Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Short test for me yesterday - Clearly a lot of graphical performance problems for the corsair compared to other WWII modules.

 

Tested on the WWII Marianas map i had all my WWII prop planes as client on Saipan. Very poor VR performance there. However when i moved the planes to Tinian the performance was much better, though still not good.

 

Going to test on other maps later today

Posted

I did a performance test the other day. Here is a brief summary of my results. I will publish the full results later. 

  • Flying over Guam at 1500ft.
  • F4U mean 56 FPS, frame interval 18 ms
  • P-51 mean 64 FPS, frame interval 15.8 ms
  • Quantitative difference: 8 FPS and 2.2 ms frame interval in favor of the P-51.
  • Qualitative (subjective) difference, negligible as both were below the 72Hz headset refresh

I need to do more tests: both planes over Caucasus, Normandy and Syria.

Settings: VR with VD Godlike and no QVFR. DCS mainly on maximum; does not really matter as both were the same, but I'll post full details when I release the full results; I will also include results when using QVFR. 

PC specs: 9800x3d - rtx5080 FE - 64GB RAM 6000MHz - 2Tb NVME - (for posts before March 2025: 5800x3d - rtx 4070) - VR headsets Quest Pro (Jan 2024-present; Pico 4 March 2023 - March 2024; Rift s June 2020- present). Maps Afghanistan – Channel – Cold War Germany - Kola - Normandy 2 – Persian Gulf - Sinai - Syria - South Atlantic. Modules BF-109 - FW-190 A8 - F4U - F4E - F5 - F14 - F16 - F86 - I16 - Mig 15 - Mig 21 - Mosquito - P47 - P51 - Spitfire.

IMG_0114.jpeg

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...