Jump to content

Increasing time scale


Recommended Posts

Hi!

 

I have an i7 4790 with 16gb RAM, and a NVDIA 2080 video card.

 

I know that time scale in SP is based on system power... But I have a somewhat good machine, and I can´t get even proper 2x time scale. Do you have any tips on how to meddle with your system in order to get more time scale?

 

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

@CCCPBera I'm unaware of any system tweaking you can use to get reliable time acceleration. The fewer AI objects in a mission, the greater probability you will be able to use time acceleration.

 

I have a Ryzen 9 3900X, 32 GB RAM, and a 2080 GPU. I get time dilation (the opposite of acceleration) and slight stuttering if I try to record tracks during career missions with "dense" selected for frontline activity. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your processor is starting to get a wee bit dated, it was great when it came out five or six years ago (at least the unlocked, K version was) but IL-2 can be fairly CPU hungry. 

 

Is it the 4790 or the 4790K? If it's the former then I'd guess that's your bottleneck. If it's the latter you could try overclocking but from what I recall that one was already pushing its limits as stock. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CCCPBera said:

Hi!

 

I have an i7 4790 with 16gb RAM, and a NVDIA 2080 video card.

 

I know that time scale in SP is based on system power... But I have a somewhat good machine, and I can´t get even proper 2x time scale. Do you have any tips on how to meddle with your system in order to get more time scale?

 

Thanks!

 

 

I have an i9 9900k at 5.2 GHz and have the same at times.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gents, as we all know, there is no such thing as a free lunch.  This is one of the prices to be paid for the ever increasing fidelity, both visual and physics modeling wise, in the sim.

4K textures, beautiful landscapes, realistic clouds, hyper detailed, well, everything, comes at a price.  Combat flight simulation has always pushed the envelope of what home PCs are capable of.  It was as true in the original IL2 as it is today.  Remember the "Black Death" track?  It would grind even the best PCs of the day to a near halt.  Everything in a modern PC gaming title is a compromise, and as ever, eye candy wins over some operational features for the vast majority who play.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Visuals will be handled by the GPU, and as far as I am aware GB is not that intensive on the visuals, at least compared to other games.  It's all about the CPU and AI.

 

AI is the #1 consumer of CPU.  AI is consumed mostly by airplanes.  In the airplane category, CPU is consumed mostly by multi crew bombers.  To keep CPU usage down you have to keep the number of airplanes, especially the number of bombers, down.

 

Ground units also consume CPU cycles but not nearly at the rate of airplanes.

 

My system is similar to @dburne .  At best I will get 4x and that is before the airplanes start popping in.  Once the mission is in full swing I am not getting more than 2x (until they start getting shot down - then I start getting back towards 4x).  I find even 2x reasonable as my transit time to base is usually not that long, but that will differ for everybody.

Edited by PatrickAWlson
Link to post
Share on other sites

Old CFS2 had a jump to next waypoint function that was very handy. If you encountered enemy planes on the way, were attacked or your fuel ran out it would hand over control at that point again. (You pressed 'x', your screen turned black for a couple of seconds and would light up again at the new waypoint)

 

I assume it simulated in a very basic way all the things that happend in between the waypoints in a short time without displaying something in 3D.

Something like that would be perfect and I think should also be possible with a reasonable amount of dev time, it would make long SP missions a lot easier for people without much time or will to use so much time repetitively for a stubborn task.

 

 

 

As for your System, the 4xxx series of CPUS is VERY old by now. IPC has increased quite a bit on newer CPUs and you still run on DDR3 on your system.

Edited by 216th_Jordan
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Time acceleration!!?   I’ve been flying entire career mission paths... the time I could have saved.... lol...

Jks... I don’t even use autopilot.. probably how I’ve managed to get flameouts on my 262 and having to air restart the engine :)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Gents, as we all know, there is no such thing as a free lunch.  This is one of the prices to be paid for the ever increasing fidelity, both visual and physics modeling wise, in the sim.

4K textures, beautiful landscapes, realistic clouds, hyper detailed, well, everything, comes at a price.  Combat flight simulation has always pushed the envelope of what home PCs are capable of.  It was as true in the original IL2 as it is today.  Remember the "Black Death" track?  It would grind even the best PCs of the day to a near halt.  Everything in a modern PC gaming title is a compromise, and as ever, eye candy wins over some operational features for the vast majority who play.

Ah the Black Death track! I remember that the first time I played it the start was just right and then as action intensified it became a kind of fast slideshow.

After some time and a few CPU changes the last time I played it it was smooth and fine the whole track, still with FPS variations but with a minimum that would not impact motion smoothness. This to say that what seem at the limit today may become mainstream in a few years.

There are some new CPU designs coming in 2022 and the jump in performance could be very very significant. But I think that if IL2 could be improved to be more multi-thread than single thread performance depended, it may improve this time dilation issue a lot. This is easier said than done and designing such games to be completely multi-thread is probably very difficult.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, CCCPBera said:

Hi!

 

I have an i7 4790 with 16gb RAM, and a NVDIA 2080 video card.

 

I know that time scale in SP is based on system power... But I have a somewhat good machine, and I can´t get even proper 2x time scale. Do you have any tips on how to meddle with your system in order to get more time scale?

 

Thanks!

 

Raw CPU power is the only thing that helps. Imagine the joy I felt when I switched from my trusty old i7-2600K@4.200Mhz to my new i9-9900K@5.200Mhz in september last year. My old i7 was barely able to handle scattered density and easy difficulty in career mode, time accelleration was practically not possible on that machine. Now with the i9 I can play with dense settings on moderate difficulty without hicups and get to aprox. 4x time acc. So it clearly is the CPU. I guess the new AMD chips (5000 series), in theory, should be even better at that than the Intel 9 or 10 series.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, [APAF]VR_Spartan85 said:

Time acceleration!!?   I’ve been flying entire career mission paths... the time I could have saved.... lol...

Jks... I don’t even use autopilot.. probably how I’ve managed to get flameouts on my 262 and having to air restart the engine :)

 

 

I do not use autopilot, but I do use auto-level for those long ingress and egress sections of a mission.

And I will occasionally use time acceleration, or what the sim will give me in that regard at the time lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, sevenless said:

 

Raw CPU power is the only thing that helps. Imagine the joy I felt when I switched from my trusty old i7-2600K@4.200Mhz to my new i9-9900K@5.200Mhz in september last year. My old i7 was barely able to handle scattered density and easy difficulty in career mode, time accelleration was practically not possible on that machine. Now with the i9 I can play with dense settings on moderate difficulty without hicups and get to aprox. 4x time acc. So it clearly is the CPU. I guess the new AMD chips (5000 series), in theory, should be even better at that than the Intel 9 or 10 series.

Unfortunately i cant handle scattered density with 5600x  unless it has something to do with the ai difficulty which Im playing on high

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Voidhunger said:

Unfortunately i cant handle scattered density with 5600x  unless it has something to do with the ai difficulty which Im playing on high

 

Both density and AI difficulty influence the amount of planes and the CPU cycles needed to handle that.

 

For game specific performance of different CPU/GPU combos see SYN_Vander test results here:

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gJmnz_nVxI6_dG_UYNCCpZVK2-f8NBy-y1gia77Hu_k

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sevenless said:

 

Both density and AI difficulty influence the amount of planes and the CPU cycles needed to handle that.

 

For game specific performance of different CPU/GPU combos see SYN_Vander test results here:

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gJmnz_nVxI6_dG_UYNCCpZVK2-f8NBy-y1gia77Hu_k

 

 

just looking at your system and you have the same GPU as I.

The 980 and together with your i9 CPU you have absolutely fluid gameplay (not fps) with medium density, medium difficulty on high or ultra graphic settings?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Voidhunger said:

 

 

just looking at your system and you have the same GPU as I.

The 980 and together with your i9 CPU you have absolutely fluid gameplay (not fps) with medium density, medium difficulty on high or ultra graphic settings?

 

Yes, I play with high density and moderate difficulty at 1080p and 60fps locked. Once I can replace that 980 with a 3070 I hope to get everything maxed out. Here are my graphic settings I use at present:

 

image.thumb.png.57683b3f4cb443a00cfff461a5f453ea.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Voidhunger said:

 

its only about FPS, i have no problem with the fps

 

Nope, the CPU test at 1080p tells you if your CPU can cope. Your Zen 3 5600X with your 980 should be faster than my i9-9900K with my 980, as you can see from the bench results. You can also check that with CPU-Z.

Edited by sevenless
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sevenless said:

 

Nope, the CPU test at 1080p tells you if your CPU can cope. Your Zen 3 5600X with your 980 should be faster than my i9-9900K with my 980, as you can see from the bench results. You can also check that with CPU-Z.

 

Avg: 103.162 - Min: 41 - Max: 137

 

I dont know why my min fps are so low.

 

second run:

 

Avg: 100.891 - Min: 48 - Max: 135

Edited by Voidhunger
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Voidhunger said:

 

Avg: 103.162 - Min: 41 - Max: 137

 

I dont know why my min fps are so low.

 

Odd. Avg and Max values are to be expected but the min values are very odd. I have no knowledge about AMD Bios settings, but is there some setting that is able to force your CPU to have the same clockspeed on all cores? Seems like your CPU is clocking down when it shouldn´t, that might also explain why you experience problems with higher density than scattered.

 

Also make sure that energy saving for CPU in Windows 10 is off.

Edited by sevenless
Link to post
Share on other sites

only 2 cores are boosting to 4700Ghz the rest is at stock speed or even less.

 

 

also im not sure why in this CPU test i have to max glass reflection if the test is running in outside view?

why grass on ultra which is not vissible at that height?

Edited by Voidhunger
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Voidhunger said:

only 2 cores are boosting to 4700Ghz the rest is at stock speed or even less.

 

 

also im not sure why in this CPU test i have to max glass reflection if the test is running in outside view?

why grass on ultra which is not vissible at that height?

Have you tried updating your BIOS? As I said multiple times, you have some issues there and you are not enjoying this excellent cpu!

Edited by LF_Gallahad
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, LF_Gallahad said:

Have you tried updating your BIOS? As I said multiple times, you have some issues there and you are not enjoying this excellent cpu!

 

@Voidhunger: Gallahad has aprox. the same machine as you have. His GPU is a tad bit faster, but you should get about the same performance out of your machine, except for the 980. However, slowdowns due to dense settings and CPU overload should not be one of your problems.

Edited by sevenless
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LF_Gallahad said:

Have you tried updating your BIOS? As I said multiple times, you have some issues there and you are not enjoying this excellent cpu!

 

Thanks guys, I thought since my cpu was recognized by the motherboard that the bios is newer one.

Updated bios, waited bit longer to load up objects in mission,  FPS are now :

 

Avg: 106.465 - Min: 74 - Max: 135

 

I will try later in the evening some career fights.

 

My GPU memmory is almost full, GPU is running almost 100% and only 2 CPU cores are boosting all the time.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, LF_Gallahad said:

@Voidhunger Those numbers are still too low. Maybe it's the ram. The best spot for Ryzen 5000 is 3600, which is  Infinity Fabric 1800. Higher is a bit of hit and miss. What's your ram speed?

3600

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Voidhunger said:

3600

Are you using stock settings? you should check with stock first. These might be the lowest FPS in a Ryzen 5600 i've ever seen by a long shot. Still sure there is something wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LF_Gallahad said:

Are you using stock settings? you should check with stock first. These might be the lowest FPS in a Ryzen 5600 i've ever seen by a long shot. Still sure there is something wrong.

no, xmp for 3600mhz

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Voidhunger said:

no, xmp for 3600mhz

So, if I understood correctly, your CPU only boost  2 cores, right?

Well, in game it should be changing cores and using max expected speed. In this case with stock should be 4,65 but around all cores. When using multithread application like Cinebench it should push everything to 4,4/3 cont.

 

In Il-2 you should observe 4,65 aprox. in all cores after a session as maximum speed read. 

 

I know you don't want to install monitoring software, but I don't know how to solve your issue. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, LF_Gallahad said:

So, if I understood correctly, your CPU only boost  2 cores, right?

Well, in game it should be changing cores and using max expected speed. In this case with stock should be 4,65 but around all cores. When using multithread application like Cinebench it should push everything to 4,4/3 cont.

 

In Il-2 you should observe 4,65 aprox. in all cores after a session as maximum speed read. 

 

I know you don't want to install monitoring software, but I don't know how to solve your issue. 

 

 

i have installed CPU Z, Riva tuner, HW info 64.

 

Im not sure if all cores should be boosting in IL2

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Voidhunger said:

 

 

i have installed CPU Z, Riva tuner, HW info 64.

 

Im not sure if all cores should be boosting in IL2

That's strange then. It should be changing the core to use etc, and push the one that needs pushing to 4.65. I have no expertise knowledge in these things but looking at your stats while flying will give you the answer.

Do you know if after a Il-2 session your maximum values of speed your CPU are all 4,65? Of course not at the same time, but to know if all cores are able to reach that speed. Just the Maximum value in HWinfo.

 

Also, don't try to run various monitoring programs at the same time, just in case.

Edited by LF_Gallahad
Link to post
Share on other sites

in cinebench all cores are running at 4,2

 

in single cpu test cores are switching to 4.7

1 minute ago, LF_Gallahad said:

That's strange then. It should be changing the core to use etc, and push the one that needs pushing to 4.65. I have no expertise knowledge in these things but looking at your stats while flying will give you the answer.

Do you know if after a Il-2 session your maximum values of speed your CPU are all 4,65? Of course not at the same time, but to know if all cores are able to reach that speed. Just the Maximum value in HWinfo.

 

Also, don't try to run various monitoring programs at the same time, just in case.

i will try

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LF_Gallahad said:

That's strange then. It should be changing the core to use etc, and push the one that needs pushing to 4.65. I have no expertise knowledge in these things but looking at your stats while flying will give you the answer.

Do you know if after a Il-2 session your maximum values of speed your CPU are all 4,65? Of course not at the same time, but to know if all cores are able to reach that speed. Just the Maximum value in HWinfo.

 

Also, don't try to run various monitoring programs at the same time, just in case.

Yes in HW info all cores boosted to the max.

Need to test more yesterday, but it seems to me that after the bios update its much better.

Thanks again. I will report later :salute:

Link to post
Share on other sites

did some testing today and on scattered density its quite flyable (not max details ofcourse), but once I set density to medium, game is much slower over the target area.

Once you shot down some planes it was better, but not so much in ground attack missions.

So I will stay on scattered density until I can get new GPU. Maybe it will help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

just bought today 3060 Ti card. Game looks beautiful on almost max details(didnt try maximum, like shadows or clouds) at QHD resolution. Everything is fluid

Mainly the increased town visibility is nice, when you can see churches from distant as navigation targets.

 

but same as before once I reach the frontline with many targets on the ground or in the air, game slows down a littlebit and there are some microstutters. Its very annoying.

Once some planes are shot down its much better.

 

FPS always 60 (vsync ON)

CPU is boosting to 4.7   and CPU usage is approx 20%

GPU is boosting max 1000mhz (max card boost is approx 1900Mhz) and usage is max 50-60%

 

The game is not using all the system power.

 

I can play any other game at max details totally fluid .

Link to post
Share on other sites

With my new 5800x I am getting more CPU utilization than with my old 4820k, also GPU (1070) now runs at >95% most of the time and delivers almost constant 120fps at 1440p. 

4x acceleration mostly no problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Voidhunger said:

Hi,

 

just bought today 3060 Ti card. Game looks beautiful on almost max details(didnt try maximum, like shadows or clouds) at QHD resolution. Everything is fluid

Mainly the increased town visibility is nice, when you can see churches from distant as navigation targets.

 

but same as before once I reach the frontline with many targets on the ground or in the air, game slows down a littlebit and there are some microstutters. Its very annoying.

Once some planes are shot down its much better.

 

FPS always 60 (vsync ON)

CPU is boosting to 4.7   and CPU usage is approx 20%

GPU is boosting max 1000mhz (max card boost is approx 1900Mhz) and usage is max 50-60%

 

The game is not using all the system power.

 

I can play any other game at max details totally fluid .

Il-2 uses multiple cores but one core is usually being used much more heavily than the others. You can have a relatively low total CPU usage, but the main thread is maxing things out, so things have to slow down to compensate. You should test it out with MSI Afterburner and watch the per-core useage - you'll almost certainly see one core getting maxed out with the others at 10-20%. 
 

The GPU is probably never going to have an impact on the time dilation since that is a function of the CPU not being able to keep up with the calculations for FM, AI, etc. things the GPU is not usually involved with. If your FPS is 60 and you're seeing time dilation, its not your GPU at all - the GPU is only working hard enough to maintain the frame rate you locked the game at, and a 3060TI can probably produce more than 60FPS for QHD so its only working at 50-60%. It's not being strained. 

 

I'm not an OC'er or memory tweaker but lots of people in the VR threads are finding that fast memory and reducing memory latency pays bigger dividends in Il-2 than in other games. Most other game types are much lighter on CPUs than flight sims so smoothness there isn't necessarily a great predictor. The benchmarking thread has lots of info on tweaks and can let you compare your setup to other similar ones to see if there are big differences indicating a configuration problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

Il-2 uses multiple cores but one core is usually being used much more heavily than the others. You can have a relatively low total CPU usage, but the main thread is maxing things out, so things have to slow down to compensate. You should test it out with MSI Afterburner and watch the per-core useage - you'll almost certainly see one core getting maxed out with the others at 10-20%. 
 

The GPU is probably never going to have an impact on the time dilation since that is a function of the CPU not being able to keep up with the calculations for FM, AI, etc. things the GPU is not usually involved with. If your FPS is 60 and you're seeing time dilation, its not your GPU at all - the GPU is only working hard enough to maintain the frame rate you locked the game at, and a 3060TI can probably produce more than 60FPS for QHD so its only working at 50-60%. It's not being strained. 

 

I'm not an OC'er or memory tweaker but lots of people in the VR threads are finding that fast memory and reducing memory latency pays bigger dividends in Il-2 than in other games. Most other game types are much lighter on CPUs than flight sims so smoothness there isn't necessarily a great predictor. The benchmarking thread has lots of info on tweaks and can let you compare your setup to other similar ones to see if there are big differences indicating a configuration problem.

 

Its the game engine. Those slowdowns and heavines are probably tolerated by majority of people.

I cant believe that you all have same fluidness (not FPS) when you start mission and at the frontline with fighters, flak, big town and ground units.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...