It looks like it’s just a start, but I loved the approach here. hopefully he keeps improving this. So many hardware reviews are focused on games or racing sims, and DCS is a whole different beast. It’s great to have someone working on deciphering it.
Awesome vid!
My takeaways:
(And I am still very happy with my 5800X3D)
I am considering trading my 5900x for a 5800x3D, since my video workflow is much less intensive on this machine now… But honestly, if I’m going to spend money, might as well… Oh shoot.
The frametimes with the 9800X3D look much better than those of the 7800X3D and 5800X3D so if you are doing a completely new build anyway that looks like the best choice. As an AM4 upgrade however the 5800X3D looks like a fantastic choice if you can get your hands on one at a decent price. I wonder how the 5700X3D fares in comparison however because the 5800X3D isn’t widely available anymore.
Define “perform”. In many DCS MP missions, I can be using 60-70% of my 64GB RAM.
When I had 32GB, it was awful as the loading and stuttering hit almost constantly.
No, it won’t make your 50fps into 60fps, but it will keep your 50fps from dropping to 5 for a few seconds then going back to 50…40…50…40…50…
If all you do are smaller SP missions, you may not cross that line.
It’s near the end of the video, around 19:00
This is a plot of the distribution of frametimes, not an average FPS. In other words, it shows every stutter and every frame.
As for multiplayer missions being more taxing, check out 17m55s. He’s aware and is asking for short track files that can be used to benchmark heavy load missions.
F/A-18C, Syria, 10 minutes.
Send it to the channel name at G mail dot com
Problem with that is that you don’t really get a track that is useful for benchmarks within 10min of joining a server.
I think building a multiplayer mission with the sole purpose of using it to benchmark is the way to go here. You can put in air starts and invite people to participate and create carnage.
Yeah for single player 32GB is all you ever need but in heavy multiplayer scenarios people with only 32GB (or less) will struggle to maintain a stable frame rate. I experienced this myself and quite a few people in my squadron had the same experience. Going from 32GB to 64GB finally made large multiplayer missions playable.
Was that on the client side as well? (on the server side, absolutely, it makes a big difference)
Oh yes, I am talking purely client side here. Think of larger campaigns featuring an IADS, AI fighters and a (very) limited ground war. It all runs on our squadrons dedicated server but I have no idea what hardware that runs on. I just know we can do quite large scenarios without much of a problem. If you have only 32GB it will often stutter when you get into the action, with 64GB or more it runs quite well apart from the occasional hiccup.
Not to mention the loading time–from clicking join in the browser until you are sitting in the cockpit and the world is done being drawn around you–is HEAVILY affected by available RAM.
Drive speed matters there, too, but if it’s paging out RAM to a swapfile you get a big increase in load times. You also see the world around the cockpit, and even its textures itself, take a lot longer to come in.
Yes, if ALL you care about is FPS once you are in the cockpit and taxi and fly around, that’s true that the extra 32GB don’t make a significant difference. But that’s why I said define “perform” because he seems to be concentrating on just one part.
When you read a review of a restaurant, the food is a major part, yes. However, what about the ambience? The tables? The service? The experience getting said table or paying afterwards?
You can have awesome food but still be a lousy restaurant if the wait staff is rude or you’re stuck under a 50mph air vent or too close to a restroom with a door that doesn’t quite close all the way…
I prefer to get into the pit in less than 5 minutes from clicking Join, but I have been online with others who took a LOT longer to get in because they had less RAM.
