Poor performance with any setting. And request to developers.

[diveplane]

I just downloaded DCS World hoping to get better performance than on FC and DCS A-10. Unfortunately it seems nothing has changed.

 

I tried changing graphics settings from low to high, keeping textures always high and strangely I get similar performance no matter the settings. As in previous versions flying over any town or city is mission impossible getting less than 20 fps when I leave towns no more than 30. I know that DCS series are hardcore simulation but with my rig I was expecting at least 40 fps in medium settings.

 

I have latest drivers and I know my system is not the problem. That's for sure.

 

Having said that, I don't think I'll buy the next coming addon or any other DCS addon.

I really love the DCS series but I think overall performance is horrible and doesn't allow me to have a good simulation experience. I haven't been able to completely enjoy any of the DCS sims because having any kind of gameplay is almost impossible and after learning the flight systems of the A-10 I just quit playing it because of that.

 

I guess we pay for a software and that's all, if it doesn't work just shut my mouth up or upgrade computer.

 

For people like me having to upgrade my PC is just a luxury. If I just could enjoy the sims I love without having to ruin my precarious economy I'll appreciate it.

 

 

My Computer Specs:

 

- Quad Core 2 @2.50

- 4 GB RAM

- ATI 5770 1 GB

 

beta atm , later on comes performance tweaks.

[cichlidfan]

I have bought Lock on, Flaming Cliffs, Black Shark and DCS A-10C. During that time I have had different PCs and I have always had performance problems and never really been able to enjoy the game maxed out.

 

So the root of your complaint is that you cannot run the games maxed out without building a high end machine? :doh:

[Jona33]

Zoky, I routinely fly multiplayer on 7 FPS, yes that's 7. 45-50 is well beyond my reach. It's perfectly acceptable. If I can manage it why can't you?

 

@Cichlidfan, spot on.

[GGTharos]

... how do you live?

[jtmedina]

So the root of your complaint is that you cannot run the games maxed out without building a high end machine? :doh:

 

 

No, that's not true. I can play most of the games. And Lockon is one of the few I can not.

 

Graphically speaking, I don't think the REAL specs requirements of DCS are according with the quality you get. Yes it has deep flight sytems, but I don't think the poor performance has any thing to do with that

 

I have run the game from low to high, disabled services, background apps, updated drivers, any thing that you could think might be slowing down my PC. Nothing worked.

 

Seems somehow ED has been unable to improve performance, I guess it'd take too much time or maybe the tweaks required would have required to start the whole engine from scratch??.

 

Whatever is going on under the hood is giving people even with powerful systems low framerates. That's undeniable.

 

I have only two choices, not buy the next DCS that comes out or upgrade my PC and it's clear the second option wont' be possible any time soon.

 

 

This is simply fighting against a wall. Then they complain for piracy, my god.

[jtmedina]

... how do you live?

 

What?!

 

Are you asking that to me?

Edited June 6, 2012 by jtmedina

[cichlidfan]

This is simply fighting against a wall. Then they complain for piracy, my god.

 

What, when, where and how does piracy have anything to do with the fact that your machine is not running DCS products to your expectations?

[VAOZoky]

Zoky, I routinely fly multiplayer on 7 FPS, yes that's 7. 45-50 is well beyond my reach. It's perfectly acceptable. If I can manage it why can't you?

 

@Cichlidfan, spot on.

 

You didnt understand me well. I have that fps when i turn everything to low (usualy i fly with mix of low-medium-high with 2xAA). And all my previous posts in other topics about how u can gain significant fps by turning water to low arent true anymore. Last good version of DCS (performance wise) for me was 1.0.0.9. With it i got ~40fps and today with DCS:World i got ~25 at most with same settings.

[jtmedina]

What, when, where and how does piracy have anything to do with the fact that your machine is not running DCS products to your expectations?

 

Do you see any demo on their website?.

[GGTharos]

I see DCS: World. It's free, you could consider it a demo.

 

But let's say things like they are:

 

You need a minimum 3Ghz processor to enjoy the FC or DCS series, and now the minimums are growing slowly.

 

Right now you need a 3Ghz processor, Win 7 x64, and 6-8GB RAM.

 

Anything less, you can play, but you won't be getting a lot of performance. That's the price of progress.

[sobek]

Whatever is going on under the hood is giving people even with powerful systems low framerates. That's undeniable.

 

It's not only *not* undeniable, it's outright false. I have a high midrange system and can play it almost maxed out just fine. :huh:

[jtmedina]

I see DCS: World. It's free, you could consider it a demo.

 

But let's say things like they are:

 

You need a minimum 3Ghz processor to enjoy the FC or DCS series, and now the minimums are growing slowly.

 

Right now you need a 3Ghz processor, Win 7 x64, and 6-8GB RAM.

 

Anything less, you can play, but you won't be getting a lot of performance. That's the price of progress.

 

Ok, but it wont help to increase sales unless you people fix performance.

 

See what's on the website...

Recommended system requirements: Operating system 64-bit: Windows Vista and 7; Processor: CPU: Core 2 Duo E8400, AMD Phenom X3 8750 or better; Memory: 4GB; Hard disk space: 7 GB; Video: Shader 3.0 or better; 896MB NVIDIA GeForce GTX260 DirectX 9.0c or better; Sound: DirectX 9.0c - compatible; DirectX: 9.0C; requires internet activation.

 

Minimum system requirements: Operating system: Windows XP, Vista or 7; Processor: Core 2 Duo 2.0 GHz; Memory: 3 GB; Free hard disk space: 7 GB; Video: 512 MB RAM card, DirectX 9 - compatible; Sound: DirectX 9.0c - compatible; requires internet activation.

 

 

... how do you live?

 

That comment you made was in reference to me?.

Edited June 6, 2012 by jtmedina

[GGTharos]

No, the poster who considers 7FPS acceptable :)

[cichlidfan]

Do you see any demo on their website?.

 

Since when is a company required to provide a demo?

[GGTharos]

That is not a valid statement within the context of the discussion. Maybe it IS possible to increase the performance, maybe it is not. But even if it is, it won't help you. There are minimums below which things simply cannot be done.

 

Ok, but it wont help to increase sales unless you people fix performance.

[jtmedina]

That is not a valid statement within the context of the discussion. Maybe it IS possible to increase the performance, maybe it is not. But even if it is, it won't help you. There are minimums below which things simply cannot be done.

 

 

4 Cores running @2.50 and a ATI 5770 is below a minimum???!!. Seriously.

 

 

Recommended system requirements: Operating system 64-bit: Windows Vista and 7; Processor: CPU: Core 2 Duo E8400, AMD Phenom X3 8750 or better; Memory: 4GB; Hard disk space: 7 GB; Video: Shader 3.0 or better; 896MB NVIDIA GeForce GTX260 DirectX 9.0c or better; Sound: DirectX 9.0c - compatible; DirectX: 9.0C; requires internet activation.

 

Minimum system requirements: Operating system: Windows XP, Vista or 7; Processor: Core 2 Duo 2.0 GHz; Memory: 3 GB; Free hard disk space: 7 GB; Video: 512 MB RAM card, DirectX 9 - compatible; Sound: DirectX 9.0c - compatible; requires internet activation.

 

Seriously!!

 

My CPU is half as powerful as the i5 2500k. Ok it's not high end. But the graphical quality of DCS is not that high after all. The game is running using "brute force" and anyone with some knowledge should be able to see it.

[Eddie]

4 Cores running @2.50 and a ATI 5770 is below a minimum???!!. Seriously.

 

 

 

 

Seriously!!

 

Yes.

 

My CPU is half as powerful as the i5 2500k. Ok it's not high end. But the graphical quality of DCS is not that high after all. The game is running using "brute force" and anyone with some knowledge should be able to see it.

 

Graphics are a tiny part of DCS. The simulation itself, which is all processed by the CPU, is the main consumer of system resources.

[winz]

Graphically speaking, I don't think the REAL specs requirements of DCS are according with the quality you get. Yes it has deep flight sytems, but I don't think the poor performance has any thing to do with that

 

I have run the game from low to high, disabled services, background apps, updated drivers, any thing that you could think might be slowing down my PC. Nothing worked.

 

Seems somehow ED has been unable to improve performance, I guess it'd take too much time or maybe the tweaks required would have required to start the whole engine from scratch??.

 

Whatever is going on under the hood is giving people even with powerful systems low framerates. That's undeniable.

 

I have only two choices, not buy the next DCS that comes out or upgrade my PC and it's clear the second option wont' be possible any time soon.

 

 

This is simply fighting against a wall. Then they complain for piracy, my god.

Why do you think specs are only tied to graphics?

In-depth modeling of aerodynamic is very cpu intensive. Not to mention modeling the various systems and equipment + dozens of AI units (you know, things like pathfinding, are not-so trivial in a the huge enviroment of DCS).

Just because you don't see all the things that tick under the hood doesn't mean they don't have their costs. The more fidelity you want, the more you have to pay in terms of required CPU power, there is no magic way around it. And sims (since the dawn of gaming) allways required all the CPU power they could get.

Edited June 6, 2012 by winz

[sobek]

My CPU is half as powerful as the i5 2500k. Ok it's not high end. But the graphical quality of DCS is not that high after all. The game is running using "brute force" and anyone with some knowledge should be able to see it.

 

I don't think that that is the correct use for the term "brute force".

 

Besides, you can not compare the amount and texture quality of FPS foliage and scenery rendering to a sim that has to render a circle segment with 100km radius. That's not even the same ballpark. While it is true that certain features of DCS could be technically made to better spread load for parallel computing, the (quasi instant) development of said features would cost the customer (and the dev) both arms and legs.

[jtmedina]

Why do you think specs are only tied to graphics?

In-depth modeling of aerodynamic is very cpu intensive. Not to mention modeling the various systems and equipment + dozens of AI units (you know, things like pathfinding, are not-so trivial in a the huge enviroment of DCS).

Just because you don't see all the things that tick under the hood doesn't mean they don't have their costs. The more fidelity you want, the more you have to pay in terms of required CPU power, there is no magic way around it. And sims (since the dawn of gaming) allways required all the CPU power they could get.

 

Yes, I do understand all of that.

 

But I have tried making a mission with no AI, No planes in the air, no trees(yes to heard it right), changed affinity to 4, 3, 2 Cores!!, a flat dead landscape. No change in the framerate.

 

Removed most of the buildings(low settings) and when flying very low near any town, there is performance problems even when there are no buildings at all!!.

 

It's not just what you mention, there is something else in the code that is making the computer struggle almost all the time.

[jtmedina]

I don't think that that is the correct use for the term "brute force".

 

 

Didn't remember the proper English word.

 

While it is true that certain features of DCS could be technically made to better spread load for parallel computing, the (quasi instant) development of said features would cost the customer (and the dev) both arms and legs.

 

I was guessing it'd be that.

[winz]

Yes, I do understand all of that.

 

But I have tried making a mission with no AI, No planes in the air, no trees(yes to heard it right), changed affinity to 4, 3, 2 Cores!!, a flat dead landscape. No change in the framerate.

 

Removed most of the buildings(low settings) and when flying very low near any town, there is performance problems even when there are no buildings at all!!.

 

It's not just what you mention, there is something else in the code that is making the computer struggle almost all the time.

It's the simulation of the airframe + systems your system cannot handle. Most of the things you've done affect mainly GPU, not CPU.

There is no way to reduce simulation fidelity the same way you can reduce graphical fidelity. Your CPU either has the power to handle it or not. Your doesn't.

[Mohamengina]

wait for EDGE. Until then, buy an intel.

 

/thread.

[VAOZoky]

While i was sleeping i was dreaming of simple performance test for DCS (I know, I know, I'm crazy)*. Because Su25T has AFM in both FC2 and DCS:World we can compere fps on empty mision with no AI and no waypoints...only Su25T on some runway that didnt change model (like Gelendzik). This way we can see how much unoptimized/optimized DCS realy is. You need to turn HDR and some other stuff off before u do the test so that FC2 and DCS look same. I didnt test this yet because i just woke-up and had need to share this with you.

 

*I have phd in matematics and comuter science

[Pikey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pikey

Oh dear, I should have checked your history before I posted. Seems you have been having performance problems for more than two years on that hardware. http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?...&postcount=410

 

Performance problems in Lock On you say? Will try the demo and then buy it you say?

 

Considering the history of issues here and the help and advice previously you've been given, I'm wondering why you are posting?

 

PS Thats a rhetorical question.

You are very dishonest.

 

I quoted you and you call me dishonest? Are you for real? You've been told at least three times over two years that your clock speed is going to give you performance problems but you've done nothing about it and still moan.

 

By the way. These comments you just made were really, really nasty and rude.

I've not even started. You can do this by yourself.

 

Whatever is going on under the hood is giving people even with powerful systems low framerates. That's undeniable.

I deny it on a mid to low system. Have you complained to the manufacturer of your TV yet about its low frame rate?

 

Originally Posted by 159th_Viper

For what it's worth, your CPU is dated.

Really??....I already know it.

 

I'll wait until the final release to see what happens...

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=995952#post995952 dated 10-08-2010

 

No way I overclock my CPU. I can even play FSX almost maxed out there is no way this sim couldn't run properly on my PC. This is a 4 core CPU. There is no need to overclock it!!.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=995939#post995939

Yes there is.

 

You have no clue what you are talking about.

That makes two of us then.

 

Now do yourself a favour and take some well meant advice. Increase your clock speed. Failing that avoid complaining about the same stuff repeatedly.

 

PS you never mention your operating system by the way. Am hoping for you its Win7 64bit.