Highest FPS AI traffic

[Sharky05 2]

Hi I think this pool will be very helpful to me and everyone who has the dilemma what AI should install to get the best FPS in the sim.

So the traffic will be used for online flying with FSX and FSinn client in VATSIM network. Just give me your vote

[Jim Young 2,356]

I only use one AI Traffic program - MyTrafficX Pro 5.4.  How am I to know if the others will give me better fps than the one I own?  I get the best fps with the default.  All addon AI programs will use additional frames.  I remember installing fsx and had less than 3 minutes load times until I installed MyTrafficX.  Then the load times went to nearly 5 minutes.

 

Best regards,

Jim

[FloG 148]

 

 

I think this pool will be very helpful to me and everyone who has the dilemma what AI should install to get the best FPS in the sim.

I'd like to disagree. I only use MTX 5.4b, haven't used anything else since my hardware upgrade a year ago (well, yes 5.4a until last week :rolleyes:, didn't recognize there was an update available), so how could I possibly know what impact the other options have?

It also depends on your settings, the plane and the area - having 30 FPS at SCIP in the default Trike is a completely different thing than 10 at KSEA in the PMDG MD-11, both with about with 30% traffic!

[cmpbellsjc 2,961]

 

 

I only use one AI Traffic program - MyTrafficX Pro 5.4.  How am I to know if the others will give me better fps than the one I own?  I get the best fps with the default.  All addon AI programs will use additional frames.

 

I agree and disagree with Jim on this one.

 

When I use stock AI, I get worse FPS due to the default AI calling for the jetways which causes a massive hit in FPS when your at a major hub and the AI have jetways going back and fourth to the a/c. In addition to that, most purposely build AI have lower poly counts and have more LOD's than the default AI which are also flyable a/c as well. Generally if you could compare the FPS and performance of 30 default AI parked at gates that aren't moving and 30 purpose build AI parked at the same airport, by design you should get better performance with the addon AI than the default AI due to the reasons mentioned above, and probably even better performance if the addon AI are FSX native (not WOAI). Packages like WOAI don't have the AI calling for jetways and some addon payware packages like UT2 or MTX have an option to turn off the AI calling for jetways as well which save a lot of FPS.

 

On the flip side, the addon AI could cause more of an FPS hit than default due to the fact that there could be many more AI populating the airport than what the default gives in a set scenario. If you go and install the 600+ WOAI packages like I have done then go to an airport like JFK and compare stock AI at 100% to an addon AI pack at 100%, there will most certainly be a lot more AI parked when using an addon AI package than what default AI generates, hence you could have worse FPS then the stock version.

 

Like Jim mentioned above, you will have slightly higher loading times when adding extra AI via an addon package than you will using stock AI. Currently I have 600+ WOAI packages installed and UT2 installed, which together adds tons of models and paints to your Simobjects folder, but my loading times are really too bad using an older 7200RPM HD that is well defraged. I would say on average that from the time I click the FSX.exe until the time the sim loads and I am on the runway, it takes less than 4 minutes and that is also with a ton of addon airports, photoscenery, and other flyable a/c.

[Jim Young 2,356]

 

 

I agree and disagree with Jim on this one.

 

I can't believe anyone would disagree with me!  LOL! 

 

Seriously though, I'm reading your post and don't see where we disagree.  Do you have every AI package so you can see which one causes the most hit on FPS?  The poll asks which AI package gives you the best performance/fps.  If you just own one, how can you tell?  See what I'm saying?  Maybe MyTrafficX works better on your system than WOAI.  There have been many other polls here regarding AI programs.  I recall one asking which AI program you use and why.  So maybe that's what the OP is asking.  Most selected MyTrafficX as you can have your AI in HD textures or you can have them in a lower resolution so they won't be much of a performance hit.  I personally think the only advantage with WOAI is that it is freeware.  Now, maybe we disagree..... :lol:

 

Best regards,

Jim

[cmpbellsjc 2,961]

 

 

Seriously though, I'm reading your post and don't see where we disagree. 

 

Hi Jim, the thing I was disagreeing with was the part where you said "I get the best fps with the default." Actually I am not disagreeing that you get better FPS with default than an addon package, because I am not at your computer to see and maybe you do get better FPS with it than using an addon package. The point I was trying to make was that theoretically if you were to compare the FPS and performance with 50 default AI parked at KDFW and 50 WOAI,UT2, or MTX AI parked at the same place, you should get better overall performance using the addon AI rather than the default AI in that scenario due to the lower polys, better LODS's and the fact that addon AI can be made to not call for jetways. However since addon AI packages will most likely spawn more AI than default will, then you could also theoretically get lower FPS at 100% setting compared to default at 100% just due to the fact that the addon will introduce more AI.

 

Just to reiterate, I am not disputing that default AI works better for you, but on my rig/install, when I was running FSX prior to UT2 comming out or installing WOAI, I got very bad FPS at big airports  using default traffic, but when I installed WOAI packages, I got better FPS even with having more AI present than I did with default AI.

 

 

 

 

Do you have every AI package so you can see which one causes the most hit on FPS?

 

No, just 600+ WOAI packages and UT2. The FPS between the two are a little better using UT2 but I attribute that more to the fact that UT2 spawns a little less traffic than .bgl style traffic addons and the fact that UT2 uses FSX native models where as WOAI is FS9 models.

 

I actually stopped using UT2 for the time being until I finish building my bew rig. The only reason being is that while UT2 gives a little better FPS, since I am on a 2GB system, the time when UT2 spawns or injects traffic causes a little bit of a pause on my system that is not apparent using .bgl traffic that is constant. I've actually considered swapping out my WOAI models and using the UT2 FSX models for my WOAI traffic since the paints are compatible between the AIA FS9 models and the AIA FSX models, as well as some of the other models that UT2 uses that WOAI also uses, but it would be a rather time consuming task to do so.