I finally have FSX and P3D running smoothly side by side. I see the great potential of P3D and envision it getting better as time goes on. However, I have been trying out some sceneries in P3D, only to be shocked at finding that some sceneries that work great in FSX fps-wise do not work so great in P3D. Obviously there must be a difference in the programming. I am not going to name names due to the discomfort over EULAs. However, it seems that the sceneries that are sanctioned for P3D do seem just fine (FSDT, ORBX, Aerosoft, TropicalSim for example). I installed couple of well known sceneries by other companies only to be dismayed by a drop in fps in those sceneries in P3D as compared to FSX. I have since removed them and will wait patiently for the future to unfold.

 

I did delete the Flightsim Estonia migrator as it plays havoc with the registry and the FSX setup. It's better to get products already sanctioned for P3D by the makers or with their own migration tools like ORBX for instance.

 

We need to slow down and do this step by step and help each other out with tips and info. Just be very careful about naming companies, if they are not on board. I've left PMDG NGX only in FSX for now. However the QW 146 is great in P3D and will install in both programs quite easily. I am eying the IFly 737 NG package which also comes ready for P3D.

 

Thoughts everyone?

 

Lee

go for the ifly, i also agree with your post. I am only installing payware that's made for P3D.

HI,

 

I just want to inform anybody that P3D is using more advanced shader to render the water, thus It would be more GPU demanding than FSX.

 

For the P3D user with less powerful GPU, don't expect to have FPS boost when you turn on the water reflections because it eats a lot of GPU resources.

 

Perhaps it also has a relationship with the airport sceneries performance in P3D... The ones near the sea, lake or river, would have less performance because of this.

 

 

BR.

I'm right there with you. I have FSX on one drive, P3D on another. I plan to keep P3D in "default" form for awhile as I get to know it. I actually am having fun with it in default. Maybe because I am zipping around flying rather than tweaking.

 

Speaking of FPS, there is a nice article about P3D in the current issue of PC Pilot. It mentions about some of inner working improvements and some of their own tests. On some identical tests the FPS where slower than FSX but ran smoother. Plus this was version 1.3.

 

I understand there are some differences between the SDK of the two platforms so that is probably playing a roll with some add-ons while those in compliance are probably applying those changes.

 

All in all, the future looks bright for simming.

Bring on Version 2!

The main difficulty is that we are a community used to sharing all sorts of information. Due to the unusual situation with the EULA fro P3D and various developers we are caught in the middle. I doubt anyone REALLY cares about individuals not following the spirit of the EULA but when it gets broadcast in the forums - that creates various legal issues for many involved. So, for me, I can say that the majority of my FSX stuff functions just fine in P3D - not all but enough for a valid comparison. As it's popularity grows, I venture that the whole EULA fiasco will get sorted out. But for now, probably wisest NOT to "name names" unless developer supports P3D.

 

Just MHO,

 

Vic