Memory Limit/Load Issues

2560x1600x60 FPS Even w/ Fast Lossless Codec is gonna need a HUGE Frame Buffer.

 

my 4K Editing Rig uses 128GB of DDR4 Ram, and a RAID-0 PCIe SSD.

 

The 128GB is Required for the Frame Buffer, and the PCIe SSDs in raid are required to be able to write the file fast enough before the frame buffer takes up the entire system ram.

I don't understand this argument. Sure, higher resolution requires more resources (but as I said frame rate doesn't matter since recording is not in real time). But the fact that I was able to record 40 seconds of video clearly means that the system is capable. Are you saying that the longer you record the more RAM you need? That doesn't make much sense. Unless DCS keeps the whole video in memory???

Anyway, just to remove any doubt, I can reproduce the same unbounded memory growth while recording with 720x450 resolution at 30fps (again, this is using the built-in video recorder). It just takes longer to kill the machine.

Thank you for the update

 

Probably a stupid question, but here goes.

Is this mem issue also the reason we experience this stuttering in game, even on low graphics setting? In VR for my part, never tried with regular monitor.

I think I have a reasonable good spec computer, at least my february expenses thought so.

I cant have TGP active and Maverick cam open at the same time in the A10C, too much stuttering.

Wow, I have your specs except I have an i7700K at 4.5Ghz and I've never had an issue with stuttering when running TGP and Mav screen. In fact, I ran just fine using a GTX1060 6Gb before I got the 1080ti. Granted I was running mostly medium settings. You didn't post your settings but if it helps I have everything on High except for Civilian Traffic which is low, Texture shading flat, MSAA off, heat blur off, DS on with 1.6PD, 16x AF, terrain textures flat, grass and clutter off, chimney smoke off, preload radius 100,000, trees 80% and I use the Rift exclusively. Also I have not done a reinstall of 2.5. I'm still running Open Beta as far as I know. Hope it helps.

But this isnt anything new.

I realise it`s not new, i should`ve elaborated on my point a bit more, So will the graphics engine still render the waves under the map at full noise when you have it set on high, and if so then it`s wasted Mem IMO if it`s not being off loaded, then could that be allocated or used for better performance with shadows or textures etc.

How can you have "no issues" then go "from bad to worse"? Contradictory. .

Reasonable pilots understand exactly what I'm saying. There's nothing contradictory about what I am explaining...

There were no issues with my game until this 2.5 version came out. Period. Maybe you can understand that....?&$@/ss

I think 32gb of ram would probably be the sweet spot for multiplayer with a lot of assets. I have 16gb and hit 90-95% physical ram usage and a 24gb commit charge on the 104th server. contrast with a single plane in the editor and I'm only using 8gb physical and a 14-15gb commit charge. the latter would be fine but hitting 90% ram usage from one program is seriously limiting the resources available to other drivers, programs, windows etc... The bigger the mission the more resources needed, it's pretty simple.

I mean sim runs fine for me, it's just the massive load times and some of the occasional stuttering online, which I attribute to the fact I just don't have enough ram for those types of missions.

People with 32GB of ram seem to escape the troubles, what is your internet speed?

100Mb/s

...Somehow I avoided what others have been experiencing.

The credit for it is in your sig:

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

I'm pretty sure that without such a thing, we should not even think about DCS. Standard that can not afford everyone. Low settings, disgusting graphics... for me is not a solution. Without much money, no enjoyment in DCS. All the time I was hoping it could be less demanding but definitely, I do not think it will. That is DCS and and I'm not sure it will change. If we see freezing and stutters on the producer's video we can only imagine what awaits us on the worse PC. That`s it. :joystick:

Yes something mus be done with this memory bug . I just cannot afford 32 GB RAM. Prices are insane.

Glad this thread confirms the long load time, I have 16gb RAM, so half way there. Will try less clutter, Nellis with no stat s looks pretty bare, but if it’s being worked on that’s fine. Thank you for the information.

Wow, I have your specs except I have an i7700K at 4.5Ghz and I've never had an issue with stuttering when running TGP and Mav screen. In fact, I ran just fine using a GTX1060 6Gb before I got the 1080ti. Granted I was running mostly medium settings. You didn't post your settings but if it helps I have everything on High except for Civilian Traffic which is low, Texture shading flat, MSAA off, heat blur off, DS on with 1.6PD, 16x AF, terrain textures flat, grass and clutter off, chimney smoke off, preload radius 100,000, trees 80% and I use the Rift exclusively. Also I have not done a reinstall of 2.5. I'm still running Open Beta as far as I know. Hope it helps.

Thanks Wicked.-, I will try to adjust my settings again... ;-) Even though I have told myself to not use any more of my time on fiddling, just use it as it is.

Before my upgrade I had the i7 6700K (OC) and 980TI and I cant say the HW upgrade gave me this omg experience I was hoping for.

Well one must never give up in trying.

Thanks again.

So, what is the official version for the RAM requirement?

The credit for it is in your sig:

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure that without such a thing, we should not even think about DCS. Standard that can not afford everyone. Low settings, disgusting graphics... for me is not a solution. Without much money, no enjoyment in DCS. All the time I was hoping it could be less demanding but definitely, I do not think it will. That is DCS and and I'm not sure it will change. If we see freezing and stutters on the producer's video we can only imagine what awaits us on the worse PC. That`s it. :joystick:

the first post explains 2.5 will be optimized so you wont need 32GB of RAM nor 12 Gb of VRAM. You just have to wait a tad. :)

From the beginning of Personal Computers till today, there are a few things that have remained unchanged, one of them is this:

- You cannot substitute memory with any other component and expect the same outcome -

Knowing how harsh the price is now, I honestly couldnt and wouldnt buy 32GB 3600 now for 550€, NO...I would wait..but I do understand that ALL talking won't help and that ED does not dictate the DRAM market. Usually 16GB is no big deal, usually....

I also understand that most missions will already fall into the "NO, your RAM is too short" category. That is the part where mission designers can tweak a little ( A LITTLE !! ) but they cannot do wonders, as much as any party desires this.

Whats the cause of the long load times? Is that related to memory?

the first post explains 2.5 will be optimized so you wont need 32GB of RAM nor 12 Gb of VRAM. You just have to wait a tad. :)

A many year experience in the DCS tells me that i don`t need to believe in that. But for many years we are waiting for optimization so it's not a problem to wait for another "two weeks"... who know. :D ...let`s hope things will be changed. If it does not happen then, it will never be.

To many things there need to be changed/optimised/removed...

For example i don`t understand where is the difference between loading Su33 cockpit for CLIENT and PLAYER.

- CLIENT: All is loaded but i need to wait for cockpit "some time".

- PLAYER: All and cockpit is loaded immediately

Same mission, same cockpit, same model...

Something is wrong, unnecessarily, ... In this example, we can see how much MP is loaded with something that may be unnecessary. Or maybe is just same thing but loaded in different way/protocol. There are not just textures the problem ... there are many things (in background).

even with my 16GB, if I load in on our 104th server, loading times dramatically reduced by loading the mission in SP first. Once in, I have no issues to fly there.

The question for me is, why there is such long loading time, is it related to the RAM as well?

my System: I7 6700K, GTX970, 16GB Ram

104th_MoGas cheers

I don't understand this argument. Sure, higher resolution requires more resources (but as I said frame rate doesn't matter since recording is not in real time). But the fact that I was able to record 40 seconds of video clearly means that the system is capable. Are you saying that the longer you record the more RAM you need? That doesn't make much sense. Unless DCS keeps the whole video in memory???

 

Anyway, just to remove any doubt, I can reproduce the same unbounded memory growth while recording with 720x450 resolution at 30fps (again, this is using the built-in video recorder). It just takes longer to kill the machine.

Which Codec are you using? and what drive are you writing too?

Video recording by itself will use alot of ram.

even with my 16GB, if I load in on our 104th server, loading times dramatically reduced by loading the mission in SP first. Once in, I have no issues to fly there.

 

The question for me is, why there is such long loading time, is it related to the RAM as well?

 

my System: I7 6700K, GTX970, 16GB Ram

 

104th_MoGas cheers

It takes a long time on 32GB too. I have 8 cores and an NVME drive, so my only theory is the data file decompression method is the bottleneck (probably pegged to a single thread like so many games do).

Which Codec are you using? and what drive are you writing too?

I am using "Theora + Vorbis" and it's writing to SSD. But this is all irrelevant.

I think I failed to make my point accurately. I am not complaining about how much memory is needed to record a video. It may be a lot depending on the settings, but it takes what it takes. Fine.

What I am trying to point out is that the memory usage grows continuously as the recording goes on, without bounds. If you monitor the task manager ("Commit Size" column), it grows pretty much linearly all the time. This is not a normal behavior, and so far no one including you was able to explain it.

Buy a 256 GB USB Stick w/ Decent Read/write speed and set it as a ReadyBoost Drive

Can you elaborate on this a little bit? I have an SSD for DCS and 16GB of RAM, what does ReadyBoost do and is it available on Win7 (64 bit)?

Guys,

I am a newbie to DCS and still on DCS 1.5.8 and am having a great time with high FPS (120s to 170s) on my new Dell 27inch/144hz/1ms/G-Sync monitor. Using Mission Editor to build air to air missions of 6 V 6 fighter combat, etc. with no stuttering, lag, screen tearing etc. Mig-15/F-86 game play is really good and I am anxious to join up with you guys on DCS 2.5.

I was flying on some of the Multiplayer Servers and still had FPS counts in the low 100s FPS....I am using a hardline cable connection to my Router.

(Perhaps we should all be mentioning which Router and connection (wireless/cable) that we are using in our equipment too?)

I always fly at 2560 X 1440.

My only concern is whether or not my current system will actually give me any good (60) FPS for flying on 2.5.

The aircraft and cockpits, sky, ground, flowers, trees, etc. are all beautifully rendered on DCS 1.5.8. ED has done a tremendous job with it...hate to leave it for DCS 2.5.

I don't need to see every tree and leaf - I just need great FPS, no screen tearing, or lag. (the 27 inch Dell Monitor with the G-Sync, 1Ms, 144Hz has opened up the game for me with excellent results!). I previously owned an Asus 24 inch 60Hz Monitor.

I'm going to try to build 12 Migs vs 12 F-86s dogfights missions and test for FPS slowdowns - have not had any FPS slowdowns with the 6 V 6 dogfights. I use D.Va's Optimization Guide to fine tune some of the settings.

I LOVE DCS 1.5.8! It works perfect with only 4Gb of VRAM on the video card and with 16Gb of overall RAM. I know that DCS 1.5.8 will go soon unsupported in favor of DCS 2.5, if not already...

FYI...

My computer specs (purchased already built):

Lenovo Y900 Desktop tower – full size (2 years old – March 2016)

Processors: 6th Generation Intel Core i7-6700K (4.00GHz 2133MHz 8MB)

Operating system: Windows 10 Home 64

Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 4GB

Drives:

SSD: 256GB (78.4GB used--160GB free)

SATA Hybrid Drive: 2TB 7200RPM (DCS 1.5.8 on this HD)

RAM: 16GB DDR4 2133MHz

Mother Board? – Device Name 2F6B2C20-1D9F-458A-A664-C0CA0E535D88

Power Supply Unit: It says “610W MAX” (625W total). Note: an online comment mentioned the following: “A PSU is operating at its optimum when only 50% of the power is used….buy twice what you need...if you are using 400W then buy a 800W PSU...”

I am not using any AIO CPU liquid cooler/fans, etc. Only the CPU cooling fan that came with it along with the two case fans-front and rear. Totally stock PC system.

Router: Netgear Wireless N600 Dual Band WNDR3400. 5gHZ

(5 years old-works great! Hardline cable connected to PC.)

Everything works great! It was the 60Hz PC Monitor that was holding me back! (that and my lousy air-to-air gunnery skills...I'm gonna blame the Monitor for that too! :-)

Um, I've never really toggled with the system options in the game, does switching the ones recommended in the readme change the looks and stuff that much, or is it just small changes?

As a side note, I hadn't updated DCS 2.5OB since I downloaded it, then last night I updated it to the latest version. Is it the 'release' version now, or still OB?

A few things:

1- Could somebody please post a screenshot of the default system settings? I forgot to.

2-I lowered all of the settings the readme said to, should there be any memory loss/limit (whatever it is) now? I experienced it only when doing campaigns.