Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
pastorpilot

3rd Party AI Reduces Load - Myth or Truth?

Recommended Posts

This is NOT the overasked question about which AI program is best. I have read several posts that indicate that certain third party models actually load the system down less than the default AI aircraft. I operate a modest E6700 system and have only about 3 gigs of ram available according to the "switch" available to XP Pro. IS THIS TRUE or myth.... at least at times ... that certain 3rd party AI programs are lighter on the CPU than the dfault AI traffic. Also I remembr that Nick or someone wrote that some of the 3rd Party solutions do not include calls for the jetways that also load the system down.I simply am trying to learn which of the 3rd Party programs would be best for folks like me without a high end I7-980 processor, or what ever. I really want extra GA and realworld liveries, but I don't want the system to completely choke either. I don't care about which program is BEST ... I want to know which has the lightest hit while still having models that look a little like the real thing! Also without the jetway calls, I assume. i don't need those, personally. :( Thanks, Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is NOT the overasked question about which AI program is best. I have read several posts that indicate that certain third party models actually load the system down less than the default AI aircraft. I operate a modest E6700 system and have only about 3 gigs of ram available according to the "switch" available to XP Pro. IS THIS TRUE or myth.... at least at times ... that certain 3rd party AI programs are lighter on the CPU than the dfault AI traffic. Also I remembr that Nick or someone wrote that some of the 3rd Party solutions do not include calls for the jetways that also load the system down.I simply am trying to learn which of the 3rd Party programs would be best for folks like me without a high end I7-980 processor, or what ever. I really want extra GA and realworld liveries, but I don't want the system to completely choke either. I don't care about which program is BEST ... I want to know which has the lightest hit while still having models that look a little like the real thing! Also without the jetway calls, I assume. i don't need those, personally. :( Thanks, Steve
SHORT ANSWER: TrueRECOMMENDATION: Since you have selection criteria, there will be one BEST program for you. For airliners, I like UT2 a little better.LONGER ANSWER: (see below)The biggest factor is model optimization. At times, the default traffic is using the same models that you can actually fly in. An aircraft for the player will likely be modeled at a higher fidelity than AI aircraft. Both MyTrafficX and UltimateTraffic II, at least in the case of FSX, use some proportion of models that are a built/compiled with the FSX SDK (typically up to SP2 or Acceleration). Many of these modelers make extensive use of Level of Detail (LOD) sub-models within their model which cull a substantial number of polygons from the model at distance. This is largely due to the fact that you'll see these other planes at distance as much as you'll see them up close.You then need to ask yourself: do I want real-world schedules? There are a few approaches to this, but to use one of the commercial packages, you'll only get real-world schedules with Ultimate Traffic. The schedules in UT2 are about 18 months old now, so the data is getting stale. A good overall compromise is to get MyTrafficX as you'll have "real-ish" schedules and many FSX-optimized models. The trick to the smoothness you desire is to have good models with good LOD techniques, which are compiled for FSX natively (not an FS9 portover). MyTrafficX will allow you to adjust traffic levels as will Ultimate Traffic II. Also, both packages will allow you to forgo the use of jetways.In the end, it's both TRUE and MYTH (and a SORTOF category).TRUE - you have a selection of better and optimized models and configurability with the 3rd party stuff to achieve better performance with AI traffic. Furthermore, you'll get more models and many real-world airlines.MYTH - you can introduce settings which saturate the sky far beyond what default traffic will give you. So, for a fair comparison, you must do an apples-to-apples comparison with similar levels of traffic. Once you do this, there is rarely any MYTH to this.SORTOF - If you introduce too many FS9 freeware airplanes and schedules, you'll possible hit trouble. Also, you won't be able to mix FS9-compiled AI traffic with FSX-compiled traffic, so it can get messy.I haven't spoken of FS Traffic much because I've never used it - it might be the holy grail, but I think MyTrafficX and UT2 are probably the best things going.Some degree of your selection will have to be weighed on other factors. Do you like the way the models look? Etc. It will come down to how you use it rather than the sum qualities of the package you go with anyhow. Every package can be configured to accommodate your tastes and your hardware, making for what one man is a myth, a reality for another. In this regard, your question is similar to the question of whether you can run all of the settings sliders to the right - in most cases, you can't. So, you have to find a suitable combination. So, again, either of the two packages I've mentioned will fit the bill. Due to real-world schedules and the use of realistic flight paths, I typically favor UT2.

Jeff Bea

I am an avid globetrotter with my trusty Lufthansa B777F, Polar Air Cargo B744F, and Atlas Air B748F.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff, Thank you so so much for taking time to write such a fine and comprehensive response. From your response, here is what I am looking for:1. I DON'T have to have "real world schedules." I live in the sticks and am not able to get true high speed internet (Cable or DSL). So I have never been able to get into VATSIM or other online thigs where I think it would be wonderful to have real world schedules.2. It sounds like I want FSX optimized models.Does one/both/all have the most of these?3. I want a good selection of General Aviation aircraft. Almost more important than the Heavy Iron. Does one package offer more GA models?I love the airliners, but unfortunately, because of the the slowness of my system, I have opted not to get into them until a later day of a faster box.4. User friendliness Some of those huge control panels threaten me.5. Frame rate hit.In an apples to apples world, as you say, where default volume AI traffic volume matches 3rd party ... I wonder which package offers a lower hit ... or if they are about the same.Should I just flip the coin between MyTraffic and Ultimate Traffic 2. Or will one be better for the above needs.Thanks to all who have patience with us who have lower end to mid range systems.Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve
Steve, all things being equal, you might like MyTrafficX a bit more. For that matter, you might even want to look at FS Traffic (a JustFlight product I think). MyTrafficX has more GA stuff. The UT2 interface is better, but the MyTrafficX package will have more GA. In the end, when talking apples to apples (using the 3rd party traffic product to produce traffic at default levels), you'll find the 3rd party packages better for performance almost always.

Jeff Bea

I am an avid globetrotter with my trusty Lufthansa B777F, Polar Air Cargo B744F, and Atlas Air B748F.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve, all things being equal, you might like MyTrafficX a bit more. For that matter, you might even want to look at FS Traffic (a JustFlight product I think). MyTrafficX has more GA stuff. The UT2 interface is better, but the MyTrafficX package will have more GA. In the end, when talking apples to apples (using the 3rd party traffic product to produce traffic at default levels), you'll find the 3rd party packages better for performance almost always.
Thanks again, Jeff ... I'll check out FS Traffic. I'm hoping to find one that Actually puts a some traffic in the pattern at some of the regional to smaller airports.Your help has been most appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest stevehow
Thanks again, Jeff ... I'll check out FS Traffic. I'm hoping to find one that Actually puts a some traffic in the pattern at some of the regional to smaller airports.Your help has been most appreciated.
Hi long time user of Fstraffic,i use trafficX now.i mostly fly the heavies,but am sure i've heard go arounds and circuits from GA traffic at smaller airports.also to second jeffs answer,yes the optimised aircraft does help with framerates,and also you can't beat seeing real airlines at you local airport.all helps the realism. steve-0 :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spoiled by the ancient Flight Unlimited 3 ... Is there a solution for Light General Aviation Aircraft ... Cherokees, Cirrus, Diamond, Bonanzas, Cessna 182/210, etc, to be seen flying the patterns of smaller airports??? I read the Flight/Sim and AVSIM reviews for MyTraffic, Traffic X, Ultimate Traffic 2 ... and all of them major in point to point only, am I right? Also ... Are any single reciprocal engine planes modeled. Maybe its an FSX issue and it can't be done. But I want to see light 4 to 8 passenger planes recip/turbo prop on the ramp, in the pattern AND heavy iron at the main airports. What product ... if it is there ... will give me my light general traffic practicing TOL's, and also going on short hops between terminals?I appreciate all of the input. Now I have learned there is little hit with optimized models and I have received good steers to the major products. But is there anything that gives equal emphasis to low and slow traffic at the smaller airports?In the old Flight Unlimited 3, you always saw some light aircraft using the smaller airports when you were there. Thanks again for the input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spoiled by the ancient Flight Unlimited 3 ... Is there a solution for Light General Aviation Aircraft ... Cherokees, Cirrus, Diamond, Bonanzas, Cessna 182/210, etc, to be seen flying the patterns of smaller airports??? I read the Flight/Sim and AVSIM reviews for MyTraffic, Traffic X, Ultimate Traffic 2 ... and all of them major in point to point only, am I right? Also ... Are any single reciprocal engine planes modeled. Maybe its an FSX issue and it can't be done. But I want to see light 4 to 8 passenger planes recip/turbo prop on the ramp, in the pattern AND heavy iron at the main airports. What product ... if it is there ... will give me my light general traffic practicing TOL's, and also going on short hops between terminals?I appreciate all of the input. Now I have learned there is little hit with optimized models and I have received good steers to the major products. But is there anything that gives equal emphasis to low and slow traffic at the smaller airports?In the old Flight Unlimited 3, you always saw some light aircraft using the smaller airports when you were there. Thanks again for the input.
MyTraffic and Traffic X (I thought it was FS Traffic, but I've never used it so I was wrong) will both be somewhat better for GA. Much of it is point-to-point GA. However, if you wan't pattern traffic, it is possible, but you'll have to use the SDK (under the Traffic Toolbox section). However, since you are interested in a 3rd Party, drop-in solution, I'd say that you should focus on MyTrafficX. I say this because I think you'll find Burkhard Renk, the creator, to be very responsive here: http://forum.simflight.com/forum/7-mytraffic-support-forum/The whole board there is pretty good about interactivity.

Jeff Bea

I am an avid globetrotter with my trusty Lufthansa B777F, Polar Air Cargo B744F, and Atlas Air B748F.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And then there is the road that a few of us have taken. You can download real world liveries for the default planes.Pros: No extra aircraft for FS to load at start up. The more planes FS has to load, the longer it takes to start. In fact, no extra files at all. Since they are default planes you get to fly the liveries, also.Cons: You have to modify aircraft files. Sounds scary, I know, but as long as you are careful and back up files you are altering, no worries. You get to learn part of how FS, and your computer,works.If there is no AI at airports near you, that may be because those airports where not made to handle AI. Only an AI addon that changes that can help. OR...You can alter those airports yourself, and write flightplans to bring AI to those airports. Sounds complicated, but is entirely fun. This has kept me busy and as a result, I think it has kept me from wanting to buy expensive add ons. I can't afford them anyway. So I don't have the fancy power draining planes, and other add ons, most seem to crave, and can't live without. Just another viewpoint.Bob


Bob

i5, 16 GB ram, GTX 960, FS on SSD, Windows 10 64 bit, home built works anyway.

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  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
  • Donation Goals

    AVSIM's 2020 Fundraising Goal

    Donate to our annual general fundraising goal. This donation keeps our doors open and providing you service 24 x 7 x 365. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. We reset this goal every new year for the following year's goal.


    53%
    $13,405.00 of $25,000.00 Donate Now
×
×
  • Create New...