Hey everyone,I decided to run FSXmark11 in P3D and in FSX to see the performance comparison.P3D averaged 41.87FPSFSX averaged 37.977FPSSo far, frames are slightly better but for the most part, I think the "giant jump in FPS" that people talk about is nearly just placebo. I only saw just over a 10% increase in P3D over FSX.Only time will tell what P3D v2 will implement into the core engine to offload the job of the CPU and put the GPU back to work again.

Hi,I haven't seen too many people talking about a giant jump in FPS over FSX. However, I have read numerous posts (myself included) from people talking about smoother performance using P3D.

Edited January 15, 201214 yr by Mike_CFII_MEL

Hi,I haven't seen too many people talking about a giant jump in FPS over FSX. However, I have read numerous posts (myself included) from people talking about a smoother performance using P3D.

FSX LOW FPS: 27HIGH: 45AVG:37.97Frame Rate Variation 66%Prepar3DLOW FPS: 30HIGH: 49AVG: 41.87Frame Rate Variation 63%So, the smoothness that people have spoken about is really non-existent. I understand that the numbers show a lower percentage of FPS variation (smoothness) but in reality, 3% is almost nothing.

Hi,Not on my setup, P3D is much smoother on my setup at higher graphic settings than FSX has ever been.

So, the smoothness that people have spoken about is really non-existent.

SMOOTHNESS, SMOOTHNESS is the objective - not fps. If high resolution lowers my framerate who cares as long as it is ... YES... SMOOTH.Leave Shift+Z alone, or all of the fancy framerate analysers if you have SMOOTH!!!!I am sure yours is bigger than mine.

Hi,I have the following working with P3D. It's the same setup as installed into FSX, with one exception, ORBX PNW.===============Flightsim computer===============1. PMDG-737NGX (600,700,800,900)2. FSDT: All Airports3. Blue Print: KCLE, KDAL, KMEM, KRDU4. Imagine Simulations: KATL, KCLT, KCVG, KDEN, KLGA, KSJC, TJSJ5. Flytampa: KBOS, KBUF, KMDW, KTPA, TNCM6. TropicalSim: SBMO, SBGL, SBRJ, SBSV, SBSP, SULS, KDAB, TNCA, TNCB, MMUN, TDCF, TNCC, TDPD, MYNN, TIST, MPTO, MBPV, MDPC7. FlightZone: KPDX8. REX9. Cloud 9: KMCO10. Flightbeam: KSFO=================Networked Computer=================1. ActiveSky 20122. FSBuild3. FSCommander4. WideFS5. Simconnect6. FTG-ACARS7. Squawkbox8. Radar Contact 49. Show Text

What has been optimizes in PD3 that makes it any more or less smoother than FSX? Load it up with a 100 addons a scenery and tell me that!

Edited January 15, 201214 yr by Mike_CFII_MEL

I have roughly the same addons as MIke above, minus the networked computer and I can honestly say, P3d is way smoother than FSX in every scenerio. Bloom causes hardly any drop in fps and no blurries!Rob

How do you measure smoothness? Why debate over it when it has not been defined anywhere?In my opinion it is completely subjective.

Why make a comparison based on one measure, fps, while some non-smooth activities are bleeding obvious including stutters, shuttering, paused stutters where the graphics seem to hang momentarily and then stutter back. Smoothness may be subjective but I believe there are some objective indications of non-smoothness.Howeve I don't want to be flamed in an unwinnable argument. Simply what I consider to be smooth is my objective in setting up my system.

FSXMark11 is not the only way to test the P3D.I have a situation saved with lots of clouds over water. I tested vanilla FSX vs P3D, and while I can't any more remember the exact number, but I do remember that the FPS boost (yeah, let's talk FPS) was massive.

FSXMark11 is not the only way to test the P3D.I have a situation saved with lots of clouds over water. I tested vanilla FSX vs P3D, and while I can't any more remember the exact number, but I do remember that the FPS boost (yeah, let's talk FPS) was massive.

Now that you remind me, I do recall seeing those benchmarks in P3D vs FSX that you made. It seems that the new shaders take advantage of the GPU within P3D + the water too.I'll try to do some more testing and see how it goes regarding FPS.Thanks for the heads up Word Not Allowed.

What has been optimizes in PD3 that makes it any more or less smoother than FSX? Load it up with a 100 addons a scenery and tell me that!

John Nicol from Prepar3D has stated that much of the code has been reworked from the ESP material used years ago. So much so, that it no longer resembles the original ESP content. It has been stated that Prepar3D is Prepar3D and not FSX SP3, the rework goes much farther than that. I believe with the years of MSFS where the frame rate determined how well the platform was performing had most of us brainwashed that it is the standard to measure up to. Given that I too notice a significant improvement with smoothness over FSX with near identical frame rates, leads me to believe all the stuttering and pausing we have witnessed over the years is not just due to CPU vs. GPU load but in some cases some inefficient coding going on behind the scenes. This may also explain the lack of huge improvement with hardware upgrades. Hardware has little bearing on poor coding when it comes to performance. This alone, goes a long way to explain to me, why performance is better in Prepar3D over FSX with near simular frame rates. By the way, I too have loaded it up with all the same resource hungry add-on's that I utilized in FSX. The coding changes also become clear when one see's how rock solid stable the platform is. 40 hours of use, and not a single application crash, a record I have never been able to obtain within FSX. Given my circumstances, which platform would you choose?

Where do you install the .PLN and WX files for FSMark2011 to get them to run. It does not seem to read them from the Prepar3d document folder.

If you have FSX set up as it suits you, and getting really good performance then P3D is NOT better.In my observation, P3D v1.2 does not perform better than FSX on many rigs. So if it's good for you in FSX then don't change.My FSX is running beautifully so although I am using P3D as a test, I would not plan a major change until the DX11 version is out and well tested by the community - the most comprehensive beta test that can be had.Even though I am impressed by P3D I intend to use it conservatively, only transfer those things with licences like FTX, or P3D installers. Meanwhile FSX will still be my 'airliner' version.But I am interested in P3D because I would like to be rid of the hangover glitches and stutters that still plague my version of FSX. I am not a ###### of anything - keep an open mind and experiment and test!

Torkermax and Ian,I agree with you whole heartedly. If you can run FSX stable and solid, then you are probably in a good position to stick with it. Keep in mind that none of the material that is ported from FSX into Prepar3D is native, and in some circumstances you may actually see a performance hit. Prepar3D has some code that FSX is not able to utilize. Some add-on's that perform well in FSX will actually have an adverse effect on Prepar3D, much like FS9 add-on's often have a negative effect on FSX even though ported over successfully. I myself either because of add-on's, applications, or computer hardware am unable to run FSX with stability, and I am not alone. Prepar3D offers an alternative that does work, and I feel fine that my cost is going to effective support. Keeping in mind the vastly different setups of thousands of user's, the experience between each is not going to be the same. If you can run FSX stable, then you are one of the fortunate ones. I have a very high end computer that cost me dearly, and yet , I can not. I am not alone with this issue.If you are convinced that there is no improvement, than there is little reason for you to move on, and nothing anyone says will change this, as your minds are already made up, and this is justified. For some of us, we see large changes and advantages, reasons are likely multiple, but not overstated. Because I can not run FSX with stability does not mean if you can, you are lying. Likewise if I am stating Prepar3D runs better on my system and not yours, that I am lying.