Where do we stand on Multi-core and DX

[IckyATLAS]

There have been discussions on the forum like Multithreading Hyperthreading and various DX versions.

 

So just to clarify, may I ask what is the status with the 3.006 or latest version of IL2 BOK.

 

1) What version of DX is being used.

2) Up to how many cores does IL2 use.

 

The question on cores is related to the MT / HT issue.

I have a Octocore Intel 7820X CPU running at 4GHz with water cooling, and with Hyperthreading switched OFF.

In this way only physical cores are used. As long as IL2 + Win10 + some background processes in total do not need more than 8 cores then HT OFF is the best choice.

But is it so? How many for IL2 and how many for the rest. When I play IL2 I have no other open application. But in the background there is Win10 plus a lot of other small processes.

 

Is there a tool to visualize exactly what process is running on what physical core and see really if HT would be needed or not.

 

 

[dburne]

1: DX11.

 

2: Not completely sure, but I think it is mostly just one. Maybe a second one to a little extent.

 

I run my i7 4820k with Hyperthreading Off so I am using just the 4 physical cores.

Typically HT off runs a little cooler and allows maybe little more headroom for overclocking.

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

LOL Jason did say a while back il2.exe is 64bit 4 core Multicore support and he was Sick of people claiming otherwise saying it single core and that devs are lying. (early DD 2015 i think)

Render is DX 11

4 cores, but high load on #1 apparently
(even tho windows task manager and all other microsoft based performance tools show an even loading on the cores. the Aces in here said microsoft are 100% wrong so,......)

while ingame
Disable core 0 game crashes
Disable core 1 no textures properly (black cockpit, odd flickering)
Disable core 2 game crashed
Disable Core 3 looses fps (maybe effects or some sound?)

[Alonzo]

What is your target display device? If it's a screen running at 60hz, then the CPU has 16ms to get the draw calls done per frame. If it's a VR headset running at 90hz, you only have 11ms. If you have a 144hz monitor and for some reason think you need 144 FPS (you don't for a sim like IL2, but let's go with it) you only have 7ms for the CPU to render the frame.

 

Either way, you're running your CPU correctly for IL2: It doesn't need more than about 4 cores, so disabling HT and maybe using the thermal headroom to overclock higher is worthwhile. I would recommend at least 6 cores for IL2 if possible -- the game uses 4 so having the extra two for Windows junk helps keep things smooth.

[IckyATLAS]

My target display device is a 40" 4K  HDR 3840x2160 running at 60 Hz.

VR is the ultimate device but for the moment we are far from the quality and FOV.

I should try the Pixmax 8K but I am afraid to feel disappointed.

Edited October 27, 2018 by IckyATLAS

[Bullets]

3 hours ago, Alonzo said:

 If you have a 144hz monitor and for some reason think you need 144 FPS (you don't for a sim like IL2, but let's go with it)

 

I respectfully completely disagree. I can't stand anything below 100fps on any game now, especially IL2. I have a 165hz monitor and get about 130/40 on IL2. I value visual smoothness very high. 

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

Having a screen vsynced at 60Hz gives a smoother experience than having 80fps on a 120Hz monitor out of sync. Maybe you are mixing that up, and seek visual smoothness at higher fps when you already could have better smoothness at lower fps.

 

I'm not talking about tearing.

 

I suggest you to try it in such scenarios of you can (use the limiter), roll your aircraft and look at how the horizon behaves. Or compare how planes look stuttery when passing perpendicular at high speed. Then do both vsynced.

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

1 hour ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

Having a screen vsynced at 60Hz gives a smoother experience than having 80fps on a 120Hz monitor out of sync. Maybe you are mixing that up, and seek visual smoothness at higher fps when you already could have better smoothness at lower fps.

 

This might not be true if adaptive sync is being used. Without adaptive sync, however, a locked framerate will indeed be better for smoothness.

 

Although the benefits of high refresh rates are known and uncontroversial, I find that their significance is somewhat limited within Il-2's relatively static scenes.

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

Your "this might not be true" uses a false argument. Here is why: Adaptive sync simply disables gpu-screen synchronization instead of cutting it  into half. Which is exactly what I wouldn't want, since it'll lead to artifacts, the stutter of aircrafts that cross perpendicular, and horizon stutter - together with tearing as well - which often means loss of eyes on target over forests and more. 

All in all, a bad thing. 

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

1 hour ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

Your "this might not be true" uses a false argument. Here is why: Adaptive sync simply disables gpu-screen synchronization instead of cutting it  into half. Which is exactly what I wouldn't want, since it'll lead to artifacts, the stutter of aircrafts that cross perpendicular, and horizon stutter - together with tearing as well - which often means loss of eyes on target over forests and more. 

All in all, a bad thing. 

There is no tearing with G-Sync. Moreover, it adapts the display to the outputting device. Although fluctuating frametimes may be perceptible, the overall frametime reduction can be an improvement. 

[Bullets]

I get 0 tearing with G-Sync. Sorry you can't convince me less frames is better. I would agree if what you are looking at is a tearing mess but is not the case  . The only stutters I see are the micro stutters present in the game. Still got to figure out how to get rid of those aha

[Alonzo]

On 10/27/2018 at 9:17 AM, IckyATLAS said:

My target display device is a 40" 4K  HDR 3840x2160 running at 60 Hz.

VR is the ultimate device but for the moment we are far from the quality and FOV.

I should try the Pixmax 8K but I am afraid to feel disappointed.

 

I think your CPU is going to be fine for 4k 60 hz, and running it with HT off is probably a good idea to maximize clock speed (I think you said you're already doing this). For VR I would suggest thinking about a CPU that can hit 5ghz, so either an 8700k or one of the new 9000-series chips. From what I've read on Pimax, the 5k+ is the one you want, the 8k is basically a bit of a waste because it's taking a "5k" image and upscaling to "8k", reports seem to indicate the 5k+ is the best headset overall out of the lineup.

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

Mitthrawnruondo: Bullets was talking of adaptive-sync, not g-sync. Both are different methods. He changed his wording after my response.

 

Bullets: I was giving advice in regards to adaptive-sync, based on observation. It's not feasible to give advice based on assumption, we're not Microsoft's support, are we. I hope you can get rid of the micro-stutters as well. I managed to. One more advice: Be more precise in differentiation of the sync methods, so that such misunderstandings don't happen again.

 

I am certain you can figure the rest out all by yourself. Good luck! ?

[coconut]

Not a specialist of sync terminology, but apparently adaptive sync and adaptive vsync are different things. 

[IckyATLAS]

Just for info my screen has no HDR, no G-Sync or any other of these sync systems. I just use the VSync that stands in the Graphics configuration page of the game.

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

10 hours ago, SCG_Fenris_Wolf said:

 

Mitthrawnruondo: Bullets was talking of adaptive-sync, not g-sync. Both are different methods.

 

G-Sync is an adaptive sync technology.

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

15 minutes ago, icecream said:

Did you just say that 60hz is giving you a better experience over 80hz or 120hz?

 

can't believe i actually read this in 2018.

2 month old thread Necro?? ok!

:D going by your response i dont think you actually read it in 2018 or at all properly :D

He said 60HZ running 60 FPS SYNCED is smoother than 80FPS unsynced on a 120HZ monitor.

Of course it would be..
60fps fluid synced at 60hz will be smoother than 190fps unsynced on a 240HZ screen

not to mention a waste as placebo effect is proven on E-sports
(not even pro gamers can tell apart a 90fps, 120fps or 140 fps frame lock. IF THEY DONT KNOW, so you cant test it on your self)

[AristocratPanda]

On 10/28/2018 at 10:58 AM, Bullets said:

... Still got to figure out how to get rid of those aha

 

If you ever manage to do this, please tell me how. In VR those micro stutters are a real deal breaker for me. The game isn't running slow on my rig, in fact quite the contrary but it stutters randomly when things are happening around.

IL2 is beautiful and I love it for the feeling of realism it's trying to achieve. More I loved it, more obsessed I've become. I spent days and days to try every possible thing, every piece of knowledge I could find, going as far as to try different cpu core configurations in bios. I wouldn't have spent this much time and effort (and money too) for any other game I know.

 

So if you figure out any magic tricks that I've missed so far, please share.  

[AristocratPanda]

1 hour ago, icecream said:

How does a decrease in roughly 11ms give you a smoother experience?

 

I think fast doesn't mean smooth and smooth doesn't mean fast. When you watch a movie at 24fps with motion blur, it feels smooth but it's actually very very slow...

Without an adaptive sync technology (gsync or freesync), even though it will introduce some blur on motion, even 30 fps can feel smoother than 60 fps on a 60hz monitor or more. It's all about the fluctuations in frame times. If there is none and you're synched with your monitor's refresh rate, it's going to be perfect. But of course, technically, frame time fluctuations should be less perceivable at faster refresh rates.

Edited November 8, 2018 by Kemal

[AristocratPanda]

1 hour ago, icecream said:

Gsync and Freesync only matter for tearing, and even if it drops from 190fps to 90.. that means it's still a far smoother experience than locked 60fps.

 

we are talking about a roughly 12ms difference, if you go from 190fps to a locked 60fps.

yeah, go ask a pro csgo player how he feels about that.

and the difference between let's say 90 or 160 is minimal, yes, but it's still clearly noticeable in my eyes.

 

No doubt the pro csgo player wouldn't be happy about that.

I understand your point. There's no problem with that. Faster it is better it'll be.

My point is just that there are two measures of performance: rendering speed and frame times. That's why we have often 0.1% low values on fps comparison charts.

You may have 240 fps on average which is phenomenal but if the game freezes every now and then even for a smallest perceivable amount of time, it won't be a great experience. And the pro csgo player wouldn't be happy about that either...

 

 

[AristocratPanda]

17 minutes ago, icecream said:

What do you mean exactly by freezes? i do not experience those freezes you are talking about?

 

I was speaking generally, no worries... just to explain why measuring frame times is important and also that a good frame rate is essential but not always sufficient to make it a flawless experience for me.

Particularly in the case of IL2 however, if you're getting 0 micro stutters in VR in the middle of a nicely populated dogfight or in career missions, I envy you. That's my dream.

 

 

[Alonzo]

10 hours ago, Kemal said:

If you ever manage to do this, please tell me how. In VR those micro stutters are a real deal breaker for me. The game isn't running slow on my rig, in fact quite the contrary but it stutters randomly when things are happening around.

 

So if you figure out any magic tricks that I've missed so far, please share.  

 

If you have a Rift, some people prefer forcing ASW "on" permanently, which is the 45 FPS interpolated mode, than having the runtime toggle between 90 and 45 FPS. The IL2 core engine can usually maintain 45 FPS in most situations on modern hardware, so if you're ok with ASW you can crank the eye candy and live with the interpolation. 

 

If the prop artifacts bug you (spinning disk causes ASW interpolation artifacts) then Lefuneste's excellent "3D Migoto" mod can switch off the prop and get rid of that problem.

 

 

[dburne]

For combat flight sims, I actually prefer ASW off in my Rift.

I still get smooth performance ( long as it don't drop much below 45fps), and no artifacts or ghosting of planes going by.

[AristocratPanda]

9 hours ago, Alonzo said:

If you have a Rift, some people prefer forcing ASW "on" permanently, which is the 45 FPS interpolated mode, than having the runtime toggle between 90 and 45 FPS. The IL2 core engine can usually maintain 45 FPS in most situations on modern hardware, so if you're ok with ASW you can crank the eye candy and live with the interpolation. 

 

If the prop artifacts bug you (spinning disk causes ASW interpolation artifacts) then Lefuneste's excellent "3D Migoto" mod can switch off the prop and get rid of that problem.

 

Thank you very much Alonzo. Yes I have a Rift indeed. Actually the problem isn't maintaining a good FPS. I can play at constant 45 FPS with ASW forced on with decent graphics settings even on Kuban map. It never goes below and I can live with those ASW artifacts, no problem. Otherwise, as you mentioned also, we have lefuneste's wonderful solution to that. Thanks to him.

 

What's ruining my gameplay however, is the stutters.

 

I have two types of stutters :

- The big ones like very short freezes, very visible, every now and then.

- And the micro stutters, almost constantly.

This is only happening when there are other planes or AI units around. In a free flight when there is only my plane on the map, it's rather very smooth.

 

You can easily see those micro stutters by looking at anything moving relatively to you, like trees passing by under your wings or the landscape turning around you when you do a 360° roll. The motion doesn't look constant as if there was a synchronisation problem between what's drawn and what's happening.

 

If this was only a FPS issue, the solution would be to lower my graphics settings and it would be fine. But unfortunately, even with the lowest possible settings, even though my FPS can go very high, I can't get rid of the stutters. It's keeping me from getting immersed.  

 

I tried with ASW off, of course, the artifacts were gone but the stutters were still there. And I find that the image blurs too much for my taste.

 

I have an 8 core Ryzen cpu at 3.8ghz with a 1080 ti. Some people on the forums say that we should have a 5 ghz overclocked intel cpu for this game. But to speak frankly, I'm not really convinced by that. Lower clock speed could explain lower fps but not the stutters, especially when the fps is maintained at 45 quite easily and when there is still enough head room for any thread used by the game.

 

Some experts say that communication between core complexes in Ryzen can be slower (even if the difference is only a couple of nano seconds). So I tried with only one core complex enabled. Then I tried with SMT (hyper threading) off. Unfortunately nothing helped.

 

Anyway, I think there is no solutions for me for now. I'm still checking the forums frequently to see if someone comes up with an idea or who knows, maybe some good news from the devs. 

 

Thank you all.

[AristocratPanda]

Thank you icecream. No, I haven't tried a clean install. This isn't an IL2 only PC unfortunately. It would be too much work to reinstall and setup every application, every game and VR again. But I would have done that of course if I had encountered the same issues with other games too, thinking in that case there's a general OS problem. But this is not the case. 

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

placebo effect..
without a label they cannot tell.

Its like how red cordial (red food dye) never makes any child or person hypo but people think it does and see it happen but they are wrong.
Placebo.

Edited November 9, 2018 by =TBAS=Sshadow14

[Alonzo]

5 hours ago, Kemal said:

I have an 8 core Ryzen cpu at 3.8ghz with a 1080 ti. Some people on the forums say that we should have a 5 ghz overclocked intel cpu for this game. But to speak frankly, I'm not really convinced by that. Lower clock speed could explain lower fps but not the stutters, especially when the fps is maintained at 45 quite easily and when there is still enough head room for any thread used by the game.

 

Try using Oculus Tray Tool to turn on the "performance HUD". Take a look at the CPU frame time. This will vary all over the place, but try to get into a bit of action where you notice the problem. For 45 FPS you need CPU frame time to be < 22ms. It may be that it "spikes" higher during those phases where you see stuttering. 

 

I understand your perspective that the Ryzen *shouldn't* be an issue but in my testing I found IL2 is extremely CPU hungry. I did a whole crapload of tuning to try to iron out the spikes on my 8086K chip, which prior to the 9000-series was the highest clocking chip on the market, and I basically couldn't get the game to be < 11ms for 90 FPS consistently. I'm actually not even sure if my rig is < 22ms consistently but I've made peace with it, I get "good enough" FPS most of the time and have used the new feedback feature to petition the devs to consider VR performance and CPU optimizations.

 

Big things that hit the CPU are anything that draws more geometry, particles, and physics. So going to Balanced settings rather than High, and Medium shadows rather than High will help a lot. You can get some eye candy back using 4x AA and some Oculus supersample -- those things are pure GPU hits and your 1080ti will happily chew through the pixels.

[SCG_Fenris_Wolf]

On 11/8/2018 at 1:18 PM, icecream said:

Did you just say that 60hz is giving you a better experience over 80hz or 120hz?

 

can't believe i actually read this in 2018.

No, I did never say that. Read more carefully.

[AristocratPanda]

On 11/9/2018 at 6:40 PM, Alonzo said:

 

Try using Oculus Tray Tool to turn on the "performance HUD". Take a look at the CPU frame time. This will vary all over the place, but try to get into a bit of action where you notice the problem. For 45 FPS you need CPU frame time to be < 22ms. It may be that it "spikes" higher during those phases where you see stuttering. 

 

I understand your perspective that the Ryzen *shouldn't* be an issue but in my testing I found IL2 is extremely CPU hungry. I did a whole crapload of tuning to try to iron out the spikes on my 8086K chip, which prior to the 9000-series was the highest clocking chip on the market, and I basically couldn't get the game to be < 11ms for 90 FPS consistently. I'm actually not even sure if my rig is < 22ms consistently but I've made peace with it, I get "good enough" FPS most of the time and have used the new feedback feature to petition the devs to consider VR performance and CPU optimizations.

 

Big things that hit the CPU are anything that draws more geometry, particles, and physics. So going to Balanced settings rather than High, and Medium shadows rather than High will help a lot. You can get some eye candy back using 4x AA and some Oculus supersample -- those things are pure GPU hits and your 1080ti will happily chew through the pixels.

 

Thank you Alonzo. I appreciate your help.

 

After a couple of hours of testing with the Oculus performance hud as my gunsight, here are my conclusions:

- The stuttering in the form of small freezes happens more or less whatever the conditions are. That must be because of some new assets being loaded into the scene which is acceptable and doesn't bother me that much. This is the only case the CPU render time goes beyond 22ms and the flat yellow bar in the Oculus performance hud goes under 45. This is very clear and makes sense.

- The almost constant "micro" stuttering however looks like it's linked to the number of AI in the mission, whether those are in the visible scene or not. These micro stutters happen without any variation in the cpu render time. I play at 45fps with ASW forced on and the yellow bar in the hud is perfectly flat at 45fps. The cpu render time varies in general between 10 and 18ms.  If no AI, then no micro stuttering at all. I have no clue what's causing this. The cpu renders the frame on time easily. Increasing the pre rendered frame count in nvidia control panel seems to smoothen those out by  a tiny bit. They're still very much there but happening, let's say, more smoothly.

 

I'm going to try a little bit of multiplayer as soon as I can. Assuming the physics and AI calculations are performed by the server, it might give me a path to understand why this is happening.

 

Thank you very much.

 

Edited November 12, 2018 by Kemal

[IckyATLAS]

On 10/27/2018 at 7:30 PM, Bullets said:

 

I respectfully completely disagree. I can't stand anything below 100fps on any game now, especially IL2. I have a 165hz monitor and get about 130/40 on IL2. I value visual smoothness very high. 

May I ask what kind of configuration you have on the IL2 graphic settings. I understand that you need above 100fps. So it would be interesting to know at what settings your hardware CPU/GPU RAM (as displayed under your post) allows a regular >100 fps.

 

[AristocratPanda]

Interesting article :

https://medium.com/@alen.ladavac/the-elusive-frame-timing-168f899aec92

 

 

[Bullets]

12 hours ago, IckyATLAS said:

May I ask what kind of configuration you have on the IL2 graphic settings. I understand that you need above 100fps. So it would be interesting to know at what settings your hardware CPU/GPU RAM (as displayed under your post) allows a regular >100 fps.

 

 

I have it on max settings with extra super sampling on nvidia control panel. Away from my pc for a while so if you want a screenshot you will have to wait  

Edited November 13, 2018 by Bullets

[SAS_Storebror]

13 hours ago, Kemal said:

Interesting article :

https://medium.com/@alen.ladavac/the-elusive-frame-timing-168f899aec92

That article is a blast, thanks for sharing it!

Hope the Devs see this too.

 

Mike