[REPORTED] Performance Issues

First and foremost, this topic is not just about low fps and poor performance.

It is about the disproportionately huge and unexplainable *performance hit* caused by the Supercarrier.

Update: DCS 2.5.6.59398 Open Beta - 17.12.2020 - still not fixed

Summary of the first 16 pages of this topic:

1. It is very likely that this issue is caused by the animated crew, their shadows or BOTH:

- Most, if not all, affected users are reporting massive performance gain after changing the in-game shadows to "Flat Only" or "Off".

- Removing just a few of the animated crew members can improve the performance significantly. Proof.

- Removing all animated crew members can more or less solve this issue. Proof.

- Likewise, loading the Supercarrier into the ModelViewer (with full shadows and animations, but without the animated crew) shows excellent performance and very low GPU usage. Proof.

2. This issue has nothing to do with the amount of polygons on screen: Proof. It persists even with the simplified Supercarrier's model: Proof.

3. This issue has nothing to do with the Supercarrier's textures: Proof.

4. This issue has nothing to do with the amount of AI units, location or mission: Proof.

5. There are people with a very wide range of hardware in this topic (incl. GTX 960, GTX 1060, GTX 1070, GTX 1080, GTX 1080Ti, RTX 2060, RTX 2070 and so on) who are affected by this issue and dissatisfied with the Supercarrier's performance.

6. At least in my case (i5@3.2 / 32Gb / RTX 2060 8Gb) the performance is poor, and yet my GPU, VRAM, RAM & CPU are clearly under-utilized: Proof 1, Proof 2.

7. If your performance with the Supercarrier is smooth, it doesn't mean you are not affected: drops from 100 to 50 fps aren't always noticeable without using a FPS monitor.

===============================================

===============================================

===============================================

===============================================

===============================================

Original post:

I'm experiencing serious fps issues with the SC.

In the stock "Supercarrier Cold Start - Caucasus" mission I see ~20 fps or less in the cockpit & external view. Moving the camera away from the carrier improves the performance significantly.

With "Stennis Cold Start - Caucasus" my performance is much, much better. In other (far more complex) scenarios that don't use SC I'm also having 50+ fps with the same settings.

Already tried:

- cleanup & repair

- deleting fxo & metashaders

- deleting my whole "saved games" profile

- installing the latest Nvidia drivers

- rebooting

- setting everything to minimum (which brings my fps to ~35)

I5-6500@3.2 / 32Gb / GTX 960 4Gb 445.87 (IRRELEVANT: upgraded to 2060 Super. Performance is still unacceptable. See details) / fully updated Win10 Pro 64-bit / SSLR is always disabled.

Supercarrier - 20 fps:

Stennis - 54 fps:

Supercarrier - 60 fps:

Stennis - 70 fps:

Full Supercarrier album

Press ALT+ENTER and performance goes WAY UP!!! Much more than before.

Press ALT+ENTER and performance goes WAY UP!!! Much more than before.

Nope, it's even worse after going fullscreen (~17 fps)

I'm pretty sure the performance will increase in the future, as we all running an early access version in an open beta environment....;)

The gtx-960 is a 5 year old low range graphics card, maybe it is time to update it?

It is normal that the SC will be heavier on your hardware.

But general performances should be quite improved

Seeing that the Supercarrier has almost trice as many polygons as the Stennis, I placed four of them in a row.

4x Stennises - 49fps:

4x Supercarriers - 11fps:

It is normal that the SC will be heavier on your hardware.

Heavier - yes. But it shouldn't be borderline unplayable.

Are your missions full of AI and/or statics? Can you try removing some and test? I know AI and statics can heavily impact performance. Thanks.

These are not my missions. They're all default DCS missions.

Anyway, here's the absolutely empty Caucasus map with just one of the carriers and me in the Hornet.

Empty map, single Supercarrier - 25 fps:

Empty map, single Stennis - 57 fps:

Heavier - yes. But it shouldn't be borderline unplayable.

It´s not possible to test with every piece of hardware around.

"GTX 960 4Gb 445.87"

 

That car is going to struggle with the complexity of the SUpercarrier. YOu may need to tune your settings. 4GB of VRAM is below spec for anything but Minimum.

So you're saying that it is okay that I can fly the F-14 (probably the heaviest DCS module) on complex missions over the PG (probably the heaviest DCS map) with stable 40-50 fps, but a single Supercarrier on an empty Caucasus map is a total overkill for my GPU?

Yeah, I am running a i7 6700k, 32 gigs of RAM, a GTX 1070 (at 1080p through a monitor) and I am seeing a rather massive drop in overall performance overall. Heck, I am seeing a significant drop when it is only the Supercarrier with a empty deck (save for a single player aircraft that I am occupying) and nothing else in the mission.

This must be a bug or something. There is more going on here than simply not having the right hardware. If anything, they may need to offer a option to downscale some of the detail in order to offer acceptable performance on a wider variety of systems. As of right now, even high-end systems are getting hit pretty hard to say the least.

Im running an i9-9900k, GTX 1080, on a 1080p monitor with most of the DCS settings on max.

Supercarrier, in a hornet, daytime, with no other units, singleplayer or multiplayer, I get 30 fps staring at the cockpit. Increases if i look elsewhere, but staring at the cockpit is flat 30. Improves once I depart the carrier.

Supercarrier at night drops to 20-16 fps D:

This must be a bug or something. There is more going on here than simply not having the right hardware. If anything, they may need to offer a option to downscale some of the detail in order to offer acceptable performance on a wider variety of systems.

As I mentioned in my original post, setting everything to low doesn't solve the problem. With the lowest possible settings I have 100+ fps in most circumstances, and only 30-35 fps on the SC.

Hope ED will have a closer look at this - rather than citing system reqs and blaming everything on user's hardware. Especially when said hardware can perfectly run everything DCS has to offer - except of a single newly released, open beta module.

SuperCarrier is an high quality 3d model, with a lot going on under the hood.

Your PC is pretty low end unfortunately.

While maybe ED will still optimize something in the future I don't expect that you will be able to reach same performances as with the old Stennis.

Also probably your VRAM is full when over the deck.

However, fortunately you are able to get decent FPS when not on the deck.

With my top-end PC (watch specs in signature) i get much higher FPS when i am not on the deck and this is pretty normal. The difference between me and you is that for me is not unplayable but it keeps somewhere between 40/60 fps depending on what is on the Supercarrier deck

The gtx-960 is a 5 year old low range graphics card, maybe it is time to update it?

Funny how someone complains about performance and has out dated hardware and expects to see +45 FPS :pilotfly:

and expects to see +45 FPS :pilotfly:

Care to quote where I said that?

SuperCarrier is an high quality 3d model, with a lot going on under the hood.

Your PC is pretty low end unfortunately.

While maybe ED will still optimize something in the future I don't expect that you will be able to reach same performances as with the old Stennis.

Also probably your VRAM is full when over the deck.

However, fortunately you are able to get decent FPS when not on the deck.

 

With my top-end PC (watch specs in signature) i get much higher FPS when i am not on the deck and this is pretty normal. The difference between me and you is that for me is not unplayable but it keeps somewhere between 40/60 fps depending on what is on the Supercarrier deck

My PC is not low-end and the performance hit I am taking by simply spawning on a empty supercarrier deck is pretty severe. The problem here isn't the specs that people are running, it is the MASSIVE performance hit regardless of specs. It is one thing if we lost a few frames here and there but it seems like there is some kind of major optimization issue or even a bug that is causing the performance hit we are seeing here.

Seriously, I can do ANYTHING ELSE in DCS and get fantastic framerates but the moment I spawn on a empty supercarrier, my framerate nosedives. That can't possibly be what was intended.

What I am saying is that its not all on you, but your card is on the lower end of the scale, and it wont help much, I do know that we need to see if some more optimization of the carrier can be done as well, but comparing it to the Stennis is not really viable. This model has much more going on.

I agree that comparing it to the older Stennis model is silly but comparing supercarrier performance to performance without it should probably be the focus here and right now, it isn't looking very good.

To be honest, I gotta wonder if this is a issue where there is TOO MUCH going on with the supercarrier. Perhaps some options to downscale the textures would help?

what if you create a custom mission with Supercarrier, and add small amounts of personnel and static aircrafts?

Or you could save some fps by placing older hornets and tomcat static models.

Or not placing the crane.

Something like that.

what if you create a custom mission with Supercarrier, and add small amounts of personnel and static aircrafts?

Or you could save some fps by placing older hornets and tomcat static models.

Or not placing the crane.

Something like that.

That was the first thing I did and performance was still significantly lower on the supercarrier when compared to anything else in DCS right now. There has to be more going on here than simply "get a better computer" or something to that effect.