FPS on Supercarrier

I should imagine the deck objects do not add as much as one might think. The main things I'd like to see is how lower end cards handle the texture loading (if required) when rolling into the groove. You cna have thousands of static objects in a mission with virtually nor performance loss, but a single aircraft executing AI tends to be a lot of the CPU required. This should sit way below aircraft requirement on pure performance basis.

However, since you get low FPS in flybys of the existing carrier, I can't see things getting better by having more. Remember that 50FPS equates to 25 in VR.

Where does it say a 1080Ti is for 1080p Gaming?

If you look at benchmarks of any open world game, with a lot of AI and physics, or watch any videos from respectable chanels on YouTube like Jayz two cents, or Linus Tech, you see the 10 series falls seriously short for pushing high frame rates above 1080P resolution. On modern AAA titles that have been optimized and running on Vulcan or DX12+ then ya, a 1080ti is great. But that’s not what we are dealing with here. Consensus is that if you want high frame rate gaming for either higher resolution or VR then the 20 series or the Titan RTX is what you need especially for DCS.

Then you need a processor capable of pushing the rendered frames to the monitor without lag. Something capable of high 4 to 5ghz in a few cores. Like the 9900 or the new 3850. One high speed core to compute DCS and another to push rendered frames to the monitor. AIO liquid coolers or Noctua coolers are needed to keep temps down because even at 70C you are loosing performance.

I know a lot of folks cant afford this kind of rig. However folks complaining about frame rates, stuttering, etc. when they are trying to use hardware beyond its capabilities just doesn’t make sense. If you want to run DCS at 1440 or 4K or have high frames in VR this is what you need. If not get a good 1080 monitor and your experience will be much better.

If you look at benchmarks of any open world game, with a lot of AI and physics, or watch any videos from respectable chanels on YouTube like Jayz two cents, or Linus Tech, you see the 10 series falls seriously short for pushing high frame rates above 1080P resolution. On modern AAA titles that have been optimized and running on Vulcan or DX12+ then ya, a 1080ti is great. But that’s not what we are dealing with here. Consensus is that if you want high frame rate gaming for either higher resolution or VR then the 20 series or the Titan RTX is what you need especially for DCS.

 

Then you need a processor capable of pushing the rendered frames to the monitor without lag. Something capable of high 4 to 5ghz in a few cores. Like the 9900 or the new 3850. One high speed core to compute DCS and another to push rendered frames to the monitor. AIO liquid coolers or Noctua coolers are needed to keep temps down because even at 70C you are loosing performance.

 

I know a lot of folks cant afford this kind of rig. However folks complaining about frame rates, stuttering, etc. when they are trying to use hardware beyond its capabilities just doesn’t make sense. If you want to run DCS at 1440 or 4K or have high frames in VR this is what you need. If not get a good 1080 monitor and your experience will be much better.

Well, we are all free to have an opinion. My own experience is that a gtx 1070 TI and a I5 4590 running at 3.8 GHz has enabled me to play DCS on high settings with a very decent frame rate on a 1440p monitor.

Cheers,

Well, we are all free to have an opinion. My own experience is that a gtx 1070 TI and a I5 4590 running at 3.8 GHz has enabled me to play DCS on high settings with a very decent frame rate on a 1440p monitor.

 

Cheers,

Likewise , my 1070 is running my Rift S decently . And my previous 1060 did very well at 1080p .

Well, we are all free to have an opinion. My own experience is that a gtx 1070 TI and a I5 4590 running at 3.8 GHz has enabled me to play DCS on high settings with a very decent frame rate on a 1440p monitor.

 

Cheers,

What is a decent frame rate? Are you maintaining over 60fps flying rotor wings at 300ft over Dubai? Correct that we can all have an opinion but I want at least 90fps on ultra setting in my example above.

Opinion aside, The goal of any gaming rig is max settings and never dropping under 60fps under any conditions. And in my case I’m running a 144hz 1440p monitor so obviously I’m always chasing that refresh rate. But the accepted standard is not dropping under 60 at any time. If you do then your hardware isn’t up to the minimum standard and you have to drop settings. DCS is too beautiful of a game to ever drop settings imho, especially if you fly rotor wings.

I know that VR is different and typically those only have 60hz refresh besides the valve index at 120hz.

Likewise , my 1070 is running my Rift S decently . And my previous 1060 did very well at 1080p .

What is decent? Are you maintaining the max FPS the rift is capable of? I want to get into VR and I am specing. A rig to run the valve index right now. I can’t imagine going down to a low refresh on VR so the 120fps on the index is the deciding factor for me.

Decent is 40 fps (the S has an 80hz refresh) and letting ASW fill the other 40 . No one , regardless of rig , realises full refresh low over cities on any map . While it may be possible on a super-rig , the eye-candy concessions necessary would be unbearable to most everyone . Guys running the Index are usually running 90 hz mode with 45fps and motion smoothing -this with 2080ti's , 9900k's , and far from maxed candy .

Decent is 40 fps (the S has an 80hz refresh) and letting ASW fill the other 40 . No one , regardless of rig , realises full refresh low over cities on any map . While it may be possible on a super-rig , the eye-candy concessions necessary would be unbearable to most everyone .

40fps doesn’t make you sick in VR? I’ve read that on fast moving games anything under 60fps makes a lot of people want to vomit. So that’s why I was looking at the index hoping to get half at least of the 120hz.

40fps doesn’t make you sick in VR? I’ve read that on fast moving games anything under 60fps makes a lot of people want to vomit. So that’s why I was looking at the index hoping to get half at least of the 120hz.

No , it does not . I even ran it without ASW , and suffered no ill effects . YMMV of course , so if you have the opportunity , try before you buy .

... respectable chanels on YouTube like Jayz two cents, or Linus Tech, you see the 10 series falls seriously short for pushing high frame rates above 1080P...

LOL, I was playind DCS in 4K with FXAA with a 7700K/Titan Xp over 2 1/2 years ago. No YouTube channel or gamer site that I am aware of does benchmarks for DCS. Both of those guys get kickbacks and special treatment from vendors. It's their job to get views and create demand for new toys. There's an obvious conflict of interest so you should take what they say with a grain of salt.

On modern AAA titles...

The software is always ahead of the hardware. Always has, always will

...the Titan RTX is what you need especially for DCS.

You definitely do not need a $2500 GPU card to play DCS.

..Like the 9900 or the new 3850.

There is no AMD 3850. If you mean the 3950, that CPU is being scalped on Ebay right now for over $1000. A 3800X costs less than $400. A 9700K or a 3600x will do just fine.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

One high speed core to compute DCS and another to push rendered frames to the monitor.

As I understand it the two cores that DCS uses are for the audio and one for the draw calls.

AIO liquid coolers or Noctua coolers are needed to keep temps down because even at 70C you are loosing performance.

The current gen of processors can run at higher temps without throttling. Cooler is always better though for the electrons running through the transistors due to lower resistance.

I know a lot of folks cant afford this kind of rig.

Sure people can afford it. The question is why would you pay that much when you could buy something else like a bigger monitor or good pedals?

However folks complaining about frame rates, stuttering, etc. when they are trying to use hardware beyond its capabilities just doesn’t make sense. If you want to run DCS at 1440 or 4K or have high frames in VR this is what you need. If not get a good 1080 monitor and your experience will be much better.

In my experience, most of the issues people see on here are due to tuning and resource management. It's usually something simple like power management settings, unnecessary background processes, a fast SSD, enabling XMP profiles in BIOS, or locking your frame rate to 60Hz for TrackIR due to limitations of the IR camera. Telling someone they need to buy a faster rig doesn't really help.

No , it does not . I even ran it without ASW , and suffered no ill effects . YMMV of course , so if you have the opportunity , try before you buy .

Good to know.

Decent frame rate for me is above 40. Dubai, 300 ft. and in a helicopter yields about 50 fps. It will dip once in a while, but it is smooth. On the NTTR map it's a solid 60 fps....and thats the map I like the most.

I am still strugling with my rift S though.

In DCS at 1440p, there is no question that the 1080 Ti struggles. If I had known that I would have to lower settings significantly to maintain a 60 FPS minimum, I would have stayed with a 1080p monitor.

If I see a 40-50 FPS drop from baseline empty map FPS on the Stennis with other aircraft on the deck, the new, more detailed Supercarrier module will only be worse.

Maybe Vulkan will help...hopefully it is released alongside the new carrier.

In DCS at 1440p, there is no question that the 1080 Ti struggles. If I had known that I would have to lower settings significantly to maintain a 60 FPS minimum, I would have stayed with a 1080p monitor.

 

If I see a 40-50 FPS drop from baseline empty map FPS on the Stennis with other aircraft on the deck, the new, more detailed Supercarrier module will only be worse.

 

Maybe Vulkan will help...hopefully it is released alongside the new carrier.

Yes, your 1080 would be loafing on a 1080 monitor. I use a 1080 monitor and get 120fps with a 1060 6g. No VR though.

2080TI is meant for VR, and driving 1440P.

Bull***t. I play VR with a 2070, good performance, absolutely not a slideshow.

Bull***t. I play VR with a 2070, good performance, absolutely not a slideshow.

On maxed out settings? Please show video. If I’m wrong and you can play at 60fps in VR with maxed out settings on that card I will be pleasantly surprised. That would be awesome.

I am not interested anything that requires turning down any settings. Nor am I interested in anything that throttles the capability or the VR rig in any way. Cost is not an issue. I want max performance.

Good performance with Rift s means above 40 FPS.

To explain why, you should Google for asw and atw.

Anyway, native 80 fps refresh can't be always achieved either with a 2080ti.

I've played VR a lot with Rift cv1 and a 1070 with no issues.

My settings are quite High, shadows flat Is the only setting lowered since shadows affect greatly FPS. Textures are High, msaa 2x and pixel density 1.2 (tested some time ago as the best performance / quality ratio between msaa and pixel density). In any case, I'm very happy with my graphics and have good performances. No need to pay 2000 bucks for a 2080ti. Within a couple of years I'll be able to upgrade to a 3070 with 500 bucks, if needed. But I'm enjoying VR right now. If I had to play on a monitor, I'd not play dcs. This is my experience. To each his own.

Good performance with Rift s means above 40 FPS.

To explain why, you should Google for asw and atw.

Anyway, native 80 fps refresh can't be always achieved with a 2080ti.

I've played VR a lot with Rift cv1 and a 1070 with no issues.

My settings are quite High, shadows flat Is the only setting lowered since shadows affect greatly FPS. Textures are High, msaa 2x and pixel density 1.2 (tested some time ago as the best performance / quality ratio between msaa and pixel density). In any case, I'm very happy with my graphics and have good performances. No need to pay 2000 bucks for a 2080ti. Within a couple of years I'll be able to upgrade to a 3070 with 500 bucks, if needed. But I'm enjoying VR right now. If I had to play on a monitor, I'd not play dcs. This is my experience. To each his own.

I understand that the 2080ti cant always hit the native refresh rate. The point of this conversation was that you can’t run hardware meant for lower resolutions and expect it to perform to the same level when on higher resolutions as if it’s controlled by some special form of magic.

You are correct. No need to pay $2000.00 for a 2080ti especially when it retails for $1200.00. And who pays retail these days? Paying $800 more than retail is a special kind of stupid.

In addition to what Bignewy said, not all settings make a big difference in VR as on a monitor. Some settings are almost unnoticeable if on or off. But you can tune to have a great experience (standard dcs VR settings are Indeed a bit too low according to quality and you have to boost them to have a good graphics).

I agree that you cannot play hardware above its chances, but a 1080ti Is absolutely not a 1080p VGA card. This is where I do not agree.

VR with maxed out settings in DCS isn't going to be good, you need to tune it for your own performance / eye candy balance.

 

Check out my system specs below, even I reduce settings to get the performance I want which is a steady and smooth 45fps.

 

On topic I have been getting good frames on the super carrier in VR using my Cosmos.

Thanks for the info Newey. Do you think you are throttled by your processor at all? Compared to say 9900k running at 5ghz?

Has it been mentioned anywhere if there is a Release Date or and ETA for the Supercarrier?

Yes probably, but I had already thrown large amounts of cash at the machine and the wife was getting suspicious. :)

Ok thanks. Since I haven’t made the leap to VR I figured that high core clock was still important but didn’t know how it correlates to performance in VR vs performance on a monitor.