[REPORTED]VR Performance OB 2.5.6

I had the same issue. I had 45-60 FPS in 2.5.5 but dropped into the high teens low 20's in 2.5.6

 

My Specs are below.

Similar experience here, except its mid to high 20's near cities. But I've got a 2080ti too.

Similar experience here, except its mid to high 20's near cities. But I've got a 2080ti too.

GPU 2080ti vs 2070S is 20% more fast for the double price. . We have high end rig for this poor performance.

OB need some optimization.

Why some write, heeeyy i can see everything smooth and perfect 60 fps,... lies, trolling,....

Rift S != Hp Reverb

2560 x 1440 x 1 != 2160 X 2160 x 2

3686400 rift S pixels != 9331200 Hp Reverb Pixels

Those who said its ok, are rift users, sure.

You can read this in the F16 store:

Minimum system requirements (LOW graphics settings): OS 64-bit Windows 7/8/10; DirectX11; CPU: Intel Core i3 at 2.8 GHz or AMD FX; RAM: 8 GB (16 GB for heavy missions); Free hard disk space: 60 GB; Discrete video card NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 / AMD R9 280X or better; requires internet activation.

Recommended system requirements (HIGH graphics settings): OS 64-bit Windows 8/10; DirectX11; CPU: Core i5+ at 3+ GHz or AMD FX / Ryzen; RAM: 16 GB (32 GB for heavy missions); Free hard disk space: 120 GB on Solid State Drive (SSD); Discrete video card NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 / AMD Radeon RX VEGA 56 with 8GB VRAM or better; Joystick; requires internet activation.

Recommended VR systems requirements (VR graphics settings): OS 64-bit Windows 8/10; DirectX11; CPU: Core i5+ at 3+ GHz or AMD FX / Ryzen; RAM: 16 GB (32 GB for heavy missions); Free hard disk space: 120 GB on Solid State Drive (SSD); Discrete video card NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 / AMD Radeon RX VEGA 64 or better; Joystick; requires internet activation.

This will be the new future???

Minimum system requirements (LOW graphics settings): OS 64-bit Windows 7/8/10; DirectX11; CPU: Intel Core i5 at 2.8 GHz; RAM: 16 GB (32 GB for heavy missions); Free hard disk space: 60 GB; Discrete video card NVIDIA GeForce RTX2060; requires internet activation.

Recommended system requirements (HIGH graphics settings): OS 64-bit Windows 8/10; DirectX11; CPU: Core i7+ at 3+ GHz or AMD FX / Ryzen; RAM: 16 GB (32 GB for heavy missions); Free hard disk space: 120 GB on Solid State Drive (SSD); Discrete video card NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 or better; Joystick; requires internet activation.

Recommended VR systems requirements (VR graphics settings): OS 64-bit Windows 8/10; DirectX11; CPU: Core i9+ at 5+ GHz or AMD FX / Ryzen; RAM: 32 GB (64 GB for heavy missions); Free hard disk space: 120 GB on Solid State Drive (SSD); Discrete video card NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080ti or better; Joystick; requires internet activation.

hi there, i run a 2080 ti OC with a i7 8700 OC to 5 ghz,32gb ram, and the game is installed on a samsung 970 ssd...and guess what...it is running worse and cannot use the shaders mod any more!!!Maybe it is going to work again but some say performance is worst. I buoght the supercarrier module and have lots of stuff...BUT WHEN IS VR GOING TO BE ADDRESSED SERIOUSLY FROM THE DEVELOPERS?!? I SPEAK FOR ME BUT...I DO NOT WANT SOME SUPERMEGAUNPLAYABLEMODULES WITH SUPERMEGAGRAPHIC AT 20FPS ON MY INDEX...VULCAN PLEASE...NOT THE NEXT YEAR, NOW!!!!

New Water Affecting FPS Performance

Hey, Nineline.

Regarding my early question about ship wakes affecting FPS...

Upon further testing it appears to me that, maybe, the new water (when setting is on "HIGH") is affecting overall FPS performance for me and maybe others. Not sure if this is the culprit for many people complaining of 2.5.6 performance drops (and I am among them), but the new water on "HIGH" does seem to kill my FPS by about 12-15.

Thanks!

Isn't that sort of expected, graphics are getting improved :)

We'll just have to ride it out until Vulkan based graphics engine, because it's better if they put more effort into that vulkan rewrite rather than maximizing the optimization on the current engine.

hi there, i run a 2080 ti OC with a i7 8700 OC to 5 ghz,32gb ram, and the game is installed on a samsung 970 ssd...and guess what...it is running worse and cannot use the shaders mod any more!!!Maybe it is going to work again but some say performance is worst. I buoght the supercarrier module and have lots of stuff...BUT WHEN IS VR GOING TO BE ADDRESSED SERIOUSLY FROM THE DEVELOPERS?!? I SPEAK FOR ME BUT...I DO NOT WANT SOME SUPERMEGAUNPLAYABLEMODULES WITH SUPERMEGAGRAPHIC AT 20FPS ON MY INDEX...VULCAN PLEASE...NOT THE NEXT YEAR, NOW!!!!

...this!

Btw: Kegetys shader mod has been updated and works fine now on OB 2.5.6! Maybe someone here wants to give it a try.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=215373

...this!

 

Btw: Kegetys shader mod has been updated and works fine now on OB 2.5.6! Maybe someone here wants to give it a try.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=215373

Never understood why some people use that mod. Lots of visual degradation with no real benefit. Certainly the case on my system, anyway.

Isn't that sort of expected, graphics are getting improved :)

No. What's expected is improved graphics that are optimized, which ED has done a wonderful job with in the past, leading to comments like, "Wow! This new ______ looks amazing, and the performance is better, too." And my comments are related to the many people who are trying to understand their performance hit with this latest update, which Nineline has indicated is being investigated by the team. So, my comment is intended to help that process. Does that make sense?

The 2.5.6 build looks awesome. Unfortunately, it comes at the expense of not only performance but decent performance.

Where I used to be in the 40-60 fps range, not I'm in the high 20s. In crowded places or during sunset, I'll be in the high tens.

I also did the fxo/metashaders2 deletion thing. It did not help. I also noticed the 2.5.6 build fully uses one core of my CPU but only partially uses my GPU (70%). With versions 2.5.5 and before, both would be maximized to almost 100%.

My build: Ryzen 7 1800X, 16 GB DDR4, GTX 1080, SSD NVME, Track IR + 1920*1080

Also, the mouse cursor sometimes has a nasty habit of jumping to the middle of the screen.

PS: I did lower the video settings (like removing bokeh, lens effect dirt + flare, heatlblur to low, lowering the anisotropic filtering and antialiasing) but shockingly to strictly no effect on performance.

Yes, I have also noticed a hit to performance while using VR. Shame, as they had just gotten it dialed in not that long ago.

Cheers,

Don

well I tweaked and in most xases some settings went up in a tier. You guys should twaek it a bit might help.. I was getting real bad performance too after the patch but now back to where it was before:

fpsVR Report:

App: DCS HMD: Samsung Windows Mixed Reality 800ZBA0 (90.002 Hz, IPD 66.0)

GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (26.21.14.3648) CPU: Intel® Core i5-7600K CPU @ 3.80GHz

Delivered fps: 45.57 Duration: 7min.

GPU Frametimes:

Median: 16 ms

99th percentile: 20.6 ms

99.9th percentile: >30 ms

frametime <11.1ms(vsync): 7.2%

CPU frametime:

Median: 13.3 ms

99th percentile: 17.3 ms

99.9th percentile: 23.4 ms

frametime <11.1ms(vsync): 9.1%

Max. SteamVR SS: 150%

Render resolution per eye: 1772x2212(by SteamVR settings, Max.) (HMD driver recommended: 1447x1806)

here are my settings:

I also tried running in Through the inferno MP Mission it ran good there.. I may need to test a campaign mission or a more active server online..

From my exp., since 2.5.6 update, scenarios in which performances are bad may be related to LOD "bugs" (lots of bugs in this beta update - visual and functionnal - , certainly because lots of changes). The worst scenario I've seen is using TGP or Mav cam above Caucasus forests, under certain angles. (maybe related to trees' LOD showing too much through MFD)

There may be several other cases where performance drop (Also the bug where you land to rearm and performances are halved is kind of back) but I only experienced few.

Ground shadows can be heavier (interaction/new lighting ?), Stennis bubbles a bit also. I've not tried over Dubai, I have to so I don't know, but Las Vegas shows no issue (while hunting ground targets on streets).

Normandie is OK (trees are different, no LOD issue on them visibly, smooth distance transition - you don't see "waves" of tree LOD that travel bellow with you), Nevada is OK, PG to me is OK (all flights on iranian side), only Caucasus often overload system with added viewports.

Comparing same settings VR 2.5.5 / 2.5.6 on TF51 free flight Tibilissi inst.act. FPS are slightly better with latest 2.5.6 (about 5%).

With usage in 2.5.6 I changed my settings : shadows up (high), visibility up (high), ground shadows down (off). I try to avoid situations where system is overloaded, or functionnality issued (a10c rearm, F18c catapult-connex) and I enjoy the great graphical improvement with stable ASW/45fps.

Some bugs are not avoidable (LOD bugs giving - according to distance - ghost units, trains, effects, stuff sometimes displayed on 1 eye only). I'm ok with some workaround.

No. What's expected is improved graphics that are optimized, which ED has done a wonderful job with in the past, leading to comments like, "Wow! This new ______ looks amazing, and the performance is better, too." And my comments are related to the many people who are trying to understand their performance hit with this latest update, which Nineline has indicated is being investigated by the team. So, my comment is intended to help that process. Does that make sense?

Sure on the feedback side, but you're still forgetting like many of us, it's OpenBeta, it's not obligated to be optimized, IMO.

Sure on the feedback side, but you're still forgetting like many of us, it's OpenBeta, it's not obligated to be optimized, IMO.

Which is why we participate open beta...to provide critical feedback to developers so it can be better optimized. Sheesh...

Free Flight F-18 Persian Gulf:

SSLR Enabled: 30 FPS with micro-stutters

SSLR Disabled: 55 FPS with no micro-stutters

3800X, X570, 32GB 3600, RTX 2080Ti, SSD, Odyssey+ VR

oh wait wait, i have got the solution to my index...i buy track ir!!! That is going to work with my 2080ti!!! c'mon ED stop doing all those modules, optimization first then build more modules, i want a module...the name is VULKAN, i pay also for that!!!

Never understood why some people use that mod. Lots of visual degradation with no real benefit. Certainly the case on my system, anyway.

Easy to understand, when you think of a performance boost of around 25% in VR. Too bad you didn't have that on your system. For the visuals, you can turn off some things like simplified canopy or grass, and then it's hard for me to tell the difference to the original. Ok, less bloom..

For me this mod is a way to deal with the performance in 2.5.6. I was just trying to help. Doclucio said the mod is not working anymore, and that is not true.

Easy to understand, when you think of a performance boost of around 25% in VR. Too bad you didn't have that on your system. For the visuals, you can turn off some things like simplified canopy or grass, and then it's hard for me to tell the difference to the original. Ok, less bloom..

For me this mod is a way to deal with the performance in 2.5.6. I was just trying to help. Doclucio said the mod is not working anymore, and that is not true.

My comment wasn't directed at your helpful reply, it was a general comment on the fact that I find no benefit in using that mod at all. Just an opinion.

Too many visual degradations - water (no shallows, flat looking), sun (unrealistic), horrible grass, etc. It might be ok to accept some of these things if there was a performance boost, but I see none - well, very little - on my system. The general feeling in the past was that it seemed to benefit users with less powerful PCs, but if you are seeing a benefit, then that theory doesn't hold.

I am not alone in that opinion, but there are others like yourself who seem to see a benefit, and that is great!

Let me give you an example. Which graphic do you think is better?

2.5.6 with and without mod.

Let me give you an example. Which graphic do you think is better?

2.5.6 with and without mod.

Guess what... second picture looks better :thumbup:

I've recently seen the original graphics alot, cause for some time the mod didn't work. And I'd loooove to to fly without the mod, cause it's a pain in the *** to activate it correctly.

But I did not want to start a discussion weather to use it or not.

In case of visuals everyone has his priorities. I don't care about seeing whats under the water. I've seen post of people turning off shadows to flat or even off in the cockpit. No go for me, it kills my immersion. As well the scratches on the canopy. I want to feel like inside the cockpit and its canopy (again, simple canopy can be turned off, the simple grass too). I need a clear picture in the distance, I hate shimmering, I want to see the ball when I call it. That for I need to push some settings up, but for 2.5.6 I had to turn some of them down (once again).

The mod gives me the VR optimization that is bloody needed. Use it or leave it, if you don't like it :smilewink:

Guess what... second picture looks better :thumbup:

I've recently seen the original graphics alot, cause for some time the mod didn't work. And I'd loooove to to fly without the mod, cause it's a pain in the *** to activate it correctly.

But I did not want to start a discussion weather to use it or not.

In case of visuals everyone has his priorities. I don't care about seeing whats under the water. I've seen post of people turning off shadows to flat or even off in the cockpit. No go for me, it kills my immersion. As well the scratches on the canopy. I want to feel like inside the cockpit and its canopy (again, simple canopy can be turned off, the simple grass too). I need a clear picture in the distance, I hate shimmering, I want to see the ball when I call it. That for I need to push some settings up, but for 2.5.6 I had to turn some of them down (once again).

The mod gives me the VR optimization that is bloody needed. Use it or leave it, if you don't like it :smilewink:

I don't like it and I don't use it - except occasionally I install it to remind myself why I don't like it! I get excellent performance and better visuals without it.

As I said, there are visual degradations all over the place when using the mod. You said earlier you could hardly tell the difference in graphics quality with and without the mod. I was just questioning that.

If you (and others) want to degrade the visuals that ED spend so much time on just to get a few extra fps, that's fine, but let's not kid ourselves, there is a price to pay! Whether that matters to you is a moot point.

Part of the issue is, I feel, that a lot of people slavish use that mod, and don't notice what they are missing in terms of the non-modded graphic quality.

But, as I said, each to his own, and lots of people get benefit from the mod, so that must be a good thing.

Let me give you an example. Which graphic do you think is better?

2.5.6 with and without mod.

Change your gamma to 1

Change your gamma to 1

Sorry, I think you're missing the point. The shaders mod doesn't do 'the shallows'. It's one of the visual degradations that occur when using it. Water looks flat and lacking any detail. Compare that to ED's original beautiful water!

The attachments I posted demonstrate that perfectly.

yep no argument using the shaders mod is a compromise, but on mid range hardware, its sort of essential to keep the 45FPS in most scenarios with "reasonable quality and smoothness" ... i would love to run without it ... but in a straight choice between running with the MOD and VR and without the MOD at TrackIR i choose VR...that said my MB and processor and memory funds are nearly complete s my view may change then :)

I had very poor performance in VR after 2.5.6 but I reduced the world shadows to default and that seemed to fix it for me.

While the black DCS window that pops up is a nice touch to show SOMETHING is happening, I can report that like another user above about 4/5 times the game simply never actually launches and requires Task Manager to resolve.

Also the load times have gotten extremely long with 2.5.6. I moved DCS to a NVMe in January but this build feels like it is still on my old PCIe SSD.