Frame rate hit

[Guest bunchie]

Hi all,Thanks to the Active Sky team for a great product (after an arduous download session).The development of this product has come a very long way... congratulations.One small niggle though. no matter what 32 bit cloud textures I use 256x256 0r 64x64 frame rate is very poor, down in the low teens.For now I'm using Flight Environment DXT textures with great success.I just wanted to point this problem out, I can work around it but I would like to see AE's wonderful textures in a smoother manner.Thanks for hearing me out.Stu

[Chris Willis 8]

HI Stu,Did you enable the mips map in the AE interface for clouds before? and when you change the resolution, you have to shut down fs2004 before. You should not have poor performance at all.DXT will be available.ThanksChris WillisHiFi Simulation Software Team Developerhttp://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_dev_team.jpgFreeware Addons for FSW GROUP

[Guest bunchie]

Hi Chris,Yes, I enabled Mips and this did improve things.My problem is that 256x256 look pretty and make you feel like your're 'flying through cloud' but frames judder badly, especially when turning.64x64 clouds are much kinder frame rate wise but don't look good at all close up... just too 'blocky'I reckon 128x128 32bit would be just right (as dxt and panel flicker with render to texture on is mildly annoying.)Anyway, looking forward to your update.Thanks for your help,Regards,Stu.

[Nick75 0]

IMO it mostly depends on the current weather situation in terms of FS9 performance with ASV, and not so much on the resolution of cloud textures or whether you have mips enabled. It seems to me after trying out all 3 resolution clouds in ASV that the frame rate difference in 3 identical weather situations doesn't vary that much, naturally a bit worse the higher res clouds you use, but not significantly so in my view, at least not on my system. The main factor IMO which is much more important to take into account in determining performance is the number of cloud layers and the coverage of each cloud layer. I've been using the 512x512 res clouds and still get decent performance in most weather situations, only when about 3-4+ heavy (i.e. broken/overcast) cloud layers are reported (height of cloud layers also being a factor) do things start getting choppy frame-rate wise. Even if you use 64x64 with mips enabled, if you throw in a few heavy cloud layers performance will start suffering no matter what.

[Chris Willis 8]

HI Nick and Stu,-With the update 256x256 32bits in DXT format will be like 128x128 in files size.-The main factor on fps hit is like you Nick told, depend on how many clouds formation and layers at the same time from the metar.-On mid and lower system, there will be noticable improvement performance increase with 256x256 or lower. Especialy when the users are using high demanding scenery and aircaft at the same time + all others factor from AI traffic etc.There will be situation 256x256 will help more then 512x512 or more noticable, again depend on the system and all addons the users got.ThanksChris WillisHiFi Simulation Software Team Developerhttp://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_dev_team.jpgFreeware Addons for FSW GROUP

[michal 44]

>or whether you have mips enabled.Mip-mapping almost doubled my performance. On many systems you will see big difference in performance. Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpghttp://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_beta_member.jpg