again, if there's absolutely no other choice, sure.  But accept that you'll be paying more, for both parts and labor that are not necessarily consistent with the higher price.

Edited October 16, 2024 by kksnowbear

[Nightdare]

On 10/13/2024 at 1:20 AM, SharpeXB said:

For VR you would need to buy an extremely expensive PC and have to be satisfied with mediocre performance and constant tweaking. Such a machine would run the game flawlessly in 2D. 

 

Agree with the latter, disagree with the former

 

Yes, pancake mode will let you get equal performance at 1/3rd of the specs VR needs (and admittedly, VR can't reach max performance with DCS with current tech)

 

But to claim you need an above average system with constant dicking around in the settings to enjoy decent VR performance is untrue

my 13600k with 3060ti was as mid-tier as it could get, but did pretty well all said and done

No, it didn't have the pancake fidelity, and 45-ish FPS in MP was about the average performance, but I most definitely wasn't playing Doom on a 386sx, or constantly diving into settings to squeeze out that 1 extra FPS

An extremely expensive system would run VR well beyond "mediocre" performance without constant tweaking, dial in what works, set and forget, enjoy 75+ FPS and quality eye candy

 

 

[SharpeXB]

46 minutes ago, Nightdare said:

But to claim you need an above average system with constant dicking around in the settings to enjoy decent VR performance is untrue

That’s not the impression I get from seeing the constant posts about this stuff. The whole VR section looks like one big troubleshooting thread. It’s probably due to the fact that many VR players seem to be running the game at the very limit of their hardware and therefore feel every bump in the road. It’s important to recognize that the higher graphic settings in this game were really not intended for 3D. The trouble is that VR players can see those in the game and try running them only to be frustrated and not willing to simply turn them down. 

46 minutes ago, Nightdare said:

An extremely expensive system would run VR well beyond "mediocre" performance without constant tweaking

It’s possible to build a PC that can easily max out all the settings in DCS. I don’t think any amount of money can do that for VR

Edited October 16, 2024 by SharpeXB

[Nightdare]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

That’s not the impression I get from seeing the constant posts about this stuff. The whole VR section looks like one big troubleshooting thread.

No, but there is an added level of complexity attached

It wasn't too long ago that a number more options were added to DCS visual settings

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

It’s probably due to the fact that many VR players seem to be running the game at the very limit of their hardware and therefore feel every bump in the road. It’s important to recognize that the higher graphic settings in this game were really not intended for 3D. The trouble is that VR players can see those in the game and try running them only to be frustrated and not willing to simply turn them down. 

Or simply the old fashioned min/maxing game guys with hardware always play: try to get the most out of your system

Don't tell me pancake users don't do this?

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

It’s possible to build a PC that can easily max out all the settings in DCS. I don’t think any amount of money can do that for VR

Not yet indeed, I already stated current VR tech is too much to run at max with current hardware

[SharpeXB]

1 minute ago, Nightdare said:

Or simply the old fashioned min/maxing game guys with hardware always play: try to get the most out of your system

Don't tell me pancake users don't do this?

Yeah but with a strong enough system there’s no need to fiddle with settings. Just max everything and game on. And since games like this one are designed primarily around 2D it’s just not as much of a stretch.

3 minutes ago, Nightdare said:

Not yet indeed, I already stated current VR tech is too much to run at max with current hardware

The thing is it’s a moving target, games only ever evolve to demand more and more. So there will never be a time when VR “catches up”. Simple math says it’s always going to be more demanding to run VR vs 2D. 

[Nightdare]

53 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Yeah but with a strong enough system there’s no need to fiddle with settings. Just max everything and game on. And since games like this one are designed primarily around 2D it’s just not as much of a stretch.

Really? Try playing Cyberpunk at full fidelity (IOW: no Downsampling or Compensating with DLSS or FSR)

53 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

The thing is it’s a moving target, games only ever evolve to demand more and more. So there will never be a time when VR “catches up”.

No, games will eventually run into an endzone where they reached the limit of realism (or at least a level where diminishing returns become too great)

53 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Simple math says it’s always going to be more demanding to run VR vs 2D. 

Yes, but VR is the endzone anyway

 

[SharpeXB]

15 minutes ago, Nightdare said:

No, games will eventually run into an endzone where they reached the limit of realism (or at least a level where diminishing returns become too great)

Sure, in the fantastical long term no more improvement will be possible since graphics will be indistinguishable from reality. That’s very far away and not in the foreseeable future. 

[Dragon1-1]

3 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

That’s very far away and not in the foreseeable future. 

https://store.steampowered.com/app/2406770/Bodycam/
On the software side, UE5 is getting there. VR tech is not quite there yet, certainly not running displays with resolution matching that of a human eye, but this is within reach. In fact, apparently headsets are closing in on that. Pimax is working on one with a 6K display for each eye. It'll probably be out of most peoples' price range, but this could very well be the point where you start seeing diminishing returns.

I believe we'll see that endzone within our lifetime. Note that Bodycam is apparently playable on a midrange gaming rig, so this level of photorealistic rendering is thanks to advanced technologies, not brute force. If you can build a rig that can push that kind of graphics in 2x6K, I think you could make something that's very near to being indistinguishable from reality.

Now, for DCS, its rendering technology is somewhat behind UE5, to say the least, and it's using DX11 which is very inefficient in VR, so it'll take some more time. I hope it'll happen eventually, though.

[SharpeXB]

Just now, Dragon1-1 said:

On the software side, UE5 is getting there.

Oh yeah there are game graphics approaching that now. But then throw in making everything destructible and make that a world the size of DCS with AI you can talk to and that all have advanced flight models and so on Not quite there yet…

[Dragon1-1]

31 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Not quite there yet…

Not yet, but then, nobody has tried yet. Also note, the things you are describing are all different aspects of the game. Talking AI? BeyondATC has you covered (in the civilian sim, for ATC only, and for no small amount of money), and LLMs in general have already made it possible. Realistic destructibility is hard, but it's been done, too (doesn't help that, as RF: Guerilla devs found out, if you make physics realistic enough, you'll need to use real engineering to keep your buildings from collapsing). Putting that into a big world is just a matter of properly streaming everything, so that it's not all loaded at the same time. Flight models are probably the hardest part, and that will always require powerful hardware. However, let's wait for GFM, maybe it'll be good enough as to be indistinguishable in hands of the AI, while not bogging things down to much. Honestly, the only thing I can't see a near term solution for is wake turbulence from large bomber formations, and turbulence in general, since that is fluid dynamics, and those require some nasty maths that are very hard to optimize.

Either way, the pieces all exist, they "just" need to be put together. Also, there's a flight sim being developed for professional users that works on UE5. All the tech that Bodycam uses will be available to them, as well. Since they are doing things from scratch, they'll be free from technical debt that bogs down DCS in many areas, and being professional software, it might be optimized for workstation CPUs, and even if not, they could still specify top dollar hardware. They probably won't have talking AI, because in a government setting it's easier to put humans in every role, but what you are describing might very well exist in a few years.

The big problem with such a monumental project is less about the tech, and more about the sheer scale of dev resources you'd need to put something like that out. Plus, you need to actually want photorealistic, which many devs don't. Bodycam deliberately went for something that could (and probably will, given that the press occasionally put up ArmA2 screenshots as real pictures) be mistaken for, well, bodycam footage. We'll see where we'll be in, say, five years, but unless someone can get LLMs to do 3D modeling, texturing and rigging for games (highly unlikely given how complex this is), huge worlds rendered in photorealistic detail will likely remain the domain of AAA studios, even when the tech to render them as such becomes commonplace.

Edited October 16, 2024 by Dragon1-1

[Nightdare]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

Sure, in the fantastical long term no more improvement will be possible since graphics will be indistinguishable from reality. That’s very far away and not in the foreseeable future. 

 

I'm just a little too young to have witnessed this release 52 years ago:

 

 

 

Imagining further game evolution, I dare not even try

 

 

 

[SharpeXB]

2 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Not yet, but then, nobody has tried yet.

We are far from the point where games are indistinguishable from reality. Unless that’s happened already and we’re in one now

[Slippa]

 We just might be Sharpe?

I’m old enough to remember pong on the Binatone. It was a few years old by the time I got near one but we were still amazed with it.

Mad to think where we are now with it let alone where it’s headed.

[waterman]

Back in 1984 i programmed a Train Simulator on the Sinclair spectrum 48k of Ram

Even back in 1984 My Train Wheels Rotated !

These 2024 DCS programmers could learn a few things from those guys about being efficient about memory usage and a few other things.