The reason for poor 2D panel performance is the Virtual Cockpits!!!Okay, let me tell you the whole story. I, like many of you had recognized that the performance of many (not all) 2D panels in FS9 is very poor.Yesterday I downloaded the excellent A320 panel from Eric Marciano. After installing it to my Project Airbus A320 I found out that the fps dropped to around 10 - 12 (locked at 20) in 2D mode, no matter how sparse the scenery was. But there was no perfomance hit in the working VC (I got 20 fps, locked at 20). I thought the reason for the slow 2D panel performance must be the excellent and detailed gauges Eric uses in his panel, like TACS, ND etc. Or, I thought, it could be the bitmap itself. So I downloaded one of the othher background bitmaps, which Eric offers on his site together with a new panel cfg. I installed this bitmap and .... trara.... the fps were up at 20 in 2D mode.BUT I realized, that there were no gauges anymore in the VC. I checked the new panel.cfg and found out that the VC part was missing in the new panel.cfg.So i copied and pasted the VC section from the original panel.cfg into the new one and - voila - the VC had its gauges back. BUT!! the performance in the 2D panel dropped to 12 again!!!So I tested the default B737 2D panel. This is one of the panels with the worst 2D performance (approx 11 - 13 fps on my sys). I erased the VC section from the default 737 panel.cfg and, unbelievable, the 2D performance went up to 20fps (locked at 20).After this I ckecked my other panels. Very detailed 2D panels work with high fps on planes without virtual cockpits (or with VCs without gauges) but the one and the same panels perform very poor if you use them together with VCs with working gauges.That's strange and I Ihave no explanation for this but this is how it is, check it out! If you want to boost your 2D panels performance you must eliminate the VC or at least its gauges. WolfgangP4 2.4 Ghz512MB DDRGeForce3 Ti200Win XP Pro

Yeahh i saw something similar with PSS A330. I tried using one of the POSKY v1.x models (no VC ) instead of the PSS model, which has a very fine VC. I had nearly no fps hit in the 2 d panel. So I believe you are right, though I'm not done testing it.I'm looking for some nice 2D views to go with the PSS 2D panel when the VC is missing.

So would the reverse work as well? In other words if I deleted the gauges from the main 2D panel would my Frames increase in the VC? Nothing but to try it I guess. This just gives me more reason to try and elininate the main 2D panel entirely :)EDIT: Well it worked but its a marginal increase. I deleted the gauges from a panel I have in two aircraft, to make it easier to compare. It was a marginal increase in FPS, but since I dont use the main 2D panels any way, poof their all gone :)

>So would the reverse work as well? In other words if I deleted the >gauges from the main 2D panel would my Frames increase in the VC? >Nothing but to try it I guess. This just gives me more reason to >try and elininate the main 2D panel entirely :)I would think the 3D cockpit is bigger frame rate hit than to 2D cockpit. So removing the 2D cockpit will help, but not as much as removing the 3D cockpit would. As often the 3D cockpit is replicating the same gauge on both the PF and NFP sides for a double hit.Myself I've gone to removing gauges from the VC I don't need to see when making an approach and landing which is really the only time I am using the VC. In particular removing gauges on the NFP side of the VC.Regards.Ernie.

Yep, I think I will also remove some gauges from the VC. I do not want to remove an entire 2D or 3D panel as I generally use both in a complementary way.But what I do not understand is, how can a VC have an impact on fps in 2D mode, when the VC is not visible? Would not there be a way, that the VC uses the gauges only when it isvisible?Wolfgang

Hi Wolfgang, the answer is easy and I even think I've documented it in these forums for FS2002 (same applies for FS2004): The Panel Engine in FS is flawed in regard to respecting the SDK and the Virtual Cockpits. In other words: a gauge, in the SDK, is meant to receive events notifications from the sim, such as events to let the gauge code know it has just been loaded, unloaded, requires updating, requires graphics refresh and so on. When a gauge is set in the VC, eventhough it is not displayed, it still receives events! So in turn, when a gauge developper does not take care of this, his gauge will be refreshed, and its code will be executed, eventhough there is no need for it.As compared to FS2002, FS2004 no longer calls for a display update of the gauge when the VC is not visible, but it still calls for a regular 18 times a second update of the gauge (usually this is the type of code in a gauge which is responsible to make the computations, not the graphics updates). There is still the flaw which is once a VC gauge is displayed (you switch to the VC), and then if you return back to 2D, the VC gauge still gets updated for its display code (but at a lower rate than usual).This only leads me to a conclusion: either the VC feature has been added "ontop" of the existing when first appeared in FS2002, and has always been something running in parallel to the traditional 2D system (hence not this much compliant and integrated), or in order to make the VC an available feature, it required to be designed in parallel to the traditional 2D system and it introduced this kind of limitations (instead of calling this a bug).What does it means for add-ons? this is one among many examples of what is needed to master for a gauge developper to offer more than the "sdk limited" gauges (sdk gauges are only bitmaps composed visuals of a gauge, with FS managed code to move/rotate/hide the bitmaps elements of the gauge). This explains greatly the differences in time to release advanced aircrafts panels and gauges, as well as the price associated with it: you can't compare the amount of work required to make a complex GPS system work in FS (out of the FS SDK to make it possible) to the amount of work required to make a full Cessna 152 panel (simple bitmaps in the SDK limitations).Hope this helps!

Its possible that for performance reasons it may be better to keep the gauges somewhat active even when it is not displayed. Sort of how local scenery is kept in memory so that when you switch to a view FS does not have to redraw it all again. Considering how quickly one can switch back and forth between the the 2D and 3D cockpits, I wouldn't want to switch to the 3D cockpit and not see the gauges up to date. The price we pay for this is a hit on the overall frame rates.So having a VC may mean displaying some gauges 3 times for a 3X frame rate hit, even when you are only in 2D mode.>This explains greatly the differences in time to release advanced >aircrafts panels and gauges, as well as the price associated with >it: you can't compare the amount of work required to make a complex >GPS system work in FS (out of the FS SDK to make it possible) to >the amount of work required to make a full Cessna 152 panel (simple >bitmaps in the SDK limitations).I agree with you. Advanced gauge development is so diffifult and time consuming to do its now mostly the domain of payware developers, outside of a few notable exceptions.Understandable really when you consider what goes into it.Regards.Ernie.

>Considering how quickly one can switch back and forth between the>the 2D and 3D cockpits, I wouldn't want to switch to the 3D cockpit>and not see the gauges up to date. The price we pay for this is a>hit on the overall frame rates.Jan Luc, Ernie, I think I understand what you mean. But how comes then the following: I now found out that the performance hit on Eric Marciano's 2D panel (and probably with most of the others too) is easy to cure, just by amending the texture size of the VC gauge display as follows:old:{Vcockpit01}pixel_size=1024,1024new:{Vcockpit01}pixel_size=512,512This boosted the fps in 2D from 12 up to 20 (!!) at the default KSEA, fair Weather, AI at 100 %.Though the PFD and the ND are harder to read now in 3D mode but for the purposes I need the VC the display quality is good enough. No deleting of gauges was necessary.The display quality of the gauges in 3D mode and not the "multiple updating" of the gauge itself brings fps down in 2D mode.So how can the DISPLAY QUALITY OF a gauge in 3D mode have an impact on 2D performance? Wolfgang

>As compared to FS2002, FS2004 no longer calls for a display>update of the gauge when the VC is not visible, but it still>calls for a regular 18 times a second update of the gaugeBut as far I understand the callback is only called after the gauge beeing displayed at least once. I only made one gauge but needed to init some sockets and to be sure that everything went smooth It was done in a hotspot in main window. So if one never goes in to VC during the flight the gauges aren't doing anything. Is it like this?Jos

A guess, is that at 1024x1024 it is 4 times more pixels to draw (blit) than at 512x512. Now, given the gauges are still updated eventhough not displayed, in the background, FS manages to update (moving back and forth pixel) for nothing but cluttering your bus bandwidth. This plus the point that the FS code seems not being MMX optimized, this leads to wasted cycles.Hope this helps!

Hi,may I just jump in here?I think the reason is within if it is 2D or and 3D drawing/vectoring of the panel. Any Graphic Card has it's work load to process and compute the 3Dimensional graphics for your Sim. So, in 2D mode you just render/compute the gauges with a stable fixed view angle at them and there is a "part" which gets rendered 3D, like the 3D world you see through the wind-shield windows forward, right/left. But in full 3D panel ALL gets rendered / computed in 3D vectored graphics, no matter if it is the "outside world view" or the 3D panel bitmaps and gauges. So now, you got 3 different things for your Computer System to compute: 2D panel bitmaps and the 2D gauges, 3D outside view through your "Windows" of the plane and third the 3D view that runs parallel behind all so you are able to switch back and forth within no time needed at all.That eats a lot of performance and so frames/sec. Not so when you fly ONLY in 3D panel mode where ALL gets computed for 3D what FS2k4 does just fine and very fast. No need to mix three different graphics to show you and or to keep up to date parallel in behind.The time where ALL gauges are gonna be clickable in 3D panel will be the time when the 2D Panel is due to get erased/deleted forever! Than you will have the best performance you could get with FS2k4/FS2k6

not true. Actually what is called only when the gauge is displayed at least once is the PRE_UPDATE and PRE_DRAW. The CONNECT_TO_WINDOW for example is called when loaded. In this case, each instance (copy of the gauge in the panel.cfg file) is called. So you have a switch in the 2D and the same gauge switch in the VC, both receive a connect_to_window event... Then, when you first switch to VC, the VC one will be called with PRE_DRAW and PRE_UPDATE. You revert back to 2D, the VC gauge still receives PRE_UPDATE... (and in FS2002 it also received PRE_DRAW)Just build a dummy gauge with a gauge callback, then fprintf the events to a file with a GetTickCount() as a time marker and pgauge as a gauge id... :-)To avoid this, I've build a framework over the FS SDK which ensures that no matter the number of duplicates on the various panels, only 1 pre_update in the whole is treated and each individual pre_draw are handled properly. Smooth it is then! There would have been no other way for a panel as complex and as realistic in both look and feel and operation than the Meridian.Best,

>I think the reason is within if it is 2D or and 3D >drawing/vectoring of the panel. Any Graphic Card has it's work load >to process and compute >the 3Dimensional graphics for your Sim. So, >in 2D mode you just render/compute the gauges with a stable fixed >view angle at them and there is >a "part" which gets rendered 3D, >like the 3D world you see through the wind-shield windows forward, >right/left. But in full 3D panel ALL gets >rendered / computed in >3D vectored graphics, no matter if it is the "outside world view" >or the 3D panel bitmaps and gauges. I'm not sure the 3D aspect of it has that much effect really.The 3D modeling in a VC is relatively static, outside of the moving parts which don't move all that often (the yolks probably having the most movement/animation), the 3D panel is only slighly less static that the 2D panel. There's more shapes to render, true, but they are not being updated very often.The gauges on the other hands are not only being constantly updated, but there is underlying code it has to go through each cycle put there by the gauge programmer. So the more complex gauges within the 3D panel I would think would be a biggest hit on the frame rates. While I think the 3D model itself would be a mininal Frame rate hit.The gauges rendering wise themselves appear to be no different than they are on a 2D panel. From my perspective they simply appear to be on a secondary 2D panel within the 3D panel in which the gauges are displayed.Your points about the extra outside views possibly affecting the frame rates I tend to agree with.Regards.Ernie.

Thank you Wolfgang for this posting.I am also one of those plagued by low FPS on all default 2D panels.This thread gives me hope that I finally can improve them which I will try as soon as I get home.Many thanks.Walter

WolfgangI have tried out your idea on the default 737 and it works for me.I deleted all the VC gauges in panel.cfg.The fps increase was from 12/13 to 16/17.As I have deleted the VC gauges I am left with a bare- looking cockpit in the VC view .Can any one tell me how to delete/remove all the VC(Backgrounds,empty panel, cockpit window frames etc.)Unlike many people ,I very seldom use VC ,I prefer the 2D cockpit so getting rid of VC view entirely would not hurt.Dave