Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Byrna

Does any owner of PMDG 737-NG 600/700 have slow frame rates?

Recommended Posts

Hi,I am interested in buying the PMDG 737NG but only to 600/700 series for now (the base pack). I have read through many postings of people with the 800/900 series having slow frame rates for which PMDG is working on a patch. I have seen how much praise everyone is giving PMDG for their dedicated tech support etc... and this makes me even more eager to buy!But I'm still worried that my planes may be unflyable due to poor frame rates (I believe resulting from PMDG's excellent but complex panels which our fast PC's can't handle). Is there anyone who owns just the base pack 737-600/700 who has any frame rate problems or is the base pack free of such problems? This is assuming you have a fast system of course (e.g. >2.4GHz, 1GB RAM, ATI Radeon 9800 Pro or NVidia 5950)I would appreciate any feedback.Thanks,John

Share this post


Link to post
Guest christianholmes

It depends entirely on how much you're asking from FS...Turn the sliders down and you can get great framerates. Personally, I don't care about framerates on the ground. I use all the ProjectAI addons, with the traffic bgls, and some simflyers airports. I have the graphics pretty high, and find it can easily drop down to 10 or so at busy airports (O'hare for example, with 30 planes waiting in line). At smaller, non-detailed airports it's usually around 22. In the air, it can get up to 40 depending on the weather. There are too many dynamic objects to give an accurate average. If you don't want the AI traffic, and don't want too many detailed clouds, or you don't mind smaller draw distances, etc., you could consistently be in the 20s-40s.I find the plane (full VC and cabin) by itself gives a 15 to 25 percent framerate hit. But it is worth it. I would turn the world detail down before the aircraft- it's that good. It literally transforms FS from a joyriding game in the default planes, to a real sim.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Nickman

The PMDG is about 2x as more detailed as the default 737. Take the default 737's framerate, cut it in half, and that should be about the average framerate of the PMDG model. Also remember that you can have bad framerates but still good performance. It depends on what you think is smooth.Nick B.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/800driver.jpg--AMD Athlon XP 3200+ @ 2.2 Ghz400W Power supply3x 80 mm Case FansSoyo VIA KT600 Dragon PlusnVidia GeForce FX 5200 128 mb2 x 512 PC400100 GB Western DigitalMicrosoft Sidewinder Precision 2

Share this post


Link to post
Guest zip

I think the 800/900 is worthwhile if but to get the new displays and FMC features retrograded to the 600/700 (clickable VC to come).Framerate wise, you will always get a hit with more detailed models, but I believe that the biggest hit in FS9 is not the plane model, it's the scenery and weather around you that matters (ie, number of objects to render). Consequently, tuning down scenery slightly should offset any FPS impact with this add-on, unless you already have a borderline system.

Share this post


Link to post

Nick,I do not get a 50% framerate hit with the NG vs. the default 737. That GFX 5200 you're using might just having something to do with that... ;) Get a 9800 Pro and I guarantee that won't happen.

Share this post


Link to post

>Also>remember that you can have bad framerates but still good>performance. It depends on what you think is smooth.>>Nick B.Hi Nick,Could you elaborate more on that statement? How does one can have bad frame rates and good performance?Thanks,

Share this post


Link to post

I believe what Nick means is that if you clock your frame-rates, you might only see 12-15fps but the actual smoothness of the plane is still there - the frames are not choppy. In other words, you don't need 30 fps or more to have a smooth (and hence a good) performance in FS.Personally, I just look at whether or not my scenes outside the plane are moving by at a smooth rate and if the plane reacts well to my steering. I don't even know how to time the frame rates in FS2004( embarrassing I guess *blush* ). Is there a built-in frame-rate counter? I think there is (activated probably by a keystroke combo) but I was never really interested in it. If I notice choppiness, I'll know...John

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks everyone for your input. I actually don't use any AI Aardvard planes for the exact fear that they will slow down performance too much. I'll live with empty or near empty airports for now and my air traffic set to 40%.Looks like I'll have comparable performance to the POSKY A330 series with Eric Marciano's panel or hopefully a little better. I flew 2 flights already with that and with the alternate panel configuration set to use the panel747ND.cfg file (using 747 ND's), the frame rates were acceptable.John

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Buck Bolduc

You wont be disapointed with the 8-900. If your good with the 700 you will be fine.Not to worry.If you got a high end video card just set the mip map slider to 3 or 4. That way the buildings and other ground objects dont spin arround like a top. Sky scrapers spinning like that I found to be totally unrealistic, if you know what I mean?Best

Share this post


Link to post

Hello Christian,Yes, you were right along with others who have compared using virtual panel and stairs to not using them:I fly all my PMDG aircraft with 2D cockpit only, no stairs or cabin and frame rates are great. I have set weather to "fair" and even stormy and no problems. It does seem that the real culprit is the virtual cockpit plus stairs and cabin - even VC alone seems to be a bad influence on performace (i.e. choppy frames). IN any case, other than "eye candy" I don't see any use for a VC when actually flying the plane (as quite a few people would agree).So for anyone with similar system specs to mine who wants to buy PMDG 737NG, the PMDG 737-600/700 Next Generation (base package) is fine as long as you don't use virtual cockpit and stick to flying with the fully functional (and easy to see) 2D panel.JohnATHLON XP 3200+ ASUS A7N8XE-DELUXE motherboard (NVidian nForce 2 Ultra 400 chipset)2x512MB ddr333 Kingston HyperX RAMATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB retail box

Share this post


Link to post
Guest LLgaz

Hi,I have an Athlon 2200+ with GF4 Ti4600 and 1.5GB RAM. For a while, I stopped flying the 600/700 because my framerates with only the 2D cockpit were just too low for me to get a nice fluid approach into KSEA for example. When I purchased the 800/900 upgrade, I started flying it again since my FPS improved dramatically with the improvements offered as FPS optimizations in that upgrade. Unfortunately, if you want those FPS optimizations, you will have to purchase the upgrade. The good thing is that you will now have two more excellent models, together with many more features. Even if you aren't interested in the 800 and 900, the new features makes the purchase of the upgrade a good buy.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Boone

I was flying the PMDG 737 600/700 on possibly one of the lowest acceptable systems, P 4 1.5GHz, with 512MB RAM. I had NO problems with frame rates as long as I had no programmes running in the back ground, used Chris Willis' replacement clouds, kept the various FS sliders to the left or the middle, and Ultimate Traffic AI at 30% (0% on final). The PMDG 737 is (as the saying goes) a simulator within a simulator. With that mind set, you can fly this bird by the numbers and enjoy every second of it. Nothing else comes close. In fact I'd go as far to say Flight Simulator should be the 'Add-On' for PMDG 737NG!Bottom Line: Tweak your system and FS9 until YOU are happy.Best RegardsBoone,BooneEIDW@hotmail.com"Flying a plane is no different from riding a bicycle. It's just a lot harder to put baseball cards in the spokes."

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
×
×
  • Create New...