Performance Query

Hi guys

This is my first post and I must say this is the most awsome flight sim I have ever played.:thumbup: But I am a little disturbed after going through a lot of the posts on fps and general performance. There is a huge differnce in in perfomance between players and I can't seam to pin point what is causing this. There are guys with hot graphics cards yet slow fps. And other with the same graphics cards cards and similar machine and super fps.

I am researching this to decide if I should spend $500 on an Asus GTX670 or GTX680 nvidia for my machine. I know I need an upgrade as my GPU is on the MB but I could spend a lot less on a card if I am going to see a limited to no performance increase at all. I really love this sim and I have just started to lay out some cash on Hotas and Track IR. I want to go with VAC and may be multiple monitors but not in a big way. Maybe just a large main with small MFD's and then get into some multi player stuff. In terms of time I have already put in over 40 hours of training and who kows how much in reading and watching videos just to learn. This sim has enormous potential but it could also be a big waste of money if I'm not careful.

I sure would like some input from some of the more experienced pilots or computer jocks out there so I can map out the best approach to equipment requirements as I haven't had too much luck pinning down the formula as to what makes this sim run well. As you can see from my signature below, I have reasonably good platform to work with. This is actually my work machine. I do all my design work on it. I work exclusively in AutoCAD and during off hours its my play machine. My office is at home so I'm the boss and he lets me play when ever I want. He's a pretty decent guy when it come to flight sims.:smilewink:.

So I hope you can guys can help me out on this and then you'll see me as a life member here. Thanks so much.

First of all, TrackIR (Looking your sig, Oh, that's OK)

Than, a decent HOTAS (I see you have a X-52 Pro which is excellent)

For Gfx card, you can go with GTX670 without a problem (review from forum)

Some advises HERE, HERE and HERE

Good Luck

It all depends on what you're after, eye candy or smoothness in motion (or both, that's always best).

Some people give up FPS for a nice high setting environment, others just go for the opposite and trade in eye candy for a higher FPS in order to make their sim run as smooth as possible without any hickups in motion.

Mostly, people who go for higher or ultra high settings don't even notice (or bother) that their game has a hickup in motion. On the other side, people who prefer higher FPS don't give a thing about grass and a bunch of flowers beside the runway as long as everything runs smooth.

If you look at it this way, it's perfectly normal that people with highend rigs have shitty performance and vice versa. It's what they are after that matters for them. With all this in mind, it's difficult to compare your system to one another, performance wise. The only way to do this is having the same view (like running the same track) with exactly the same settings. Otherwise it's useless to compare. And i'm pretty sure comparable systems will match up to a % or 2, not more, not less.

So if your next step is cashing out for a video card, i would try to find a review on your current GPU and set that to the one you want and look at the results to see if it's worth it (my guess it is because an onboard GPU is no match to a separate one, certainly if it's highend).

Go through this three threads:

Framerate DCS: World; Bottleneck

Setting up Dcs A10

Advice on GFX card

to learn about the basics.

Than run this test to make yourself a picture what to upgrade:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1381103#post1381103

there is a very simple test to see if your CPU is the bottleneck , - and so you can decide if you will benefit from a new GPU.

 

Run a track that is recorded in a campaign mission with a lots of battle going on.

 

Do this first on your normal setting with your system is in the exact same configuration (monitors/exports...)

- and than do it with all graphic settings are turned to low.

 

- If you have a better overall average FPS at the seconded run,...you can benefit from a GPU upgrade.

 

If the average (not the max!) is staying the similar/same - you should think about a CPU upgrade first - because a better GPU will only help you to turn on more GFX options on like HDR/AA... but it will not higher your FPS while the CPU is struggling with the calculations for the ongoing battle.

(that's why I call DCS a "framed" simulation)

 

If you running Multi monitors in a windowed configuration and want to have a boost for "free" :SoftTH NEWS

This will make it possible to run DCS in full-screen and even have Helios visible at your secondary screens.

 

more than 1GB V-ram helps if you run on very high resolutions/have more than one View-ports and/or more than one monitors. - if you only want to run 1 monitor in 1650x1080 - 1GB is sufficient.

One minor addition: if your datamining tool allows it, getting both median and average could be useful to inform you.

Lange, what has really drawn me to this sim is the idea that it is virtually photo realistic. It adds such a visual sense of realism that no other sim has ever offered. So much so that I am willing to put in the hours just to learn how to fly the A-10C so I can enjoy getting lost in a sense of actually flying it.

Thats my goal. Then there's the part of course about blowing up stuff.

However Peter, (thanks for the links) with most of the graphics turned down except textures turned to high I am averaging 15fps. Everything seams smooth enough and I don't have any problems flying and I have no crashes nor any strange things happening. My main concern is spending $500 on a GTX 670 and still having 15fps. I didn't think my CPU would have been an issue as its an i7-3770K. Thats getting pretty high on the performance scale so I didn't consider it would be a bottleneck of any kind.

It's going to be difficult trying the test as I can't turn up the graphics at all with my present GPU. In fact I really don't need to do an evaluation at this point to detemine if a GPU upgrade is necessary. Its on the board so say no more. It's really doing a splendid job considering what I have asked it do. Its performing way above its pay grade but its just not cut out for this kind of work.

So do I put in a GTX 650 at $150 or go all out for a GTX 680 at $500 or maybe step back a bit to a GTX 670 which might be perfectly fine running two monitors. I just don't know what I will gain in perfomance. And that means both eye candy and at least reasonable fps so I can at least run away in a battle with out crashing my plane:pilotfly:.

Thanks guys for your input.

So do I put in a GTX 650 at $150 or go all out for a GTX 680 at $500 or maybe step back a bit to a GTX 670 which might be perfectly fine running two monitors. I just don't know what I will gain in perfomance.

My opinion: In general, going after the best of the best (read: most expensive) isn't always a good idea budget wise. You mostly spend a lot of $$ for only a minor gain in performance. Looking at your setup and at the same time at some general performance reviews of GPU cards, i would go for the GTX670 at the moment. You will definitly see quite a bit of performance increase compared to your current HD4000. You will not regret this.

See here for an example:Link and compare to your own system.

with most of the graphics turned down except textures turned to high I am averaging 15fps. Everything seams smooth enough and I don't have any problems flying

Read again what i have posted above about smoothness and eye-candy. You seem to find that an overall 15fps on average is smooth. If 15fps would be my average i would stop playing and i would look for a solution or an upgrade because for me that is far from smooth. I don't need 100fps to make it feel smooth, i just don't accept stuttering, not even microstuttering because of to low fps. The moment it feels smooth, i trade in the extra fps for extra eye-candy. Everybody's perception on this matter is always a personal taste and therefore difficult to discus. But then it's always interesting to know what people want...:)

I got a GTX 670 FTW 2GB card and I'm very happy with the results. I only tested DCS A-10C out a few times before I went on a long business trip. With pretty much every graphic option to max, besides mirrors and heat blur I got 70+ FPS in the pit.....without the MFCD's on and outside views was higher in FPS. The only thing I wish I would of did was get a 4GB card, but at the time they didn't have any 670 4GB cards. Wish I had more time to play DCS before I left, but it pissed me off trying to set up everything. The 670 is a very good card. I built the system in my sig back in June.

I need an upgrade as my GPU is on the MB

15 FPS with this intel HD 4000 is good result.

Onboard gfx card is a big NO for DCS.

My main concern is spending $500 on a GTX 670 and still having 15fps.

Impossible. All your components except gfx seems to be quite good. Your FPS will double AT LEAST.

If you wanna pay less go for ATI HD 79xx series. Much cheaper and same FPS.

You seem to find that an overall 15fps on average is smooth. If 15fps would be my average i would stop playing and i would look for a solution or an upgrade because for me that is far from smooth....:)

I think the statement "Ignorence is bliss" might apply here. I guess when you haven't had 50 or 60 fps to begin with you don't know what your your missing. I am hoping to be very much impressed by this upgrade. I have no idea what 50fps will even look like on the monitor so there is definitately some anticipation mounting.

I was looking over Cali's specs and they are very close to mine other than the CPU is a bit different and the GTX670 is performing as I would have hoped. Thats encouraging to the point that I have enough confidence in that card that I have put it at the top of the list. I was a little concerned with the GTX680 and some of the reports I had read as well as the cost. There was some concern that its performance in DCS World was maybe not as consitant through the various machine configurations compared to the GTX670.

I guess if there is no major concern I haven't found yet, I think the nvidia GTX670 is going to be the card of choice and most likely an Asus as they seam to have the best cooling system and quitest fans.

Thanks everyone for your input. I really appreciate it. I must say this is a very hepfully community. I am going to enjoy my stay here.

Héhé, get back in here once you get that GTX670 (or whatever card you will get) in your system and tried it out. And then i'll ask to take it out and give it to me with you going back to your old setup (i might even pay you a few $$ for that card). I already know your answer...:D

Seriously, you will not regret it one second.

When you install the card, just leave your current DCS setup as it is to compare directly to your new setup. It will you a very fair look on the gain you made with the upgrade.

Welcome on the forum John.

Welcome on the forum John.

Thanks very much. I must say I have been made to feel quite welcome here.:)

And Lange I imagine I won't want to part with it unless you want to trade me for a GTX 690:music_whistling: . Once its installed I will do a before and after analysis to see the benefits more so for the people here looking for similar answers as I was. I was into my tech guy yesterday and we have decided to install a EVGA GTX 670 next week and maybe add another 8GB to the MOBO.

Has anyone any idea as to whether a video card with more than 2 GB of ram on board will make a difference or is the standard 2 GB enough to do a good job. I had read an article on one of those hardware testing sites. They did some testing of graphics intensive games using nvidia GTX cards with 4GB of memory. What they found was most games in that catagory rarely use more that 2GB. Now they didn't include our favourite sim in the list of test subjects and DCS A-10 has to be one of THE most graphics intense products I've seen so I was curious if anyone knew whether the sim would actually benifit from the extra ram on the card.