All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. robert young

    P3D V4.4 Low FPS

    Your specs are much higher than mine but I would say I get far better performance than you are reporting, but I'm not completely sure because I'm unclear how much detail you are running with. It is a complicated subject and everyone tweaks in their own way, so i am posting this in an effort to give examples, not a firm guide. I can only say what I do. One thing I don't do is to start with everything set high. I do the complete opposite. I start with a simple, default - or FSX default - aircraft imported into p3d (the FSX defaults all work almost flawlessly despite posts here saying they don't and in fact LH specifically declare that P3d v4 is FSX Sp2 compatible except where 32 bit gauges in the form of .dll files are included). With sparse scenery and autogen, and shadows and reflections off, no weather and no HDR your system should easily achieve well over 200 fps in spot view if you load an imported default C172 from FSX, or similar aircraft. Actually I get well over 200 fps in this aircraft on a machine that is at least 4 years older than yours and of a much lower spec and it is also underclocked for stability. Your system should do much better than mine (possibly 300 fps in spot view and 200 fps inside the cockpit?). If your system and set up cannot achieve these rates with sparse scenery and a modest aircraft, it is never going to achieve a decent frame rate with a complex aircraft and more scenery detail/shadows/Ai traffic etc. If you don't get this kind of frame rate then look at your p3d.cfg and remove anything that is not standard, APART from maybe Fiber Frame Rate which most definitely delivers a much higher frame rate with low values, and rarely causes any blurries unless you over-ride scenery or weather and LOD standard values. Work from the highest frame rate possible then gradually add more complexity and see the effect, one by one. This is so much more efficient and useful than starting with all guns blazing then having to reduce.The reason is obvious to me. In this way you can identify precisely which component is slowing things down, rather than seeing what improves when you remove things. Additive tweaks from nothing upwards are always more efficient than reductive tweaks from ridiculous detail downwards. Despite what some say, flight models break down very quickly below 30 fps - even though they might be just about ok with procedural flights that do not tax the FDE. If you are happy with this that's fine. But you need overhead. Unless your system is delivering totally smooth motion at 25-29 fps you need overhead because the best setups still suffer spikes. Just one tiny spike during a banked turn can introduce stutters and make a smooth flight model jerky. If you are flying a large airliner mainly under autopilot then 28 fps is just about ok providing you do not get frequent fps spikes. For this reason I always aim for at least 35 fps and ideally more, because just a couple of fsp drops can ruin the experience. If you are flying smaller aircraft manually and want to fly with any kind of challenging maneouvres, you need in my opinion more fps: 40 fps is a decent ambition as that will iron out micro stutters. The aircraft you listed are mostly very challenging as to fps. There are ways to instantly improve frame rate of most of them and they included editing huge dds files which can be reduced in size without much visual impact, disabling certain gauges that are known causes of performance reductions, removing unnecessary pfds and mfds, removing weather radars etc, etc. Two very useful ways to test if your system is delivering decent performance are, surprisingly, nothing to do with actually flying. They concern camera movement. If you are in a Virtual Cockpit and you pan left and right, and the movement is jerky AND there is a delay before the movement starts, that nearly always indicates that you over-taxing your graphics card, probably with more MSAA, or SSAA than your machine can handle for the detail you have loaded. This has become a very telling indicator for me, even without flying. It also might indicate that you have loaded more stuff than both your CPU and graphics card likes. There is no magic wand as you no doubt know! Except for the most demanding addon aircraft you should be able to find a decent compromise between detail and flyability. I'm still learning and I've been tweaking privately for over two decades!
  3. Nickbe

    Aircraft system malfunctions Falcon 50

    Yes, certainly. And all the other instruments are working. I'll check all again today.
  4. scandinavian13

    PMDG and P3D v4.4

  5. ckyliu

    P3D V4.4 Low FPS

    You didn't mention your traffic settings, you could try turning those down. But don't chase numbers, if the sim feels okay then that's enough 🙂 Overclocking your processor past 4 Ghz would help and swapping the 1060 for a 1080.
  6. pedwards

    First Flight in the Vertx Diamond DA-62

    Thank you Howard.
  7. dmiannay

    P3D V4.4 Low FPS

    Just off the top of my head, your i5-6600k at 3.7GHz is probably the costliest to your low performance. P3D is both CPU and GPU hungry. You should be able to overclocked your 6600k to get better performance. Have you tried that? I'm sure others will chime in with their thoughts...
  8. Sooner or lager P3D sceneries and aircraft will be migrating to PBR, and we'll all be the bitter for it, judging by Steve's beautiful work above. Glad he's getting out ahead of the field. Just couldn't help myself...
  9. Ray Proudfoot

    So what happened to Navigraph survey results?

    Better things but you don’t list them. It took me 15 mins or so and I was happy to help Navigraph who provide a great service to the flight sim community.
  10. J van E

    Train Simming

    Why feel sick about it when it did give you fun over the years...? You can't expect things to stay fun forever and ever. I spend a LOT of money on various flightsims but I don't feel sick about it at all and I also wouldn't feel sick about it if a new sim would be released tomorrow and I would never ever use any of the old purchases again.
  11. n4gix

    In 1984.....

    Thank you for reposting the "sanitized" version Noel. It was an enjoyable read.
  12. Seeing your photos of the internals this actually looks really promising, although it is hard to see how those slide bearings are implemented. If they can replace these with decent bearings without bumping the price up this will be a definite contender.
  13. Prepar3dV4.4 seemed like an update just tying up loose ends. this forum posts had some slight proof that v5 may come soon, wich gives me hope that Truesky will maybe be in V5 I mean, who wouldn't want this, i guess yeah AS and Rex would only work in V4 but still, this is way better than wierd laggy overcast and stretched textures right?
  14. scottb613

    Pete Dowson announces he will retire on reaching age 75

    Hi Folks, Our Flight Simulator without Pete's contributions: Thanks for saving us Pete and enjoy your retirement... Regards, Scott
  15. Ray Proudfoot

    Pete Dowson announces he will retire on reaching age 75

    If AvSim doesn’t have one what better time to create it. 😉
  16. If you still haven't found this, try looking for a function called 'TOGGLE_GPS_DRIVES_NAV1'. If you have FSUIPC you can call it directly with function id 66375.
  17. Jackaroo05

    PMDG and P3D v4.4

    When will the PMDG 747-8 have PBR?
  18. jabloomf1230

    So what happened to Navigraph survey results?

    I didn't bother to complete the survey, after I realized that I had a lot better things to do with my time and it seemed like the purpose was for Navigraph to provide the results to the sponsors. Even after the survey results are publically released, they will be subject to criticism. But that's the nature of voluntary online surveys.
  19. scottb613

    Train Simming

    Hi Thomas, Yeah - I've heard good things about that as well - I haven't tried it though... It's the steam locomotive physics that sucked me in to ORTS... When I'm not here - I'm usually over there... I model on that side of the fence and each steam locomotive is probably 9 or 10 months worth of free and not so free time... While Erik Cantu kind of faded out over here - I've crossed paths with him with ORTS - where he bring his impressive skills to bear on locomotives and rolling stock... Here's another one I made: Regards, Scott
  20. rjfry

    So what happened to Navigraph survey results?

    Interesting the developers that took part but just as interesting the ones that did not, and the sim they most develop for know.
  21. Ray Proudfoot

    Pete Dowson announces he will retire on reaching age 75

    Pete might be able to get a few flights in now. John is a very capable programmer and FSUIPC is in safe hands. I don’t know where we’d be without FSUIPC and Pete. Back in the Dark Ages of Flight simming I think. I don’t know if AvSim has an honours system. He’s certainly deserving of recognition. And he’s far more likely to accept one from AvSim than the British Honours System as he’s a staunch socialist! 😄 And to paraphrase Churchill.. Never in the field of flight sims has so much been owed by so many to so few.. or one.
  22. Yeah, that’s what I don’t like. Tired of a clickbait world!
  23. HOPfully, we won’t have to wait long.
  24. Today
  25. Ted Striker

    Coverage outside USA

    Is the older database with the shorter runways still available and if so can it be installed? Ted
  1. Load more activity