![]() ![]() The point at which you can feed the GPU without waiting on the CPU should greatly benefit VR. I mostly play multiplayer on the Caucasus, but my GPU is never maxed while only giving 45FPS. Nevada is pretty sparse so it will reach 90 in the air hitting 50% GPU. A campaign in Nevada (on low) will see 22FPS on the ground for only 25% GPU utilization reaching 45/40 at times while taxiing. You can crank setting up to the point of GPU saturation for "free" because the CPU is the hangup not being able to get render requests to the GPU inside of the 11ms window for 90FPS. CPU utilization as a whole looks low for multi-core CPUs anyway. Without either of those the Caucasus in VR (F-15 Intercept instant action) will get you only 45 FPS on all low settings and pixel density on 1.0 seeing only 50% gpu utilization average. How exactly are you determining utilization? Because the only thing that really causes high GPU utilization is using AA with DS, which is the result of some inefficiency, or really high pixel density. ![]() ![]() (an exemple of high CPU usage in DCS with screen on this afterburner monitoring screen : Using my screen (low res) with max settings I can see CPU being as highly used as my GPU, on or near max, so I can guess Vulkan will improve things … but what about VR ? Or will Vulkan ease the GPU's job, by a mean or another ? And so be a help for VR/DCS ?Īt a time I heard here something like 50 or 60% increase perf (on one of first announcements about vulkan). Vulkan seems to improve the CPU's job part … so no improve to expect with VR in DCS ? (as in VR my CPU is barely used while my GPU is near full usage with only 45fps to render with ASW rendering the rest of the 90fps ?) I'm just now waiting for my 1440p / 4K VR and 2080 GPU to handle it and I'll be set! All this should allow ED to spread some of the strain around. I still think this will set DCS up for the future and for future hardware, it will still always be at the upper edge of system requirements going forward like all flight sims always are for good eye candy, especially in the future on the VR side, as Screen res increases. There is still going to be some compromises, otherwise someone would have built a flight sim full multicore (How long would that take?) I mean even the large lockheed went down the upgrade path and not rebuild from scratch, that sim is much better, You still need a bit of a power house PC to get a real good experience with addons and eye candy. This makes the most sense and would stop a lot of asynchronous problems I would think (client-server approach)? This would also help setting up towards the dedicated server I'm guessing too. W/o rewriting the engine, splitting simulation into a separate thread from the graphics will benefit it most - which will be, in fact, the mentioned client-server approach, just inside the app. Resource loading and other I/O (logging, input, ffb. What is being refactored/rewritten does use multi-threading where possible. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |