I have played with the settings so much i gave up. Seems turning Deferred shading off (which makes terrain look gross) is the only thing that will salvage the once BEAUTIFUL cockpit textures.

The following are captures (SAME ACRFT, SAME TIME, SAME SERVER) First deferred shading off... then on. Other settings adjusted make no notable change to the situation.








Does anything jump out at y'all that i should alter?

My setup:

MSI GT72S 6QF
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980
i7-6820HK CPU @ 2.70GHz
32Gb Ram

The only thing that really jumps out at me is how there's an i7 running at so low a clock speed, but I'm sure that has nothing to do with the issue at hand..

But while we're on that subject.. Is it overclockable or does the "H" in front of the "K" make it mean something other than "unlocked multiplier?"

As far as the actual picture goes I don't know if I'm seeing what's so off. Are you saying it's too bright? It didn't strike me as being terribly implausible, I thought it was probably more accurate to what you might see in real life. With all the light that would be bouncing off the pilot and the rest of the cockpit or even just from the open sky above, the deferred shading pictures look more convincing to my eye.

Having the same issue. Yesterday after the initial update, everything was fine, with the shading on. Now, I just fired up DCS and it is all washed out and over-exposed looking, like those shots on this thread. I don't get it.

ED? What'ya doing (again)?

It's shameful to say, but as far as overclocking or what my rig is capable of... I have no clue. I'm fairly fresh in the PC realm. Should I look into getting that done?

The problem is maybe hard to make out on those photos, but Just some of the most noticeable were as follows.

A-10:
Panel under left MFD is a complete different color than cockpit.
Text on all panels almost unreadable unless zoomed in.
Shadows on floorboard near pedals looks light brown.
MFD's, RWR, and CMS all just look absolutely terrible. Cannot explain better than that! Lol.


F-15:

Doesn't seem as bad as A-10. However, one huge issue... green dot dead center of HUD. Dunno what that's about.

I didn't have the energy to test other aircraft.

Thanks for the notes Tracer. I'll give those a try. From what I've been reading unless you get some sort of standalone adjuster, You just have to cope until ED decides to make changes.

Now that I look it up it looks like it's a laptop CPU? I didn't realize you were flying on a laptop. That's pretty awesome.

Often laptops aren't great overclocking candidates even if they do have the ability to do so, but I'm seeing a lot of stuff that that processor in particular is pretty good for it. They make a 4.0 GHz overclock sound like a breeze, but I'd look up what people were able to do with your exact laptop before I'd recommend trying it out yourself. If the cooling isn't up to speed you could run in to thermal issues or if the power supply doesn't have extra juice on tap that could be a problem, but it seems the chip itself is good and stable.

And if we were talking something besides DCS I'd probably just leave it be, but DCS is pretty CPU heavy and the lazy Russian coding means it likes single threads at high clock speeds. The Turbo clock of 3.6 GHz isn't terrible, but if you could get to 4.0 GHz or just beyond it could be worthwhile.

Yup rocking the laptop! It has done really well. Once I get settled back in the states I'm planning to get a desktop. More power!!

Really helpful info BTW thanks!

they did something with the graphics and shaders in 2.1 that screwed with everything, even my WWII skins that i updated for 2.0 are washed out and they dont reflect properly anymore, ill have to see if i can find screenshots of the screwed up reflections/shading on the "bare" metal skins i use.

Just to touch on the OC subject, don't OC your laptop. Laptops simply don't have the cooling system to keep chips cool, most of them are smoking hot already at stock settings when you play games on them. So even if you got a nice stable OC going, it's highly improbable that your laptop would dissipate that heat and it would either throttle (lower its power automatically and slow to worse-than-before speeds) or BSOD, or just completely fry.

Fun fact, a cooler is so important for a CPU that if you turned on your PC with no cooling whatsoever, it'd fry before the screen even flickered. That's just what happens when you're running that much juice through microscopic circuits.

Anyway, for a desktop that had unlocked multipliers and if more CPU speed would actually be beneficial to the particular system, I'd say go for it. It's not that difficult and the chances of breaking things is pretty slim. There's plenty of resources to explain how to do it and why you're doing this or that.

I've had my old CPU at a pretty high oc since BF3 came out and it really makes it twice the chip it is stock. I used the "push it till BSOD and then back it off a bit" method but there are safer ways to do it. Most of the time you can find charts showing different OC settings for your particular chip that enthusiasts have cons up with. As long as your cooling isn't complete shit, you can simply apply a OC and monitor your temps while running a stress test.
If your temps are getting too high for your taste or things start getting wonky simply dial it back and find a nice balance between speed and stability. Depending on the chip you can really amp them up before even worrying about stability, allowing for a substantial perf boost without pushing the envelope whatsoever.
Even in my own OC I pulled it pretty far back from where it crapped itself. (Stock was 3.8, max was 5.8, I'm running 4.5).

Thanks for the cautions Runny. I decided not to overclock for that very reason.

[BBvideo=560,315][/BBvideo]
Good old times