6800xt not boosting in dcs

[eatthis]

very early days yet but ive fired up dcs 5 times so far and only once has it activated the boost clocks. its sitting at 570 mhz with the obvious terrible fps. any suggestions or is it likely to be an early driver problem?

[Mars Exulte]

Drivers would be an obvious starting point. Beyond that vague possibility, your post is utterly lacking in any details that would allow somebody to help you.

[JayRoc]

5700 mhz

 

That would be amazing since it just can do 2500mhz with OC. Troll?

[eatthis]

 

That would be amazing since it just can do 2500mhz with OC. Troll?

 

570 lol

 

what more info would you like? ps it seems fine at 2600 mhz so far when it does boost

 

[JayRoc]

Do you have the Steam or the standalone Version? Running Beta? Which drivers?

 

My brother will get his on saturday, can test then.

[eatthis]

Do you have the Steam or the standalone Version? Running Beta? Which drivers?

 

My brother will get his on saturday, can test then.

 

beta standalone latest drivers, 20.11.2

 

[reece146]

JayzTwoCents released a video yesterday that showed Control only going to 570MHz. Able to work around via "jumping" but it still sucked.

 

Driver issue.

 

Patience is a virtue - or so I hear.

[LucShep]

 

I have an RX5700XT (Navi-1, released last year) and got no issues whatsoever, so that's definitely driver issues (somewhat expected, unfortunately, being such a new card and DCS not being a mainstream game title).

You should definitely report that to AMD. For that, open Adrenalin (AMD's Control Panel) >>> System >>> Launch Bug Report Tool

 

As for a possible temporary fix...

Within the drivers, you can create specific custom frequencies (base, game and boost clocks) to individual games, and I'd definitely recommend trying that until the issue is solved via new drivers.

There's nothing to lose, it's a well known method for very old or obscure (or unoptimized) games where GPU doesn't boost at all, and it's also a way for you to get accustomized to AMD's Adrenalin. :)

 

 

1) You need to first create a profile for the DCS executable.

So, open Adrenalin (AMD's Control Panel) >>> Gaming (on top) >>> click the three dots on the right "Add a Game", and then locate the DCS.EXE (inside the main game installation, under the BIN folder)

 

2) With the DCS profile now created...

Adrenalin (AMD's Control Panel) >>> Performance (on top) >>> Tuning >>> click "Manual" (on Tuning Control) >>> Add Game Profile (on the right) >>> "GPU Tuning" enabled >>> "Advanced Control" enabled

 

Now click "Fine Tuning Controls" and you'll open the clock values.

 

Here what you see is three clock values on Frequency (left to right)

Minimum (Base clocks), Medium (Game clocks), Maximum (Boost clocks)

 

Below it, their three respective voltage values on Voltage (also left to right).

 

No need to touch the voltages, adjust the Frequency only - specifically the value for minimum, so that the minimum (base) is same as medium (game) frequency clocks.

 

So, for example, if we imagine that the three default Frequency values are:

750 > 1500 > 2500

 

you would then put:

1500 > 1500 > 2500

Save profile and try again DCS, let's hope it works better this time. :pilotfly:

 

Of course, you can play around with values (welcome to tweaking and overclocking) but do tread carefully.

[eatthis]

JayzTwoCents released a video yesterday that showed Control only going to 570MHz. Able to work around via "jumping" but it still sucked.

 

Driver issue.

 

Patience is a virtue - or so I hear.

 

That was my gut feeling, thanks

[eatthis]

I have an RX5700XT (Navi-1, released last year) and got no issues whatsoever, so that's definitely driver issues (somewhat expected, unfortunately, being such a new card and DCS not being a mainstream game title).

You should definitely report that to AMD. For that, open Adrenalin (AMD's Control Panel) >>> System >>> Launch Bug Report Tool

 

As for a possible temporary fix...

Within the drivers, you can create specific custom frequencies (base, game and boost clocks) to individual games, and I'd definitely recommend trying that until the issue is solved via new drivers.

There's nothing to lose, it's a well known method for very old or obscure (or unoptimized) games where GPU doesn't boost at all, and it's also a way for you to get accustomized to AMD's Adrenalin. :)

 

 

1) You need to first create a profile for the DCS executable.

So, open Adrenalin (AMD's Control Panel) >>> Gaming (on top) >>> click the three dots on the right "Add a Game", and then locate the DCS.EXE (inside the main game installation, under the BIN folder)

 

2) With the DCS profile now created...

Adrenalin (AMD's Control Panel) >>> Performance (on top) >>> Tuning >>> click "Manual" (on Tuning Control) >>> Add Game Profile (on the right) >>> "GPU Tuning" enabled >>> "Advanced Control" enabled

 

Now click "Fine Tuning Controls" and you'll open the clock values.

 

Here what you see is three clock values on Frequency (left to right)

Minimum (Base clocks), Medium (Game clocks), Maximum (Boost clocks)

 

Below it, their three respective voltage values on Voltage (also left to right).

 

No need to touch the voltages, adjust the Frequency only - specifically the value for minimum, so that the minimum (base) is same as medium (game) frequency clocks.

 

So, for example, if we imagine that the three default Frequency values are:

 

 

you would then put:

 

Save profile and try again DCS, let's hope it works better this time. :pilotfly:

 

Of course, you can play around with values (welcome to tweaking and overclocking) but do tread carefully.

 

Cracking reply, thanka io try this tomorow. I did see custom profile game specific but didnt notice tye 3 settings, il have a proper go at it tomorow. After 2 more game starts it boosted both times with no overclock

[Qiou87]

Buying an AMD GPU is not recomended for anyone as they have the most the bad awful terrible driver. 8GB VRAM is enough for DCS and the extra VRAM will automatically fill the RAM, no stutter with 8G VRAM for my RTX3070 when the VRAM is filled. DCS tends to load the meaningless content into VRAM which does nothing with the fps and it is not meaningful to increase the VRAM even to 24GB

 

Yeah, you are probably also very experienced with AMD GPUs given your very open-minded and clearly fact-based approach. You strike me as an nVidia fanboy who hasn't owned an AMD GPU since it was called ATi. I totally agree with you, we should only have nVidia producing GPUs for gamers. This way we can all pay 2000$ for 1080p gaming GPU and see absolutely no innovation. You realize that RTX 30x0 is so powerful because nVidia was afraid of Big Navi and developed their own cards accordingly right? No big navi, no RTX 30x0...:music_whistling:

 

Early releases are typically rocky, and yes sometimes AMD has had problems like early 5700XT drivers, as have other companies (how many third-party card builders, like MSI or Gigabyte, had to release a "V2" of their custom cards because V1 had issues?). That is a cautionary tale to not get the first batch and wait for others to iron out the kinks.

 

I love how you are defending somehow the RTX3070 when no one mentioned it here. You are obviously happy with your choice, go and enjoy your GPU, no need to ruin everyone else's day with off-topic posts.

[LucShep]

 

 

Buying an AMD GPU is not recomended for anyone as they have the most the bad awful terrible driver. 8GB VRAM is enough for DCS and the extra VRAM will automatically fill the RAM, no stutter with 8G VRAM for my RTX3070 when the VRAM is filled. DCS tends to load the meaningless content into VRAM which does nothing with the fps and it is not meaningful to increase the VRAM even to 24GB

 

None of that is true.

 

First, AMD drivers are near perfect these days. After the shiteshow last year with awfull drivers (for six months they were horrible), they've been superb since March/April, with the Adrenalin overhaul (20.4.2 release).

I'm chuffed to bits with my RX5700XT for many months now, superb image quality (no idea why, but it's noticeable after years with different Nvidia GPUs) and stable drivers, with respective updates and fixes being effective, even repeated bi-monthly when AMD feels necessary - they pay attention to bug reports and act accordingly (and why everyone should submit bugs like the one in the OT).

 

Through the years I used many GPUs of both camps AMD (previously ATI) and NVIDIA, both are very good, both have problems, all depending on driver release and specific models.

The fact is the RX6000 series are a completely new architecture launched just two days ago, so of course some things may need further updates - the same happened with Nvidia's RTX3080/3090 just two months ago (also with RTX2080Ti two years ago).

Nothing new on the front lines then...

 

Second, you're very wrong on the VRAM subject, it's actually a known problem in DCS - 8GB VRAM may be "enough" for DCS on something like 1080P (if single-player), but no longer ideal. It's actually insuficient for higher resolutions, such as 4K and more so those on VR, and much worse when in multiplayer, where everyone's textures data are loaded into each user's VRAM.

DCS is a freakin anomaly monster consuming as much VRAM as it can (one discussion, and here's another), it easily chews upwards of 10GB VRAM.

If you have a Windows pagefile, I hope you have it large enough and on a really fast SSD, as that's where the game will chew on, once there's no more on the GPU to feed on (hello stuttering!).

So, no, sorry to say but your RTX3070 8GB (as good as it indeed is) will actually become outdated and kind of short for DCS far faster than (and therefore not as good as purchase compared to) the RX6800 16GB.

[coldViPer]

If you have a Windows pagefile, I hope you have it large enough and on a really fast SSD, as that's where the game will chew on, once there's no more on the GPU to feed on (hello stuttering!).

 

If you are out of VRAM, doesn't it use RAM first (shared GPU memory) or how this goes?

[Qiou87]

In DCS VR, the CPU is the main bottleneck. I used to try a GTX1060 3GB, it can run with a Pimax VR 4K resolution, but the usage is just 80%, 20fps, no stutter, just steady low fps, multiplayer is playerble.

 

No, this is wrong. I measured CPU and GPU frametimes with my Rift S (I have made multiple measurements in SP, and some in MP as well), and I consistently have higher frametime with my GPU (2070S) than my CPU (2600X). This means the GPU is the bottleneck. The situation becomes a little bit less clear once in multiplayer, but still on average, the higher frametime is for my GPU. You might be happy with 20fps but I have a steady 45 at SS x1.4, 20 is quite unplayable I think...

 

@coldViPer: I wouldn't be adamant about it, but I had serious stutters after a while in DCS (SP and MP), and it was due to my pagefile size. I have 32GB of Ram but the game seemed to run out of Vram (my 8GB was reported full but some monitoring software) and then would stutter like crazy. After setting a much higher pagefile size, it never happened to me again.

 

@jim keller: saying most people do it so it must be the smart choice is proven, time and again, to be wrong. After all at some point, almost everyone believed the Earth was flat. The fact that nVidia is a larger company, investing a lot more in marketing over the years, means it has built a much larger image than AMD. AMD also never really gets praised for their accomplishments, only cut down for their mistakes.

 

I have personnally no stake with any of those huge corporations, I seriously don't care and just buy the better product. That's why my Intel CPU got replaced by an AMD, and my former AMD card by nVidia. But right now as I look to upgrade again for VR, the RX6800 looks like a much smarter choice for me, using mostly DCS and VR to decide (and yes, I will not replace a 8GB card by another one). And by the time cards are finally available at their MSRP price, the early problems will all be solved, and the cards will run beautifully.

[LucShep]

 

If you are out of VRAM, doesn't it use RAM first (shared GPU memory) or how this goes?

 

This is indeed a funny one. It should, right?

Yet that doesn't seem a definite conclusion, even if I admit not understanding why different results across different computers.

 

I tested quite a bit ago (2.5.4 and 2.5.5 stable) with 50.000 terrain preload on various missions at Caucasus (FC3 ones with A-10A, mostly).

First on friend's PC with 32GB of RAM, and the result was identical to those on these forums using 32GB (and over) of RAM, in that over 22GB can be consumed with just a bit of page file consumed (but may worth mentioning, some prefer not to use a pagefile).

But then in my own tests with three different computers, one with 24GB RAM (which am currently using) and two others with 16GB RAM, and all with 8GB pagefile, none went over 13GB of used RAM (so, 12GB plus a smidge, Win10 not taking more than 1.5~2.0 GB so plenty more to use). Yet the page file gets filled over 65% (with VRAM on the limit).

 

After this, I'm not even sure anymore. Not discounting on the RAM importance (for example) but placing more emphasis on the pagefile usage (if present and large enough) seems correct(?).

One thing is sure though, 6GB VRAM doesn't cut it anymore - if Syria is of any example - and with DCS increasing details and textures size, not even 8GB VRAM (today being "enough") will suffice in a near future.

 

 

@coldViPer: I wouldn't be adamant about it, but I had serious stutters after a while in DCS (SP and MP), and it was due to my pagefile size. I have 32GB of Ram but the game seemed to run out of Vram (my 8GB was reported full but some monitoring software) and then would stutter like crazy. After setting a much higher pagefile size, it never happened to me again.

 

...see?

That's what I'm saying.

[Thinder]

 

Buying an AMD GPU is not recomended for anyone as they have the most the bad awful terrible driver. 8GB VRAM is enough for DCS and the extra VRAM will automatically fill the RAM, no stutter with 8G VRAM for my RTX3070 when the VRAM is filled. DCS tends to load the meaningless content into VRAM which does nothing with the fps and it is not meaningful to increase the VRAM even to 24GB

 

Blah. I had both and I had drivers issues with both.

[Thinder]

 

This is indeed a funny one. It should, right?

Yet that doesn't seem a definite conclusion, even if I admit not understanding why different results across different computers.

 

I tested quite a bit ago (2.5.4 and 2.5.5 stable) with 50.000 terrain preload on various missions at Caucasus (FC3 ones with A-10A, mostly).

First on friend's PC with 32GB of RAM, and the result was identical to those on these forums using 32GB (and over) of RAM, in that over 22GB can be consumed with just a bit of page file consumed (but may worth mentioning, some prefer not to use a pagefile).

But then in my own tests with three different computers, one with 24GB RAM (which am currently using) and two others with 16GB RAM, and all with 8GB pagefile, none went over 13GB of used RAM (so, 12GB plus a smidge, Win10 not taking more than 1.5~2.0 GB so plenty more to use). Yet the page file gets filled over 65% (with VRAM on the limit).

 

After this, I'm not even sure anymore. Not discounting on the RAM importance (for example) but placing more emphasis on the pagefile usage (if present and large enough) seems correct(?).

One thing is sure though, 6GB VRAM doesn't cut it anymore - if Syria is of any example - and with DCS increasing details and textures size, not even 8GB VRAM (today being "enough") will suffice in a near future.

 

 

 

...see?

That's what I'm saying.

 

Pagefiles are best set on a separate HD than the O.S, typically twice the RAM size, I have a 500GB Samsung V-NAND SSD exclusively dedicated for gaming and page files (98304 mb), with only DCS Client and DCS O.B installed, it is obviously way faster than my SSDs so it contribute to reduced latency and other issues due to page files...

[eatthis]

I have an RX5700XT (Navi-1, released last year) and got no issues whatsoever, so that's definitely driver issues (somewhat expected, unfortunately, being such a new card and DCS not being a mainstream game title).

You should definitely report that to AMD. For that, open Adrenalin (AMD's Control Panel) >>> System >>> Launch Bug Report Tool

 

As for a possible temporary fix...

Within the drivers, you can create specific custom frequencies (base, game and boost clocks) to individual games, and I'd definitely recommend trying that until the issue is solved via new drivers.

There's nothing to lose, it's a well known method for very old or obscure (or unoptimized) games where GPU doesn't boost at all, and it's also a way for you to get accustomized to AMD's Adrenalin. :)

 

 

1) You need to first create a profile for the DCS executable.

So, open Adrenalin (AMD's Control Panel) >>> Gaming (on top) >>> click the three dots on the right "Add a Game", and then locate the DCS.EXE (inside the main game installation, under the BIN folder)

 

2) With the DCS profile now created...

Adrenalin (AMD's Control Panel) >>> Performance (on top) >>> Tuning >>> click "Manual" (on Tuning Control) >>> Add Game Profile (on the right) >>> "GPU Tuning" enabled >>> "Advanced Control" enabled

 

Now click "Fine Tuning Controls" and you'll open the clock values.

 

Here what you see is three clock values on Frequency (left to right)

Minimum (Base clocks), Medium (Game clocks), Maximum (Boost clocks)

 

Below it, their three respective voltage values on Voltage (also left to right).

 

No need to touch the voltages, adjust the Frequency only - specifically the value for minimum, so that the minimum (base) is same as medium (game) frequency clocks.

 

So, for example, if we imagine that the three default Frequency values are:

 

 

you would then put:

 

Save profile and try again DCS, let's hope it works better this time. :pilotfly:

 

Of course, you can play around with values (welcome to tweaking and overclocking) but do tread carefully.

mines different to thjat, i dont get ethe 3 freq options. onlyu min and max which ive set at 2500 and 2600

 

[LucShep]

mines different to thjat, i dont get ethe 3 freq options. onlyu min and max which ive set at 2500 and 2600

 

Yes, just noticed that now from

... :wassat: For the RX6800s there's only Minimum (idle clock) and Maximum (boost clock) Frequencies settings.

 

For those (like me) that like to micro-tweak things, it's kind of a stepback if no longer being able to tweak mid range (if imagining a curve for fine tuning), but I digress.

That's a really minor thing, not really a problem and most won't ever use it or miss it at all.

 

So, totally fine for the use case discussed here, for which the focus is on the Minimum clock.

If you set the Minimum ("500" is default, it seems?) to somewhere in-between that and the Maximum (boost clocks), say "1500", it should do the job, I think. :)

 

At least with RX5700s, the very rare issue with "my card is not boosting in XYZ game" was usually about having clocks that sit on idle and not even being tickled by the game being ran, but once Minimum (idle clock) was raised at about "medium values" (or perceived as such) the expected normal action was back. Hopefully that works same for RX6000s with any such issues.

[Thinder]

Did any of you tried to use AMD Ryzen Master?

[eatthis]

 

Yes, just noticed that now from

... :wassat: For the RX6800s there's only Minimum (idle clock) and Maximum (boost clock) Frequencies settings.

 

For those (like me) that like to micro-tweak things, it's kind of a stepback if no longer being able to tweak mid range (if imagining a curve for fine tuning), but I digress.

That's a really minor thing, not really a problem and most won't ever use it or miss it at all.

 

So, totally fine for the use case discussed here, for which the focus is on the Minimum clock.

If you set the Minimum ("500" is default, it seems?) to somewhere in-between that and the Maximum (boost clocks), say "1500", it should do the job, I think. :)

 

At least with RX5700s, the very rare issue with "my card is not boosting in XYZ game" was usually about having clocks that sit on idle and not even being tickled by the game being ran, but once Minimum (idle clock) was raised at about "medium values" (or perceived as such) the expected normal action was back. Hopefully that works same for RX6000s with any such issues.

 

ive got minimum set to 2500 lol

its just worked fine for 30mins then randomly tanked still in game

 

[LucShep]

 

ive got minimum set to 2500 lol

its just worked fine for 30mins then randomly tanked still in game

 

WOW :noexpression: so you put Min same as Max boost?? That's probably way too much.

...my understanding is that frequencies on a GPU are like on a CPU, i.e, meant to flutuate. That way it means it's pretty much full on power at all times (frequencies and respective voltages).

Maybe it was throttling after 30mins (same as CPUs do)?

 

Anyway, short of ideas besides trying something lower for Min Frequency (still think a value around "1500" would be more than enough)...

...maybe try Hybernation (Sleep) OFF, as well as PCI-Express "Link State Power Management" OFF in the Windows Power Options (see attached image, these I always do on gaming PCs) and maybe also ULPS OFF.

[eatthis]

 

WOW :noexpression: so you put Min same as Max boost?? That's probably way too much.

...my understanding is that frequencies on a GPU are like on a CPU, i.e, meant to flutuate. That way it means it's pretty much full on power at all times (frequencies and respective voltages).

Maybe it was throttling after 30mins (same as CPUs do)?

 

Anyway, short of ideas besides trying something lower for Min Frequency (still think a value around "1500" would be more than enough)...

...maybe try Hybernation (Sleep) OFF, as well as PCI-Express "Link State Power Management" OFF in the Windows Power Options (see attached image, these I always do on gaming PCs) and maybe also ULPS OFF.

 

I dont think min runs it like that unles its loaded up ie gaming, it certainly doesnt boost in windows. Il drop the min freq and see what happens. Min is 2500 max is 2600 so there is a difference. I havnt looked closely at temps but when i have seen its maxing low 70s i think so not horrible

[JayRoc]

So we testet today with a XFX Rx 6800xt. The card runs like a charm and I can't confirm any driver problems or funny behaviour with the boosting clock.

 

We get over 70fps with a Pimax 8kx and a Ryzen 5900x CPU. We will do some benchmarks early on this week with 6800, 6800xt and a 3080 with ryzen 3600, 5600x and 5900x.

 

Your Problems seem to be the overclocking. There are some channels referring to non boosting Rx cards with RAM clocked to more than 2150. You might want to check that.

[eatthis]

So we testet today with a XFX Rx 6800xt. The card runs like a charm and I can't confirm any driver problems or funny behaviour with the boosting clock.

 

We get over 70fps with a Pimax 8kx and a Ryzen 5900x CPU. We will do some benchmarks early on this week with 6800, 6800xt and a 3080 with ryzen 3600, 5600x and 5900x.

 

Your Problems seem to be the overclocking. There are some channels referring to non boosting Rx cards with RAM clocked to more than 2150. You might want to check that.

 

i set it to stock. seemed a bit better but still did it. this time was was fine for 10-15 mins then tanked for 5 minutes and then boosted again

 

ps what are your settings? i have a 7700k at 5ghz with the 6800xt and 32gb 3200mhz ram and i cant get it set so im happy