I need FPS

[xXNightEagleXx]

the only thing i don't understand is, when looking at my cpu its at about 45% usage, ram 30%, Gpu 55%, hdisk is almost using nothing and i only get 13 to 23 fps if i am lucky?

and after every patch i have to put al the modified backup files back in or i get only 8 fps.

 

The thing is simple....optimization. As a programmer i can tell you that there are so many levels in the architecture where the performance can be easily lost if the code is not properly.

Some people reported that SSD help to increase performance, if it so then this is clearly one of those points. A game like this should not rely on direct data access on hd during game but instead use very effective cache techniques. Since i cannot see the code it might do it but not in a efficiency way. Anyway there are others issues.

So in conclusion, it is hard to tell where they f^%$^$ up the engine but obviously it is an engine issue. The only thing that we can do it is to hope that the edge engine will be efficient because this one is not and there is no doubt about his.

 

What is your spec?

 

By the way i did a lot of test and i believe that an overall update should help FPS but when the engine is like this you have to be lucky to match the exactly game friendly configuration or else you might get low FPS even with a monster setup just like someone inside this forum.

[kk0425]

I'm not seeing much of an issue with FPS drops, but hopefully EDGE will fix a lot of performance issues. The code is still supporting 32 bit operating systems and I've heard somewhere that ED will be dropping support for them soon due to them not being able to provide enough memory.

[Slayer]

Using CPU % is kind of meaningless because DCS probably only uses 2 cores...So basically you end up with 2 cores maxed at 100% then the others are idle or being used by windows.

 

DCS is very heavily CPU bound. Low GPU usage can also be an indicator you can't feed it fast enough. In my experience after I hit between 4-4.4 ghz it "seems" ideal ,running faster doesn't seem to scale well, marginal FPS gain more power usage, higher temps etc...just not worth it.

 

Another thing with 3 screens is video memory. 2-3 gig is pretty much needed for running 3 screens. On my system at max settings DCS is using 2.5 GB with the Huey and the shooting range mission. If you run out of video memory it will start using system memory and your frames will go to garbage.

 

So bottom line invest in a good H100 or H50 CPU cooler and OC your CPU, even if you replace your CPU get a good cooler and OC. This would be first on my list. (does your board handle an I7 2700K? Go find a used one for cheap on EBAY)

 

Consider getting a GPU with 3-4GB video memory (if you want close to max detail). Adding another card will not let you use more video memory so consider your purchase carefully.

Edited May 22, 2013 by Slayer

[xXNightEagleXx]

If you like this sim try the stand alone versions 1.1.1.1. A10 and BS only.

I get my best FPS with then running 3 monitors. Any thing after 1.2.0 in world

has gotten worse for me. I lost 20 FSP aii around with new updates.

 

Thanks again for your tip. I just tried and you are totally right. Not only i have higher FPS but also more stable FPS so there is not the disturbing drop. Now the game is playable.

I guess i will stick with this version until things get better.

 

By the way this only proves what i'm saying. This game is bugged as hell, and while they try to improve with patch they only ended up with a worst version for some.

Edited May 22, 2013 by xXNightEagleXx

[xXNightEagleXx]

Using CPU % is kind of meaningless because DCS probably only uses 2 cores...So basically you end up with 2 cores maxed at 100% then the others are idle or being used by windows.

 

DCS is very heavily CPU bound. Low GPU usage can also be an indicator you can't feed it fast enough. In my experience after I hit between 4-4.4 ghz it "seems" ideal ,running faster doesn't seem to scale well, marginal FPS gain more power usage, higher temps etc...just not worth it.

 

Another thing with 3 screens is video memory. 2-3 gig is pretty much needed for running 3 screens. On my system at max settings DCS is using 2.5 GB with the Huey and the shooting range mission. If you run out of video memory it will start using system memory and your frames will go to garbage.

 

So bottom line invest in a good H100 or H50 CPU cooler and OC your CPU, even if you replace your CPU get a good cooler and OC. This would be first on my list. (does your board handle an I7 2700K? Go find a used one for cheap on EBAY)

 

Consider getting a GPU with 3-4GB video memory (if you want close to max detail). Adding another card will not let you use more video memory so consider your purchase carefully.

 

My GPU has 3 gb so i don't think that the problem is the GPU. The only possible increase COULD be the CPU but in a bugged game it might really not improve that much.

Thanks anyway.

[xXNightEagleXx]

If you like this sim try the stand alone versions 1.1.1.1. A10 and BS only.

I get my best FPS with then running 3 monitors. Any thing after 1.2.0 in world

has gotten worse for me. I lost 20 FSP aii around with new updates.

 

By seeing your specs I'm curious how does the game perform on your pc?

Edited May 22, 2013 by xXNightEagleXx

[Newspeedy]

did you gave this a try?

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1667399&postcount=1

[xXNightEagleXx]

did you gave this a try?

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1667399&postcount=1

 

Thanks! I tried this and honestly the gain was not that big. That said i found what was my performance killer.........

I blame myself but when i picked the monitor layout i chose the 3 screen option believing that was just a string and technically with no difference between 1 screen and 3 screen. I don't remember where but, maybe the manual, yesterday i read about 3 screen option allowed each screen to be rendered separately (like multiview in rfactor 2). In my experience all games that uses that option sees a huge FPS drop for my 7950 (except iracing). Once i switched to 1 screen all massive drop has gone (as expected).

The A10C standalone gives me about 40 FPS and the A10C world falls to 28 FPS but at least both are stable now.

Finally i can enjoy this game .

 

THANKS ALL FOR YOUR HELP.

Edited May 22, 2013 by xXNightEagleXx

[Robert1983NL]

Hey guys. I'm also in need of some better performance. I don't want to mess with config files and all. I have an outdated computer and will be upgrading in the very near future.

 

Right now I have:

CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 955

RAM: 2x2GB

GFX: HD5770

 

Next month I'll buy a HD7970. I was told that my processor wouldn't need an upgrade, is this old CPU still good enough? And how much improvement will RAM make? I'm looking at a GEIL 2x8GB DDR3 1333Mhz set that's only a little over €100, would that be a good upgrade for DCS?

[xXNightEagleXx]

Hey guys. I'm also in need of some better performance. I don't want to mess with config files and all. I have an outdated computer and will be upgrading in the very near future.

 

Right now I have:

CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 955

RAM: 2x2GB

GFX: HD5770

 

Next month I'll buy a HD7970. I was told that my processor wouldn't need an upgrade, is this old CPU still good enough? And how much improvement will RAM make? I'm looking at a GEIL 2x8GB DDR3 1333Mhz set that's only a little over €100, would that be a good upgrade for DCS?

 

1 screen or 3 screen?

[Robert1983NL]

1 screen now, but seriously looking for a 3 screen setup.

[chardly38]

By seeing your specs I'm curious how does the game perform on your pc?

 

Right now I have a10 standalone and 1.2.4 installed. Im running 3 1680x1050 monitors. 1.2.4 for me sucks. I have lost 20 FSP all around with this up date. Any explosion drops me to 20 or 30. When im at 30 and below I get a slide show. Im going to go back to 1.2.0. With standalone and 1.2.0 im getting 60 FSP at all times in the cockpit except for CBU 87. They have always been a problem. Look at the two screen shots. You can see a difference from 1.2.4 and 1.2.0. With 1.2.4 it looks foggy where 1.2.0 is clear. That tells me that DCS is changing alot of things in the sim for good or bad. My experience with any thing after 1.2.0 has not been good. I see alot of people say that you computer is a problem. I will disagree with that. I have great luck with the older versions. As much as I want the UH-1h I wont get it. I refuse to buy it knowing that the performance is not good. I truly believe that if only 10% to 20% of people have a FPS problem it wont get fixed. And to some people that would say just run one monitor with my IR tracker Im going to have to say ON. :thumbup: Multi monitors are becoming more popular.I love the A10 ever since I was a kid watching them fly over me in South Carolina. I tell people about this sim all the time. I hope DCS will get the FSP back to where they were in the older versions. To any one test it for your self. Try an older version.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?...99&postcount=1

These fixes to my understanding are files from BS2.

Edited May 27, 2013 by chardly38

[Slayer]

Honestly you really can't compare old versions to new versions. It seems ED is in a no win situation because on 1 hand you have people asking for DX11 on the other people with slightly older systems asking for the same performance across the board.

 

With DCSW you basically cannot just use the same settings as BS1 or A-10C. They have incrementally added a lot of stuff to this sim, some things not so easy to see , others very obvious.

 

Bottom line is you need to go through the steps as any other new sim or game and re tweak it to what your hardware can handle. Yes it is a continuation of older products BUT it IS entirely new so you cannot just copy paste and be good to go. It will not yield favorable results. There are new things like ground clutter , higher res objects, TSSSAA and nameless other things that make old settings invalid. Apples to oranges really.

 

It's like comparing FS 2004 to FSX or P3D. Yes you got 100 FPS in FS 2004 but in FSX only 30.....

 

3 monitors only adds to the confusion. If you go this route it's not plug and go. Be prepared to spend lots of time tweaking. 8-10 years on it's not new but it's still not mainstream.

[tietze]

I read a lot about this game inside this forum and it is pretty obvious that this game has a very bad engine. It is pretty bugged in term of optimization and every patch is like a roulette, it might be better or worst.

 

Yep in terms of bug squashing and performance patches seems to be a hit and miss for the moment.

 

That said people with NVIDIA GPUs are reporting higher FPS than AMD/Radeon users.

[chardly38]

I aslo noted that 1.2.0 is the best FSP I get and any thing after that has been down hill to me no matter what I do that has been suggest from the fourms. Any explosion creates FPS loss. Slide show. I will say that im not that great of a tweeker. I can only go by what others have done. Just gets a little frustrating when you spend alot of money on a sim that have up dates that make the game worse. I just wonder how many people at ED have a more than one monitor.

[Fuby]

I recently helped convince a friend to upgrade his graphics card to get better frame rates.. actually I did this for two friends.. Now before I mention chip sets cpus etc.. I been a strong AMD fan in most of my system builds. My current setup allows me to run DCS on average in the 50 fps area..and boost to the 70s.. that's an I5 2500k cpu and a Nvidia GTX670 with 2 gig memory. These items seem to be what everyone is focusing on..

 

but I have found after reading a lot of these forums and knowing both of the friends system.. something else should be counted and seems very important with this less than stellar optimized game.. The DISK ACCESS... I didn't or don't know if that is used a lot in DCS once mission is loaded.. but it points that way..

 

The only reason I went with intel this time was the raid caching of the z68 chipset. Allowing for a small SSD to cache the bigger HD systems drive.. and the bulldozer at that time.. was getting bad reviews for games.. which has changed.

 

Obviously AMD can do the same with just using a SSD as system and offloading games on a second storage device.. any system can do this..intel z68 just made it a simple choice for me at the time and it works.

 

When both friends load into a game with me..im already off flying before they even get into the game.. they also seem to have hiccups when you would assume that the game just cached to HD..

 

I would really like to know how many have bad FPS and I mean real huge drops that run SSD systems? I don't think anyone with SSD is complaining? I may have missed those postings.. Now I do still get the drops in the 30-20s if a ton of rockets are blowing up under me in say a Huey strafe of ground troops.. again.. poor game optimized.. but nothing that is not playable, just noticeable.

 

With regular benchmark programs the AMD guy with same graphics card and about same CPU speed gets the same or near same scores as I do.. the other guy with a NEW GTX780 card only beats me once the settings in the benchmark program are turned all up.. then he boosts by 10-15% of my scores. Obviously BOTH type CPU can handle games and the graphics cards.

 

Once we play DCS.. the GTX780 and the GTX670 AMD guys without SSD run in the single digits at times and can move into 40-50 fps at other times..

 

We can only "assume" the difference is with the SSD system and the disk access during game that DCS does? or does it?

 

 

That was snapped while a GTX780 guy had single digits.. the split there is just my second monitors background pic.. I run on one monitor at 1920 x1080 windowed.. other monitor is for TeamSpeak etc..

 

Just an observation... an opinion.. we all have them.. I think a lot of people are bumping their heads against a wall that will not move on systems that would be deemed proper in most other games... Always stay within 1-2 years of computer technology and you will always be a happy gamer.. it's just a fact of the changing times.. actually.. this has always been true for gamers..

Edited June 8, 2013 by Fuby