Request not to add new content, but to solve problems

[YoYo]

I apologize for this request, but I'm feeling frustrated .

I started my campaign (career), as is my style, in VR. K-13 Airport, behind me were seven more Mustangs, eight were circling in the air, and a ground target.

Unfortunately, it wasn't a pleasant experience. Even at the airport itself, I noticed a problem with stable FPS (despite medium settings, without DLSS). The game couldn't maintain 72 frames on the RTX 5090 in VR. Some say it's not a GPU issue, but a code bottleneck that's issuing too many commands to the CPU. I don't know, and it's part of your diagnosis. In any case, even at the airport itself, the FPS dropped, making takeoff unenjoyable and unsmooth (55-68).

The flight was still going smoothly, but over the target, I had another slideshow-fest (plus, the flight route was past Seoul, so you know what's going on there....). There was also a noticeable load on the computer, with frame drops, etc. (45-50-65-72) over target as well.

I understand you wanted to move forward and implemented many features, such as a large vehicle damage model, flat tires, etc. but I feel this comes at the expense of gameplay. I wonder if GB Korea wouldn't be more enjoyable with the IL-2 engine, despite its limitations (GB still looks good, and above all, runs really well). The main problem with IL-2 Korea is performance and optimization. In my opinion, if this isn't resolved soon, it will result in a loss of customers and discourage new ones. You'll lose a portion of the market (I'm talking especially about VR users) because it's clear that they're the most complaining group here, on Steam, and on Discord. Please don't underestimate this. New content, such as the recent release (e.g., airports), somehow caused further FPS drops, which has also been reported by many people.

I'd like to ask you to prioritize post-release work on improving the game's performance first. The simulator should currently run well on top-tier hardware, even with medium settings, but unfortunately, that's not the case. Even during gameplay, you can clearly feel the problem. You can feel the significant load whenever something is happening. Even planes flying past in the air, despite the maximum frame rate, look like they're jumping around, as if I had reprojection enabled, which I don't use. I've never experienced anything like this before. In IL-2 GB, the image is super smooth, and it's a pleasure to fly and fight there.

A combat simulator should be characterized by high performance, relatively good graphics, and good realism. Air combat and ground target attacks are dynamic, action-packed events. This should be ensured because without it, as we add more and more content, we'll only be clogging up processes instead of streamlining them. In my opinion, this should be the current goal for the upcoming development of IL-2 Korea.

Btw. I'll add that I don't regret a single cent, even though I have the Deluxe version (new name, I think), the simulator has huge potential and seems promising, but without solving the performance issues it won't attract a part of the population and not will be the basis for the next years. Thank You.

[Stoikiy]

What resolution you use for VR? Just interesting 

 

[YoYo]

1 hour ago, Stoikiy said:

What resolution you use for VR? Just interesting 

 

About 2700x2700 pxt. So 5400x2700 for both eyes. I use upscaling 1.2 and FOV 0.75 on the Quest.

[Stoikiy]

11 minutes ago, YoYo said:

About 2700x2700 pxt. So 5400x2700 for both eyes. I use upscaling 1.2 and FOV 0.75 on the Quest.

So you run game in 5k without DLSS and want one RTX 5090 handle it? 
Of course if they do some optimizations magic it would be better but you need DLSS + we need FG tech in the game.
Nvidia FG working pretty well

[YoYo]

7 minutes ago, Stoikiy said:

So you run game in 5k without DLSS and want one RTX 5090 handle it? 
Of course if they do some optimizations magic it would be better but you need DLSS + we need FG tech in the game.
Nvidia FG working pretty well

Of course, and I don't know why you're surprised? What HMD are you using and what hardware? Near all simulators currently run at 4.5K resolution without issue, and not just on my hardware (I won't mention 8K with QV). It's not a matter of resolution as you think; 4K or 5K is the norm on the market today and the settings are quite average. I have no problem with MSFS, DCS, or IL-2GB at higher settings (even MSAAx4). Here I have multipliers of 1.3 and 1.4, so even higher resolution. I don't know if you know this as well, but FG doesn't work with VR as well. A friend runs DCS with an RTX5070Ti on the default settings in his HMD and gets stable frames to his refresh rate. In IL-2 Korea, on his hardware, he's unable to maintain stable frames in VR at low and medium settings. I don't have Aces of Thunder, but I saw it at a friend's place. On his RTX 5070Ti, it runs great in VR, with many of planes and decent graphics on the ground. It's got 90 fps (it's just for fun, so I'm not interested, but it works great).  Here's another example of how it's not the GPU, but rather the CPU-related code performance. Performance isn't just about graphics. Jumping planes or long columns of vehicles in A2G missions are examples of this (with stable FPS). There's just work to be done here.

[Husar]

47 minutes ago, Stoikiy said:

Nvidia FG working pretty well

FG is only 2D and I would not use this because additional latency. What high resolution headset needs is DFR and VR optimization like other games have now - instancing of geometry.

Edited August 8 by Husar

[Andrey78]

100% agree, I have 4090 running Pico4 3k x 3k per eye resolution, and in both DCS and Il-2 GB have stable 72 FPS on almost maximum graphics settings without DLSS, but in IL-2 Korea with minimal graphics settings i get 50 FPS without DLSS and 60-65 FPS with DLSS 😞

Edited August 8 by Andrey78

[Stoikiy]

7 minutes ago, Andrey78 said:

100% agree, I have 4090 running Pico4 3k x 3k per eye resolution, and in both DCS and Il-2 GB have stable 72 FPS on almost maximum graphics settings without DLSS, but in IL-2 Korea with minimal graphics settings i get 50 FPS without DLSS and 60-65 FPS with DLSS 😞

I guess its because Dx12 more difficult to use and implement then Dx11 and many games from 2013-2020 has same problem that on Dx11 game has more FPS and Dx12 called as experementel.  Since we now use DLSS means that engine been upgraded from Dx11 to Dx12 which is huge step forward. I think devs should also took DCS as an example and add Vulcan support as they did, that not is easy task.... but, with Codex or Claude AI they might increase Dx12 optimisations or Vulcan integration speed

[YoYo]

And just to make it clear, I tried. I took on a "simulation" of an A2G mission from the career – four Mustangs AI at the airport (behind me), four in the air AI. Takeoff (start mission) directly from Runway of K-13 (try it here). 

I even enabled DLSS and lowered the multiplier to 1.1 (Meta Quest). And take off with wing with 4xF-51D was unfortunately a very bad experience. I could clearly feel the stutter. Normally, I should have 72 FPS (I don't have reprojection enabled). However, even with these settings (weak for me, for RTX5090, LOL), the FPS dropped to 60 during the takeoff run with pronounced stuttering. My favorite test is looking to the side during takeoff, not straight ahead. Objects around me would freeze, as if they were appearing twice for a split second, but it was the entire sequence of time. It was like I was seeing every other frame. This clearly demonstrates the problem with rendering time. 

Edited August 8 by YoYo

[Redeye]

Jees @YoYo that is bad. I run my Quest3 with multiplier 1.5 at 90 Hertz and have no stuttering whatsoever. As I stated in another thread I am satisfied with 35 to 45 FPS. The latter in the sky and the former around busy points. Here and there it sometimes dips lower (have seen 22 FPS but then I was lower then the gun barrel of a Is2!).

[Drewm3i-VR]

1 hour ago, YoYo said:

And just to make it clear, I tried. I took on a "simulation" of an A2G mission from the career – four Mustangs AI at the airport (behind me), four in the air AI. Takeoff (start mission) directly from Runway of K-13 (try it here). 

I even enabled DLSS and lowered the multiplier to 1.1 (Meta Quest). And take off with wing with 4xF-51D was unfortunately a very bad experience. I could clearly feel the stutter. Normally, I should have 72 FPS (I don't have reprojection enabled). However, even with these settings (weak for me, for RTX5090, LOL), the FPS dropped to 60 during the takeoff run with pronounced stuttering. My favorite test is looking to the side during takeoff, not straight ahead. Objects around me would freeze, as if they were appearing twice for a split second, but it was the entire sequence of time. It was like I was seeing every other frame. This clearly demonstrates the problem with rendering time. 

You should set your screen resolution as low as possible. In GB VR, I use 640 x 480 for instance (windowed).

Also, have you tried deleting your updates folder and startup.cfg?

[YoYo]

9 hours ago, Drewm3i-VR said:

You should set your screen resolution as low as possible. In GB VR, I use 640 x 480 for instance (windowed).

Also, have you tried deleting your updates folder and startup.cfg?

1/ This has nothing to do with the whole performance, and it wouldn't make that much of a difference. However, I've checked it. Zero changes, as I suspected.

2/ This also only applies to people who messed with the cfg and forgot what they did (which happens). In such cases, it's worth deleting the startup.cfg. I did it when a thread appeared on the forum. It doesn't affect performance over Seoul, AI issues, etc., believe me.

Btw.

This is interesting. I'Il minimized everything (almost), did test on K-13 airfield and guess what....? Still no stable 72 frames, stutter is present still (FPS 58-72 fest, Oculus Performance HUD, clearly shows the graph with spikes and stutters, rendering times are too high).

DLSS Performance Plus even. It looks downright awful, so it's still not a GPU, at least not in the sense some people think. 
Btw. CPU i9 13900K, 5,7GHz on Turbo.

If anyone wants to check this FPS TEST Track out (32Mb), please take it from here:

https://www.transfernow.net/dl/20260808r8w1pFem

(unpack the whole content to IL2Series\game\data\Tracks). If the replay changes the camera, go back with F1 key, I see that the tracks are not playing correctly yet.

I had to run the IL-2 GB to see... how well it works, compared to Korea, the huge gap in performance….

Edited August 9 by YoYo

[skywalker22]

100% agree here with YoYo. No new content before this one doesn't work at least decent in VR, please!

---

Btw, have you tried to set the AA to MSAA? It runs better than any other setting in DCS. But I guess you did try, read it here.

Edited August 10 by skywalker22

[GiftGruen]

Full agree.

MSAAx2 as AA gives me clearly best balance between visuals and performance.

[YoYo]

Factors that also affect performance, I think, include grass (and I think there was a post from the developers a while back saying they noticed this and were supposed to work on it; I don't know if this fix is already in the game or not) and... shadows. However, turning them OFF also means we don't have shadows in the cockpit, which visually takes us back 15 years in gaming. In VR I'm currently using Low, but I see that has an effect too. However, it's primarily objects. Regardless of the graphics settings, even with DLSS Performance settings down, airport takeoffs still don't look as they should, or low pass over cities. FPS drops are most pronounced here, similar to Air to Ground missions with a large number of vehicles, as in Career.

8 hours ago, GiftGruen said:

MSAAx2 as AA gives me clearly best balance between visuals and performance.

I have the same impression: despite the fact that there's an exclamation point indicating that AA is the most system-intensive, x2 not only looks best to me, but also doesn't make much difference in FPS to other AA settings (it's small but a better GPU can handle it very well, the bigger problem is the CPU processes, it has a bigger impact on performance). This exclamation point should probably be present for MSAA x4 and DLAA, especially (without DLSS).

[Zakson85]

Do you use turbo mode in that external OpenXR enhancement?

https://diener.tech/products/vectorxr

I use those settings on a much worse graphics card and don't experience those kinds of FPS drops. Admittedly, I fly in multiplayer 95% of the time, where there are always 50 people around. My graphics settings aren't low, either. However, I don't upscale the resolution, as that kills performance the most. Maybe it's worth backing off on the high resolution a bit and adding some effects instead?

With settings like that on a 4080 + Turbo mode and Virtual Desktop—the game runs beautifully.

[YoYo]

Turbo isn't much to say; it's not a GPU issue, but rather a CPU and process issue. Incidentally, this is why multiplayer runs better because the processes are running on the server. It's not perfect, but it's a different situation, and the difference is noticeable. As always, I suggest having a broader perspective on the whole situation, rather than focusing on a single aspect :).

Have you tested the mission I linked? I encourage you to give it a try. Back with result.

[Zakson85]

“Works for me.” Am I doing something wrong? 
2d
 

vr

 

Edited August 11 by Zakson85

[YoYo]

It doesn't look bad for you, it's strange considering the frame rate (basically stable, I use 72Hz myself as well). But what resolution are you using in VR? I have quite a bit of stutter, especially when I look around during the run-up. Interestingly, it's not really related to the graphics settings (your settings are fine for me; mine are quite similar). Could it also be a CPU issue? Which one are you using?

Btw. I'll try to record a similar video. Of course, the recording itself takes up some of the power, so I'm keeping that in mind.

 

Edited August 11 by YoYo

[Zakson85]

I use: amd r7 9850x3d, 64gb ram 6000, rtx 4080, virtual desktop - ultra preset, quest3 

To get rid of the stuttering on Windows 11, I had to disable Game Mode and Xbox Game Bar, set the Low Latency Mode in the Nvidia Control Panel to "On" (but not "Ultra"), and install the Vector XR program and enable Turbo Mode within it. This program is a game-changer for me, for both IL-2 and DCS.

[YoYo]

Okay, I understand you left the Quest 3 at its default resolution? I use Turbo, previously OpenXR, and now VectorXR. I'm aware of this issue, okay, I'll take a look and let you know. Btw. Maybe AMD can handle IL-2 Korea better? I have an i9 13900K or maybe VD helps with something here (I use Quest Link).

Edited August 11 by YoYo

[Zakson85]

In Virtual Desktop, you can't set the resolution the same way you do in Quest Link; instead, there are presets that handle it. I have no idea how that translates to a multiplier like 1.5, the way it does in Quest Link.

 

[Husar]

1 hour ago, YoYo said:

Okay, I understand you left the Quest 3 at its default resolution? I use Turbo, previously OpenXR, and now VectorXR. I'm aware of this issue, okay, I'll take a look and let you know. Btw. Maybe AMD can handle IL-2 Korea better? I have an i9 13900K or maybe VD helps with something here (I use Quest Link).

What I’ve noticed is that when FPS drops below the headset’s refresh rate, it’s not nearly as unpleasant in VD as it is with Link. Use to used it before.

VD preset resolutions

Potato: 1344x1440

Low: 1728x1824

Medium: 2112x2304

High: 2496x2688

Ultra: 2688x2880

Godlike: 3072x3264

 

In my new system I don't have meta and streamVR installed on my system, just VD. 

Edited August 11 by Husar

[YoYo]

Just a curiosity, I've done some testing recently, traditionally in Seoul and formation flights. I noticed something quite interesting in VR: the FPS (72Hz), I'm at 72, but with a minimum of 36. I switched to 90Hz and get 90 and 45FPS. I have reprojection (for Quest ASW) disabled, and it shouldn't be like that (when I enable it, there are more aggressive jumps from 72 to almost 36 very fast). Of course, there are also in-between values, and sometimes they can stay there for quite a while (66, 51, 48, etc.), but I'm curious about this minimum value, which is exactly half the frequency as if ASW were running.

Since it works quite well in VD (but VD also uses its own settings), maybe the problem isn't entirely with VR performance in the IL-2 Korea, but simply some OpenXR/runtime interaction. Perhaps something was implemented incorrectly? It would be useful to see what else could be done here by mbucchia...

[Husar]

1 hour ago, YoYo said:

Just a curiosity, I've done some testing recently, traditionally in Seoul and formation flights. I noticed something quite interesting in VR: the FPS (72Hz), I'm at 72, but with a minimum of 36. I switched to 90Hz and get 90 and 45FPS. I have reprojection (for Quest ASW) disabled, and it shouldn't be like that (when I enable it, there are more aggressive jumps from 72 to almost 36 very fast). Of course, there are also in-between values, and sometimes they can stay there for quite a while (66, 51, 48, etc.), but I'm curious about this minimum value, which is exactly half the frequency as if ASW were running.

Since it works quite well in VD (but VD also uses its own settings), maybe the problem isn't entirely with VR performance in the IL-2 Korea, but simply some OpenXR/runtime interaction. Perhaps something was implemented incorrectly? It would be useful to see what else could be done here by mbucchia...

I don't trust meta link and ASW, many times I had it off but when frame timings was off out of nowhere it kick in. Had to use Ctrl + Numpad 1 to turn it off, check performance displays from oculus debug while it happens again.

Edited August 11 by Husar