CPU upgrade, is it worth it?

How come you have stuttering with your monster setup? You’ve got a 2080 and it stutters?

Believe it or not I'm still CPU bound. My GPU does not get above 85%.

I could probably overclock 2 of the cores to 5.3Ghz and run DCS just on those cores but thats not going to gain me that much. At the moment I'm just having too much fun fling to screw with it.:joystick:

Sweet, That will keep the fox's out. Glad to here your overclocking saved you some dough.

Believe it or not I'm still CPU bound. My GPU does not get above 85%.

Hi.

Youre not CPU-bound, thats just Windows spreading out the workload to all available cores. Even on my I5-3570 I had only 50% CPU-usage avrage. But going to the I5-9600k increased fps considerably. Also now Im not too high on CPU-usage.

Following up with my completly unscientific testing, I also overclocked my GPU by maxing the powertarget by 11% (I think Bioslimit) and pumping corespeed +100Mhz, memspeed +200mHz and with my setting at my testing scenario I got maybe 1ms less in frametimes. Before the lowest in the start of the scenario was 20, that I saw, now 19 was more common. What was clear was, that I had less dips beneath 40fps.

But overall in my (uneducated) opinion, Id say my results are "unconclusive". Still it seemed to me, that my oc´d CPU did not help and the oc´d GPU only helped a tiny bit.

Of course a real OC with higher settings may yield much better results.

I believe he was referring to his GPU usage, not his CPU usage. Ideally you want your GPU at 90%+ to maximize performance and get what you pay for.

In my experience, DCS is still mostly CPU bound on the Reverb per the native diagnostic tool that gives you a colored dot specifying whether you are CPU bound, GPU bound, or both.

This is all situation dependent though, "it depends", is the key takeaway. When flying low level around lots of trees and buildings I'm still CPU bound. Draw distance graphic settings are mostly CPU dependent as well. As you get away from complex areas and gain altitude you get the green dot for true 90 fps without any frame interpolation and it's very smooth to your eye.

I could probably overclock 2 of the cores to 5.3Ghz and run DCS...

You can overclock 1 core and Intel's turboboost will take care of the rest automatically for DCS's rendering thread that sends draw calls to the GPU. The other cores don't really need to be overclocked so aggressively above stock for DCS.

Be careful with core affinity. When I restricted to just 2 cores in Process Lasso, it turned into a choppy mess, but does well restricted to 3 cores, at least on the 9700K/9900K. Can't speak for AMD or older Intel processors.

Hi.

I did some tests with my system now. I can do a stable 5 Ghz on my i5-9600K.

But comparing it both in 2D and VR in 20 runs on a 1min tracklog-replay (Hornet IA-Caucasus-Freeflight), there is NO FPS-difference for me in 2D and VR.

The only difference is that in VR with my Rift S I gets better "App render CPU time" according to OTT. With 4,3Ghz its around 20ms (~17-25) and with 5Ghz around 15ms (~12-18 ). GPU-rendertimes are (with 2D-max-settings) at unplayable 34-40ms (=> 25-30FPS)

Maybe with a higher resolution headset, that needs more CPU-power, an OC could help.

But in my situation (1440p monitor with TrackIR or Rift S) there clearly is no CPU-bottleneck. Its all GPU for me. This might be also the reason, Im not having MP-perf-problems, since my CPU has enough headroom to handle the extra MP-load.

Id have to get a RTX3080Ti (which I plan to do anyway) to increase my FPS to something above 50 to be able to use the OC to 5Ghz. But even in this case Id invest the extra-performance into better visual quality (which on the Rift S is a bit of a joke anyway).