DCS isn’t performing as well as I would like either. At 1080p I was expecting this system to be bottlenecked by the refresh rate of my 32 inch TV/monitor (so 60 FPS), but that isn’t the case. I ran a benchmark using Rise of the Tomb Raider on max settings, and that does peg out at a solid 60 FPS, so I’m thinking this is something to do with the CPU side of things. I’ll keep digging.
Does your new computer have “turbo boost” software installed? If so, is it enabled?
It does have it installed, but it is not enabled.
Pity. I was hoping I had found your fix. I too have a new computer, bought back in November and to my dismay was not running DCS well. I had just about given up when I found a threat at ED Forums about something regarding Windows 10 and Intel Turbo Boost software. The advice given was to disable the turbo boost software. I figured what the heck so I tried it. For me, worked like a charm. DCS runs superbly now on my system never going below 60fps. I run DCS at a higher resolution than 1080 as well with all settings set to max so I’m quite happy with the results. Was hoping you’d tell me yes it was enabled and your problem would be fixed.
Sorry I couldn’t be of more help.
No worries, it was certainly worth mentioning. I think part of the problem was that my expectations were maybe a tad unrealistic, especially when it comes to VR using the Odyssey Plus headset. I just tweaked DCS back down to a more manageable level for VR and flying the Mirage instant action Takeoff mission, it was buttery smooth, even at low level over the nearby town. I certainly couldn’t get that level of smoothness with my old PC using the new headset. I’ll have to tweak the settings a bit more, but I’m feeling a little better about the new rig at this point.
2 Likes
So it’s DCS and X-Plane specific poor performance you think? Really weird. I was hoping for some unreal performance gains…
You and me both. I figured it would be at least a good leap forward straight out of the box.
Of course, with the O+ I’m pushing around more pixels than with the Rift. I haven’t installed Oculus Home yet. I should point out that the O+ gave me pretty poor performance on my old system, to the point that I went back to the Rift.
I’ll keep at it. I will download some mainstream games and see how they handle.
1 Like
Cough
Don’t know about XPlane but DCS is still likely sitting on a lot of old code - as it doesn’t appear to be utilising all of the cores in the same manner as modern games do. Reasons being it is ridiculously hard to change the core code - same as it is to just add majors things in that were not part of design.
DCS only seems to use one/two of the CPU logical cores so for now higher clock speed and not more cores is probably more beneficial.
Here is a snapshot of DCS over Las Vegas Nevada Spitfire 1080p - settings Over High
GPU 39%
VRAM 4.9 GB
FPS solid 60fps (VSync on)
Frame Time 16.7ms
Logical CPU core usage
CPU-12 ave 38%
CPU-10 ave 15%
others not doing much
RAM = 11.9GB
DCS is currently not working with a NVIDIA profile (for me) but that is one thing I use with BMS to smooth out performance.
Thanks again for the info. I’ll go take the Spitfire for a flight over Vegas and see how it fares in comparison with high settings.
So, the high ‘preset’ over Vegas gave me a rock solid 60 FPS on the free flight Instant Action mission.
Again, I should emphasize that the display I am using maxes out at 60 Hz, so I have no idea of what I would be getting with a newer monitor. I’m going to have to address that at some point soon I think. Still, 60 fps is very fluid.
6 Likes
Those pics are sweet! Makes a big difference.
1 Like
For a flight sim I’m pretty sure 60 Hz is more than enough - its really the mainstream gaming where the higher FPS starts to make a difference with gaming monitors that do G-Sync/Freesync etc that can help.
You should maintain a solid Frame rate and Frame time at 60…which is the important thing but you might find it cant maintain 90 hz with DCS currently in which case it would not be as smooth.
3 Likes
It isn’t a 2080Ti though…and that tiny box…probably not ideal for adding storage (?)
Cons:
-Win10 Home
-SSD is ridiculously small for this era. 256GB? Really? I got a PCIe SSD of that size for 60 bucks.
-“Up to 500W” PSU? No. 650W minimum if on the 20xx cards.
-The small size would make me worried about heat issues, to be honest.
-Mem speed of 2666MHz?! My 3 year old rig has 3000MHz capable RAM. “Up to 32GB, supports up to 64GB”? Seriously?
For $2,000, it’s way too much.
2 Likes
Haha…all good points. I’m just nursing a bad back from lugging my full tower up to my parents house this past week.
Thing is, for the price range, you can have a killer system for ~$1850 which also has a 650W PSU, a M.2 1TB SATA, and a 3TB platter drive. Don’t discount the AMD Ryzen CPUs; my understanding is that they’re currently beating the pants off of Intel’s offerings when it comes to gaming.
2 Likes
The other thing with a small case is the cooling side of things. My previous PC had a very nice, compact footprint, but I was definitely dealing with thermal throttling . My 1080 was getting up in the mid 80’s (ºC) and no room in the case to add fans, liquid cooling etc. I don’t think I’ll ever go back to a compact case again for that reason alone.
Silly Hardware question:
Back when I still built my PCs myself one of my rules was “don’t mix”.
Meaning if you had an Intel processor and chipset you better got the Nvidia card, and if you had an AMD processor you better got the ATI card because they just worked better together.
Is that still the case?
I am asking because I want to build two not too expensive PCs soon, for me and my brother. And in both cases I am thinking of a Ryzen instead of an i5 or i7, mainly because of the price.
And the CPU benchmarks pretty much scream AMD in the mid price sector. A Ryzen 2600X seems to outperform any i5 and some of the i7 as well.
…except in single thread rating that is. Which makes me wonder if it is worth it for DCSW…
But I am definitely not going for an AMD graphics card.
So… mix it or not?
Example configuration that I might build for myself. Comments?
this is 2000€, which happens to be the maximum I want to spend.
Goal is to get some sort of VR going in DCS. Not planning on playing on maximum settings.
- Core™ i5-9600K (this has six cores and good single core performance. I have never seen more than four or five cores in use while gaming so it might just do)
- Prime Z390-A
- Dark Rock 4, CPU-cooler (placeholder cooler, any other will do as I usually don’t overclock)
- 2x DIMM 16GB DDR4-3200 Kit
- GeForce RTX 2070 Dual V1
- 970 EVO 500 GB Solid State Drive
- V200 TG RGG Tower (placeholder case, I have one that I will probably use and I don’t care much about the case)
- STRAIGHT POWER 11 CM 750W
- Windows 10 Pro OEM version
- 3 year extended warranty
As for the Ryzen vs. i5: Look at this:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i5-9600K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-2700X-vs-Intel-i7-8700K/3337vs3238vs3098
And I just checked:
If I keep the above configuration except the following changes, it is 1680€ instead of 2000 which is significant, and might be just fine for my brother who doesn’t game that much. In fact the 2060 is probably still overkill, considering that I have experienced that you can fly DCS in VR on a 1060:
- AMD Ryzen 5 2600x
- ASUS PRIME X370-PRO Mainboard
- GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 2060 OC 6G
I could even drop 16 GB of the RAM to save another 120€ and get it to 1500€, but then I do think a lot of RAM is a good thing to have in any PC.
1 Like
Edit: I asked in another thread 