Roll Back to DCS 1.5 am I alone?

Well I have tried everything possible to get my old Dell XPS quad core 8GB Ram, GTX 750. To run the 2.0 version but I don't think my resources have the horsepower to run 2.0 new version. It will kinda run single player but no way on multiplayer.

It ran 1.5 perfectly and had many hours of enjoyment but the new version it wont have anything to do with it. Every other program I use and I use many, my pc handles fine with the one exception of World 2.0.

Therefore i can't justify upgrading to a new pc just to play a flight sim. I must not be the only one? My question is, am I going to have any problems going back to the good old 1.5 version and am I going to find any other players to fly with if I do?

Just a poor boy that likes to fly.

Thanks

Fly

DCS World 2.5 is, quite simply, the most demanding video game available. Bar none.

That means 4.0+ GHz processor (i3, i5, i7, i9, i37.28675, it doesn't matter), 16 GB of system memory, and a GTX 1080 Ti.

Less than that, it might run pretty well--just not nearly as well as any other game on a much lesser system. It's not because of poor optimization, or an outdated graphics engine, or poor this or neglected that--it just means DCS 2.5 is demanding as all hell on PC hardware. I have a good, but dated, system, and DCS 2.5 runs pretty decently most of the time, barring long-time oversights (the classic stutter-on-weapon-hit, ejection, and crash).

Any other game under the sun? No problem at all.

If 1.5 works great for you, that's awesome. Enjoy :)

AD

DCS World 2.5 is, quite simply, the most demanding video game available. Bar none.

This is probably the most untrue statement I have seen in a while.

This is probably the most untrue statement I have seen in a while.

Yet you fail to mention even a single game more demanding :D

Thanks for confirming my suspicions I have to agree. I'm sure there are a few more demanding but I'm not aware of them. I can do video editing/compressing, programing visual studio and everything else but not 2.0. And I only know one other person that has a modern computer so I think they cut a lot of people out when they went to the max. Most developers try to develop to the most common denominator for maximum number of players over max quality. Maybe someday the rest of us will catch up. Personally I had no problems with 1.5 was satisfying for me. But I put gameplay over graphics and eye candy.

I'm keeping my 1.58 install for VR once i make a couple of pc upgrades . 1070 on the way , a 7700k next spring , and i'm ready for the Rift . Doubt I'll ever be able to VR in 2.5 . Interestingly most super-VR-rigs videos I've seen on you tube have the graphics settings turned down so low , 1.5 looks better ! Gonna hurt not having the Hornet tho :(

This is probably the most untrue statement I have seen in a while.

Exactly this. I have a number of games that are more demanding than DCS World 2.0 installed on my PC at this exact moment. One of them is even a hugely popular AAA title released a couple of weeks ago that I won't mention by name, but even though it's playable on my PC it actually runs much worse than DCS World.

I'm keeping my 1.58 install for VR once i make a couple of pc upgrades . 1070 on the way , a 6700k next spring , and i'm ready for the Rift . Doubt I'll ever be able to VR in 2.5 . Interestingly most super-VR-rigs videos I've seen on you tube have the graphics settings turned down so low , 1.5 looks better ! Gonna hurt not having the Hornet tho :(

2.5 will run much better in VR than 1.58, they have made some advances in the VR integration since then.

2.5 will run much better in VR than 1.58, they have made some advances in the VR integration since then.

Ouch ! That hurt....thanks , though . Guess i'll haveta come up with a plan B .

This is not true. Even tho around 1.5.5 I find best, 1.5.8 I could still run pretty decent with Oculus and gtx970. After 2.5 it was an agony and I had to buy 1080ti.

I am disappointed from 2.5 not only by the performance hit but also from the majority of the lighting and cockpit textures bugs the new rendering system came with. And it doesn't seem like ED bothers too much fixing them.

DCS 2.5 is a buggy resource intensive mess, 1.5.x was much more stable and playable.

I'm keeping my 1.58 install for VR once i make a couple of pc upgrades . 1070 on the way , a 6700k next spring , and i'm ready for the Rift . Doubt I'll ever be able to VR in 2.5 . Interestingly most super-VR-rigs videos I've seen on you tube have the graphics settings turned down so low , 1.5 looks better ! Gonna hurt not having the Hornet tho :(

I have a laptop with a 2.2ghz I7 and a gtx 1060 and it does alright on 2.5 in VR for me. I have the settings turned down and can't have as many units in a mission as my desktop rig but a 1070 should be good enough.

I have a laptop with a 2.2ghz I7 and a gtx 1060 and it does alright on 2.5 in VR for me. I have the settings turned down and can't have as many units in a mission as my desktop rig but a 1070 should be good enough.

Thanks ! Gonna upgrade to a i7-7700k soon , and am hoping to VR , at least after Vulcan . If not , i'll use the extra horsepower for msaa , uping graphics , display export , mp etc

This is not true. Even tho around 1.5.5 I find best, 1.5.8 I could still run pretty decent with Oculus and gtx970. After 2.5 it was an agony and I had to buy 1080ti.

I am disappointed from 2.5 not only by the performance hit but also from the majority of the lighting and cockpit textures bugs the new rendering system came with. And it doesn't seem like ED bothers too much fixing them.

DCS 2.5 is a buggy resource intensive mess, 1.5.x was much more stable and playable.

Thanks for the reply . I was happier with earlier versions of 1.5 than .8 . Wonder if we can still revert 1.5 ?

I have a laptop with a 2.2ghz I7 and a gtx 1060 and it does alright on 2.5 in VR for me. I have the settings turned down and can't have as many units in a mission as my desktop rig but a 1070 should be good enough.

And how is this ok ? Yes if you turn shadows AA and PD off, you can fly alone in a clear day but shoot a few ground targets to generate some smoke and it becomes a stutter mess, let aside playing a more decent mission or joining a crowded server. This is not ok, this is more like a demo version :)

Because I'm able to have 20-ish units on screen and I still get to play DCS in VR when I'm travelling for work without it being a stuttering mess.

to generate some smoke and it becomes a stutter mess, let aside playing a more decent mission or joining a crowded server

Untrue. I've got an i7-2600K / 16GB RAM / GTX980 rig originally assembled in January 2012 (the videocard is a new addition) and it still runs the latest OB with busyish missions just fine in SP and MP both. I do see an occasional hiccup, sure, but by and large it all still works smoothly enough.

The key is OS/HW/DCS optimization. Tedious, but definitely doable. Suggest you give it a go as well.

Before we answer how about posting your system specs...

This is probably the most untrue statement I have seen in a while.

Any suggestions? I'd love to hear 'em

AD

I'm keeping my 1.58 install for VR once i make a couple of pc upgrades . 1070 on the way , a 6700k next spring , and i'm ready for the Rift . Doubt I'll ever be able to VR in 2.5 . Interestingly most super-VR-rigs videos I've seen on you tube have the graphics settings turned down so low , 1.5 looks better ! Gonna hurt not having the Hornet tho :(

GTX 1070 is probably unsuited for VR in DCS World. Go for the 1080 Ti if you can find one. I wouldn't go any lower than that for the graphics card if you want VR.

Instead of a Core i7 of any kind, which doesn't improve gaming performance but costs a lot more, get a K-type i5, or even i3-8350K (4C/4T, 4.0+ GHz).

AD

It's not because of poor optimization, or an outdated graphics engine, or poor this or neglected that--it just means DCS 2.5 is demanding as all hell on PC hardware.

How do you know? Have you done any graphic engine comparisons? Or may be you saw their source code?

Personally I don't think there was enough done in the optimization department. The existence of VR shader mode only proves that.

GTX 1070 is probably unsuited for VR in DCS World. Go for the 1080 Ti if you can find one. I wouldn't go any lower than that for the graphics card if you want VR.

Instead of a Core i7 of any kind, which doesn't improve gaming performance but costs a lot more, get a K-type i5, or even i3-8350K (4C/4T, 4.0+ GHz).

 

 

AD

Thanks for input . Right now a 1080ti is twice the cost of a 1070 . In any event , the 1070 is on its way . As my motherboard does not support overclocking , and i'm not interested in doing so anyway , i simply need to get the fastest compatible stock-clock cpu i can find . 7700k stock at 4.2 & turbos to 4.5 looks good .

While DCS might not be the MOST demanding game it does require a modern system.... I am not opposed to this. I just got DCS world when I saw the f-14 was being released. I played DCS A10c stand alone and that ran okay on my PC. DCS World 2.5...not so much but it does look much better. I had been debating building a new system to replace my current 7 year old PC. Now I have a good excuse. Ill probably spend 3,000 bucks and not touch it again for 7 years. I typically try to build with about 5 to 6 years in mind. Ill be throwing the new RTX card in this system with a 5Ghz i7 8086k.

This is the rules of the game we play its been this way since D0om. Devs need to keep pushing hardware limits or we wouldn't have things like DCS / heat blur's f-14 or other very visually appealing titles. I welcome it but realize its also a bit of a love for abuse thing.

How do you know? Have you done any graphic engine comparisons? Or may be you saw their source code?

 

Personally I don't think there was enough done in the optimization department. The existence of VR shader mode only proves that.

They stopped working on the older engine, they needed to update two engines side by side while building the new engine and redoing the older map. Not real efficient and once 2.5 came with all the maps under one roof, 1.5 was cut loose. Now the engine coders/engineers are focusing on the one engine and implementing Vulkan for better optimization.

This is still quite a new engine and needs a little more time in the oven to mature. That's all, it still looks great and needs tweaking for better results for mid powered hardware, hopefully Vulkan will help here.