Sign in to follow this  
Guest thors

Framerate problem with pmdg b.747!

Recommended Posts

Dear staff!I have a problem with your product of pmdg b.747. I does

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Hi Thordurwould you be able to post more of your computer specs? i.e your processor and your graphics card..if its a top end machine it should be running the 747 smoothly, you may be having other problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Paul!Thanks for responding so quickly. Here are the information of my computer.ACE AMDAMD athlon64 processor3500+2.21 GHz 1,0 gb of RAM239 gb hard driveNavidia GeForce 7800 GTXHope you can help me to solve this problem.Regards.Thordur SigurjonssonIceland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are your other settings in FS9?Also how low is low? above or below 10fps? And is that when cruising or on final into a detailed airport with heavy AI traffic?Boaz...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Boaz suggested try out your settings in FS9 and also whether you are running AI Traffic at a high percentage. AI Traffic set to high will seriously hog your FPS and also airport addons can hog your FPS, and maybe some other add on software like ActiveSky. You do have a very powerful computer one that should run the 747 flawlessly. If you do have some of these settings set to high, maybe knock off AI Traffic completely and any other weather addons and test the 747s FPS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again!Thanks for your advise. When I was dealing with my proublem on pmdg b.747, I was taxing on Seattle aiport (made by FlyTampa). They have very framrates friendly airports, so I was a little bit suprised. But I measured my framrate when I was taxing, and he was 18,23 - 18,35 (shift+z). Maybe that is okey framerate, but I was hoping that he would be better on airports from FlyTampa. I have the newest version of ActiveSky, the framerate of there clouds is no problem in my computer, but a more heavy when I am flying pmdg b.747. I also use fspassenger. Maybe this two product have a impact on my framerates. I used real weather program, and it was cloudy and raining. My traffic in Seattle was about 60%. I use ultimatetraffic from Flight1, and use aircrafts from aardwark and fsp. There is no problem with my framerates when I am flying pmdg b.737 or other aircrafts (like 50century or freeware aircrafts), but there I use another panel.Regards.Thordur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, that the PMDG 737NG will have a higher impact on performance, but this might not be the case with you as you use some kind of FPS reducing panel???Clouds have a high impact, you can overcome this by downloading new texture files with reduced size and thus pc demand.Flytampa makes amazing airports and they are very frame rate friendly especially if you look at the detail they contain!But Seattle can still eat away, especially, and this is confirmed by flytampa, the city of Seattle.All or most of FS9s default scenery are very fps unfriendly.Again I wouldn't look at ONE thing, more the combination of all things!If you were flying the default cessna in the same situation and place, you would propably receive a cool 25-30 fps... But with the PMDG 744 you would receive 15-20 fps, this is not only because of PMDGs 744.Cutting away the PMDG 744, which I say is a big no no, you would still end up with many selections that eat up fps.Auto gen is really good at this! At settings above normal you will see a loss!Clouds detail and view range must also be checked.Frame rate lock, should be at your max fps, or on unl if you want faster texture loading.ANY VFR scenery will also cause some stuttering as textures load.ATC active even at 60% is a major source of FPS loss, also at Seattle!Clouds in the default FS9 format are of high resolution and are over 1mn in size! They are also 32 BIT images!To reduce the load of clouds, DXT textures with a resolution of 512x512 and downwards will greately improve performance! Especially if the above mentioned range is kept to far.Shadows! I keep aircraft shadows on while I keep scenery shadows off, this is because I use a lower end pc (AMD 1900+) it is just that shadows are mini replicas of the scenery and aircraft models sorta ;)Again this is just to show you that it is not only your 744 that eats away fps, it is FS9 over all!If you used some kind of 2D panel that is not official, I cannot explain why your fps would be higher than with the 744, but I can tell you that 2D fps are roughly equal to VC fps, and that it wasn't on the NG!Boaz...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dude it willbe awesome if i get those FPSme at FT sea i get some 15-7

Share this post


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
Sign in to follow this