ED has raised the DCS system requirements on the steam store page (GTX 1070 is now listed as a minimum for low settings).

[Mars Exulte]

14 hours ago, Fri13 said:

 

Problems are that not everyone can drop a 500-1300 for a new GPU, and likely new CPU and motherboard and RAM as all goes hand to hand together to be usable.

  Nobody has to. It's a video game. Prioritising and managing your budget is your problem.

 

Quote

To buy a 4 years old setup is not so expensive, but it is of course not enough.

  The 1070 launched in summer of 2016. That's about to be five years old.

 

Quote

Would it be bad to offer DCS version that might look as a game but works? Not all need a reality looking cockpits.

  99% of the stuff in the game is not suddenly changing. The cockpit yesterday is the cockpit you'll have tomorrow.

 

Quote

Especially VR users can anyways use much lower quality.

  You can do that already in the aptly named ''graphic settings''. 

 

Quote

But problem is again that so much is promoted on Open Beta, and average players are directed primarily to be Open Beta users.

  What version people choose to use is their problem. Nothing is ''marketed'' to beta. Unsuprisingly, new stuff goes there first.... that is its purpose afterall. It is nobody else's problem if the average **MP** server chooses to do that, and a few hundred online users follow suit. The majority of the offline community most likely do not. This is a ''you'' problem, not an ED problem, and not a ''problem'' in the first place.

 

Quote

The stable is left behind and it is not marketed or promoted as primary platform as should.

  It literally is. I cannot count how many times ED have encouraged people to use the main branch. People ignore them. That's not their problem.

 

Quote

So that leads situation that all go to Open Beta

  No, a couple of popular multiplayer servers do that, and a few hundred mp focused players follow suit. 

 

Quote

and all get pushed with the latest problems

  If you use the beta, that's a risk yes. Good thing nobody put a gun to your head.

 

Quote

and latest hardware demands

 This is a lot of bitching over a block of text that presently means nothing. Why don't we... like... wait until we have something to bitch about first, instead of all this ridiculous pre-emptive whining and hand wringing.

 

Quote

and it just cause situation where lot of messages are about hardware demands and problems etc

  Half the people on the internet are illiterate and incompetent, that applies to literally every context, not only DCS.

 

Quote

that leads to overall product reviews and opinions being negative.

  People frequently leave reviews based on their incompetence or impatient, yes. Welcome to the internet, this applies to literally everything. 

 

Quote

I can see it as a big deal in many scenarios.

  If by ''many'', you mean ''a handful of optional and specific scenarios'', sure.

 

Quote

But it is normal as so many want to be the first or have the best hardware and showoff that superiority over others.

  Nothing wrong with people showing off their stuff. If you can't appreciate it without being jealous or wringing your hands, that's your problem. It also has no relevance to the game's requirements.

 

 

 

  Tldr; This is a lot of bitching over a block of text that presently means nothing. Why don't we... like... wait until we have something to bitch about first, instead of all this ridiculous pre-emptive whining and hand wringing.

Edited February 21, 2021 by Mars Exulte

[Rudel_chw]

Here in chile there is no stock currently of the 2080ti, but the 3070 costs us$ 1.270 new

 

Anyway, I never purchase GPU new, always 2nd hand.

[Fri13]

1 hour ago, Rudel_chw said:

Who would be using a 10 year old processor with DCS and yet have the money to consider purchasing a 3080 ? who?

 

If you would read the thread, you would understand that it is about changing the minimum GPU up to Nvidia 1070 series level.

Those who need better than they already have, can very well be in the situation that it requires them to buy something else than a GPU like you.

 

1 hour ago, Rudel_chw said:

I had a couple of years old Ryzen 3600 (like a lot of people, most users upgrade processor every 3 years), so I could get a lot of improvement changing just the GPU ... and I don't think that I'm an exception in this regard.

 

Actually you are part of exception group. CPU upgrades every 3 years is not very common. And to upgrade to levels where a todays $1000 GPU would be huge benefit without CPU being bottleneck, that is again a case that requires to question that what is the upgrade path to take to be able upgrade in the future in more sensible manner. 

 

1 hour ago, Rudel_chw said:

Amazing, the lengths one person can go to avoid admiting that he was exagerating his case.  

 

Amazing how you can not admit that you have not read what I have written and you just exaggerate everything that you think I have written.

 

Let me quote you the missing parts that you are claiming doesn't exist:

 

Upgrading just the GPU is not often enough as you need to feed that card as well. Hence other components requires upgrading.

$1000 for a GPU + $500 for a CPU + $200 possible new motherboard + $300 possible new RAM. Not to miss possible new PSU.

 

You can keep exaggerating that "not often enough" is not about Your case, you just made the GPU, but not all are in exactly same situation as you are.

You are just missing the point, like making a claim that "possible new RAM" is same thing as adding more RAM: "what would have been the point on increasing it to 64?".

 

If one swaps from older motherboard to newer one, there might be a requirement to buy new RAM, not more, but different. The PC gaming market (steam survey) is split between two hardware groups. Those who have 8 GB of RAM (30%) and those who have 16 GB of RAM (45%), and only 10% has more than 16 GB.

You just do not consider the situation that is been talked about here. DCS use very high quality textures, requiring more VRAM and more RAM, and it could be considerably be lowered with new options what texture qualities are being installed and then used.

 

The point that you are still missing, is that some people just doesn't have a option to do a $1000 GPU upgrade because they do not get the benefits without upgrading rest of the computer. If they want to do the upgrade, they need to put more. And it is not about question that what is someone's budget or not. And there are people who use 10 year old CPU successfully to play DCS. We are talking about 3-4 Ghz class in 2012, example AMD FX-8350, a eight threaded CPU at base clockspeed 4 Ghz. It just is not capable to feed a $1000 GPU's at this day even when such will increase performance compared to example 1000 series.

 

And yes, I do have one such PC elsewhere, and I do run a DCS on it. And yes I do have money to buy any GPU there is without any problems.

But I can't for that PC, do you know why? Because hardware compatibility problems that I can not upgrade the GPU. There is no reasons to do the replacement as it main use is totally different things where it performs completely fine.

[LucShep]

3 hours ago, Mars Exulte said:

  Tldr; This is a lot of bitching over a block of text that presently means nothing. Why don't we... like... wait until we have something to bitch about first, instead of all this ridiculous pre-emptive whining and hand wringing.

 

Of course it makes sense to wait, but I also think it's justified that people are complaining this much.

You and I know that the next update won't make DCS run faster and consume less resources than before.

 

The "new" hardware requirements announcement just exacerbates a problem that is not new - lack of optimization.

We read about "8GB VRAM GPU or higher will now be minimum requirement", when instead there should read"We fixed/corrected/optimized the textures VRAM issue".

 

I made a huge wall of text in this thread with a particular information about DCS's textures size, format and bit-depth being wrong and all over the place.

Listen, many of those textures have been packaged like that for years(!), more keep getting packaged like that, in every module and every map, and that's actually surprising for many of us. And I don't mean just those of us dealing with texture mods for DCS. 

I almost want to believe that someone at ED, by mistake, has created wrong textures export settings as default, for inside and third-parties to adopt. Because, looking at the files, it looks so obviously wrong that they thought it wouldn't matter, when in practice it does create problems. 
 

Therefore it's impossible to not feel disappointed and vent in the forums, when reading about newer brute-force hardware requirements (minimum 8GB VRAM GPU, in this current world scenario!) instead of correcting an older practice/problem and fix DCS's many issues with VRAM, RAM and Disc usage/swap and, most likely, need lower GPU requirements!

We are (and will be) paying customers and passionate followers/believers of ED's outstanding work, but this almost seems like either negligence or incompetence.

 

Edited February 22, 2021 by LucShep

[3WA]

15 hours ago, Fri13 said:

I think I could get DCS run nicely in 10 years old CPU and 5 years old GPU, with 16 GB RAM. But it would take little doing.

Well, both my cpu and gpu are 7 years old, I have 8 gb ram, and I still manage to hit 60 fps at 1920x1080 @ all low settings.  So, even if it halves that, I'll still get 30 fps which is probably minimal to fly.  But I plan on upgrading everything in a year or two when prices come down.  So I'm good with the new minimums, and hopefully Vulcan helps out somewhat.

This sim was not meant for poor people, sorry.  I've been saving up for a couple of years now for a new computer, mainly just to play DCS.  I'm old, out of a job, and flat broke, but am cheering DCS on all the way.  They are finally starting to push it, and going beyond what they were.  I can see that one day, they're going to bring in vehicle and FPS simulation, at the rate they are going.  Look at the graphics on Mariana's.  I just wish they would release their mapping tools so we could work on our own custom maps.

DCS isn't even the real problem.  It's the HOTAS and rudders, and if you want a cockpit, etc.  That's where the REAL costs start coming in.  I play with a joystick that was made for Radio Control training.  It's works decent for now.  Just had to repair it the other day by shoving some paper shims in it, because the stick got loose.  I'm hoping one day to be able to afford VKB or Virpil mid grade HOTAS.

 

And speaking of bitcoin miners, did you guys see that Nvidia is going to cut them off in the new 3060?  That should help somewhat!

They're going to make a special 3060 for mining that can't be used for gaming.  I doubt if most people will be interested in it, so it should free up chips somewhat.

Edited February 21, 2021 by 3WA

[LucShep]

42 minutes ago, 3WA said:

And speaking of bitcoin miners, did you guys see that Nvidia is going to cut them off in the new 3060?  That should help somewhat!

They're going to make a special 3060 for mining that can't be used for gaming.  I doubt if most people will be interested in it, so it should free up chips somewhat.

 

 

Oh, if only... unfortunately it won't be like that.

But we're going off topic and maybe better recommend thread opened here about that subject: 
 

 

[TOViper]

18 hours ago, NineLine said:

Try not to panic right now.

 

Yep, I'll try this time too.

Let's forget the past, should we?

 

I personally didn't panic before launch of super-carrier.

Then I bought it ... installed it ... tested it ... and the result can be read here:

https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/234517-reported-performance-issues/

For me its not usable during night (lights on) or with shadows set to anything other than OFF.

 

I don't see any reason for throwing my 1070 to the waste bin (finally landing somewhere in the holy western worlds official waste-bin ... called African coast or whereever it lands, most probably the sea). Guys, there must be a way for ED as a professional software designer to adopt to the idea of not throwing away our systems every two years, and by that causing more environmental disruptions. You see any thinking in this direction @NineLine ?

My question is: Why do I have to buy a bigger graphic card, if I only want e.g. the F-16 or the Viggen to be out of Early Access (which might take time, a time DCS during its evolution will use to increase performance requirements step by step)?

 

I'm not saying that I would not buy a new GFX, but I prefer to use equipment longer than two years, and a software developer with the size and experience as ED might adopt to this idea by doing this and that with textures/code/giving the user options in order to keep it working as best as possible.

 

What do you think?

Edited February 22, 2021 by TOViper

[statrekmike]

1 hour ago, 3WA said:

Well, both my cpu and gpu are 7 years old, I have 8 gb ram, and I still manage to hit 60 fps at 1920x1080 @ all low settings.  So, even if it halves that, I'll still get 30 fps which is probably minimal to fly.  But I plan on upgrading everything in a year or two when prices come down.  So I'm good with the new minimums, and hopefully Vulcan helps out somewhat.

This sim was not meant for poor people, sorry.  I've been saving up for a couple of years now for a new computer, mainly just to play DCS.  I'm old, out of a job, and flat broke, but am cheering DCS on all the way.  They are finally starting to push it, and going beyond what they were.  I can see that one day, they're going to bring in vehicle and FPS simulation, at the rate they are going.  Look at the graphics on Mariana's.  I just wish they would release their mapping tools so we could work on our own custom maps.

DCS isn't even the real problem.  It's the HOTAS and rudders, and if you want a cockpit, etc.  That's where the REAL costs start coming in.  I play with a joystick that was made for Radio Control training.  It's works decent for now.  Just had to repair it the other day by shoving some paper shims in it, because the stick got loose.  I'm hoping one day to be able to afford VKB or Virpil mid grade HOTAS.

 

And speaking of bitcoin miners, did you guys see that Nvidia is going to cut them off in the new 3060?  That should help somewhat!

They're going to make a special 3060 for mining that can't be used for gaming.  I doubt if most people will be interested in it, so it should free up chips somewhat.

 

 

 

  You keep doing the whole "stop being poor!" thing but that is entirely, utterly missing the point. The issue here is not new. It isn't something that suddenly has popped into being now that the system requirements have changed (yet again). This has been a ongoing issue for a long time now and to make it clear (yet again), it isn't about not wanting to buy hardware or not wanting to upgrade, it is about ED's approach towards solving some pretty straightforward optimization issues and the costs it puts on us as the players when they don't deal with those issues and instead just demand inefficient, brute force hardware approaches. 

 

  We all want DCS to move forward but at the same time, we also want ED to take a serious look at how they handle some visual elements because if things keep going as they are going right now, only the most high-end systems will be able to comfortably play DCS at reasonable settings and that isn't really a great deal for any player (even the ones who can afford such systems). We are not upset because we have to upgrade, we are worried because ED doesn't seem to respond to concerns about overly large texture sizes (or at least a lack of options in regards to choosing smaller textures) and that has put us in a position where certain parts of DCS run according to the requirements and certain parts simply don't. DCS performance SHOULD be at least relatively consistent across all modules, maps, and the like. This hasn't been the case for a good while and it only is getting worse as newer stuff comes out. You may be happy with your performance and we are all very happy that you are happy but it looks like you are intentionally trying to derail a conversation that needs to be had. It doesn't matter if you don't care, we do.

 

  

[3WA]

Hmm, well, that's something I would have to study.  I don't understand textures and such well, but I get your point.

 

I'm just saying I think some of you are going a little too far with your concerns about being able to actually run it.

 

It can be run, just at low levels.  Now, if it can be optimized to run better, sure, I'm all for that.  And maybe ED needs to take some time and look at that.

 

But I also don't want to lose the graphics quality that ED has seemed to gain of late either. 

 

And also remember, that while compression saves memory, it takes up CPU / GPU cycles to decompress it!  So, the trade off may not be worth it.  But then again, I have never studied texture compression, so I don't know how much trade off it costs.

 

Right now, I'm happy that they are talking dynamic campaign, a third party is looking at the ground, and they seem to be quickly moving ahead after a long period of doing very little.

 

There is also probably a difference in opinion because I'm a ground pounder that flies heli's and the A-10C.  I'm sure being high up in a Fighter may affect things computer wise very differently, so I really don't know about that.  You may be taking in much more of the World than I am at near ground height.  I rarely go over a few hundred feet high.  So, in the end, these are the opinions of a heli pilot.

Edited February 22, 2021 by 3WA

[Mars Exulte]

DCS Forum Thread :

 

#1 I want better graphics

#2 I want better weather

#3 I want better AI

#4 I want better radar

#5 I want better ECM

#6 I want better ships

#7 I want better tanks

#8 I want better missiles

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#9 Y U GAM SO BROK ED FUUUUUU

[naizarak]

all of that is possible without ballooning the sys requirements to hilarious levels

[NineLine]

1 hour ago, naizarak said:

all of that is possible without ballooning the sys requirements to hilarious levels

Luckily that hasn't happened.

[YSIAD_RIP]

16 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

only requirement for 2.7 is dropping windows 7 support. 

 

thanks 

@BIGNEWYwill dropping Windows 7 Support yield any performance or stability benefits?  For example: Better memory management, FPS, less stutter, etc..

[Nealius]

When discussions of performance and having to buy new (and unaffordable) hardware comes up, it's always the gatekeeping rich boys who shut down the discussion with "stop being poor."

[3WA]

If your getting stutter, check where your paging file is.  Make sure it is on your fastest drive, preferably an SSD one.  I was just having problems with mine.  For some reason, Windows decided to move it from my SSD to one of my slowest data drives.  Couldn't figure out for a while why my hard drive was making so much noise, and I was getting so much stuttering.  Moved it back to my System SSD drive, and all is well now.

 

Lol @Nealius. No one is gatekeeping dude.  I feel your pain and frustration too.  The World is getting pretty BAD.  But the show must go on.  I can't afford real HOTAS controls.  So I make due with what I can.  I play with a 7 year old computer and GPU.  I'm old, half-dead, and broke.  It's probably the end of upgrading DCS for me if I can't afford to get a new computer.  I'll have to stick with the old versions.  Is the World supposed to stop just because some people's computers can't take it anymore?  Sorry, that's not how it works.  Should ED see if they can increase performance where they can?  Sure, and I hope they will.  If something is crazy, I certainly hope they repair it.

This gets into very complex discussions on the pro's and con's of Capitalism, Socialism, etc.  ED is a business looking to sell a product.  That means pushing into the Future.

As adults, we have to make hard decisions.  Do I want to spend all my money on my hobby, or do I want to eat today?  You have to balance it.

What's great is that when I can afford it again, one day, the new technological innovations will be there to enjoy.  Right now, my computer is having FPS issues with a lot of new games.  It's old.  Do I want to spend the money to upgrade it?  I don't know.  It's a hard decision.  The future in my Country right now is not looking great.

 

I guess I don't know really what to say.  What is ED supposed to do?  Just stop upgrading the product?

Edited February 22, 2021 by 3WA

[BIGNEWY]

1 hour ago, YSIAD_RIP said:

@BIGNEWYwill dropping Windows 7 Support yield any performance or stability benefits?  For example: Better memory management, FPS, less stutter, etc..

 

Windows 10 handles memory better as I understand it. 

 

 

 

Some of you in the thread are treating this like the sky is falling, its not. 

 

DCS wont magically stop working because you dont have a GTX 1070 or higher, your hardware if it supports DX11 will still work. 

 

thanks

[Knock-Knock]

When I bought the F/A-18C, F-14B, AV8B, Mirage 2000C, Syria map and World War II Asset Pack, minimum requirement was X. Now time has passed and I still havent received the full products, and requirements have changed since then, and now for me to receive the full products down the line, I have to upgrade. Now Im still inside minimum hardware requirements (not OS though), but many others arent, and I really dont think this is fair to your customers, especially when you can lower the video memory usage substantially with little effort and very little, if any, loss in quality.

For me its more a principle thing, you are changing the requirements under us, stopping me/us from receiving any further updates on a products I/we have bought, but not received yet.

 

And sure, DCS wont magically stop working with less than 1070 hardware, but look how well optimization went when the minimum requirements was a 2 Gb card.

 

And for all the just upgrade and buy new hardware people. We arent all so lucky that we can do this. There is a freaking world wide pandemic with continuous lock downs, and many have lost their jobs or even worse, their business. Even without the pandemic, there are people who cant afford to upgrade, simple as that.

 

I would have no problems if requirements changed for future products, but not for products already sold.

Edited February 22, 2021 by Knock-Knock

[TOViper]

Seen from a personal perspective:

The introduction of 2.5 brought fantastic graphics and other improvements, but the hardware demands were increased, which in my understanding was a logical step.

My 1070 was and is still able to keep good fps, even in VR, even with shadows set to HIGH! For sure, many things happend within the sim (besides development of exciting aircraft models), but the fps are still good, that's a fact.

I haven't seen many serious issues in the forums regarding the modules I don't fly, but for sure there are some.

Even the mighty F-14 is giving me good frames, and the F-16 with two MFDs showing camera or infrared pictures as well, which makes me happy every day I fly

Only Viggen in 60km radar range is awful, and the MiG-21 radar totally kills my computer (1-2 fps).

 

On the other hand, the situation around the SC made me think: What will be their next steps? Not take care about optimization, and quality of products?

Luckily, and I think many people agree, this relates to SC only. I would not say that ED doesn't take care at all, in fact they do, and I am 100% sure they take care every day.

The SC is the most prominent example where things went off, at least in my (DCS) world and all others that posted in the related performance issue thread.

 

Giving even more detailed options in the settings dialog (shadows for cockpits only, rest different settings) would help many people right now, and not telling them to buy new things. People who can afford and are willing to by new HW every 6 months, good, but other people around depend on the direct support of ED's coders, and my simple request is to have ED put more efforts in detailed settings .... and take care about the SC!

 

So this was my story about the 1070. I am using it since 4 years now, and it is still giving good frames. But this depends on ED's will to keep us in the loop

 

Kind regards

Edited February 22, 2021 by TOViper

[Lurker]

On 2/21/2021 at 2:36 AM, NineLine said:

Also, those commenting about Vulcan, it is not a silver bullet to make older systems ad good as new ones, and Vulcan allow wont make huge differences, the total work on the graphics engine should help, but understand, DCS is moving forward, along with computer hardware.

 

I don't think anyone with a basic grasp of how PC system hardware works, and interacts with software has any misconceptions about this. The problem is that many (I believe rightfully) fear that the optimizations of the engine do not take proper advantage of even newer and more powerful hardware. 

 

For example, I have the 3090RTX, arguably the most powerful consumer grade graphics card on the market right now. The rest of my system is no slouch either. However even with this top of the line hardware I need to drop in-game settings to make the system run at reasonable framerates with ASW on, and this is on an Oculus Rift S. 

Will this be addressed in the future, or do we need to keep throwing better hardware at the problem? 

[Expert]

20 hours ago, Expert said:

dlss is the future and we are telling no to it, this makes me laugh, a lot! 

 

 

Edited February 22, 2021 by Expert

[Mars Exulte]

12 hours ago, naizarak said:

all of that is possible without ballooning the sys requirements to hilarious levels

''Five year old mid range gpu''

 

If that's your idea of a ''hilarious requirement'' you need to get another hobby.

3 hours ago, Lurker said:

I don't think anyone with a basic grasp of how PC system hardware works, and interacts with software

  ...is present in starts 90% of these kind of threads

Edited February 22, 2021 by Mars Exulte

[sirrah]

For those that continue mewling, either you didn't read this response from NineLine:

 

On 2/21/2021 at 7:33 AM, NineLine said:

Guys, honestly, I don't see a huge performance change right now with 2.7, so guys still with lower cards than a 1070 will still have similar results they have now, but really the requirements will continue to climb. We want to set expectations for users coming in and for the future.

 

Try not to panic right now.

 

or you don't trust what he's saying..

 

Either way... Maybe just wait for 2.7 to be released and find out?

[Tom Kazansky]

All confusion came from the term "minimum system requirements". I trust all ED staff that stated that this is not the case. Thank you.

Edited February 22, 2021 by Tom Kazansky

[Expert]

3 hours ago, Tom Kazansky said:

All confusion came from the term "minimum system requirements". I trust all ED staff that stated that this is not the case. Thank you.

 

or maybe they are in a strange relationship with nvidia who wants to sell the remaining 1070

 

[BIGNEWY]

A reminder to all, 

 

please treat everyone with respect, I have delete a post and another that quoted it, lets play nice regardless of you views on the subject.

 

thank you