Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

crazydread18

60+ FPS on default planes ... drops to 25 on Realair Lancair Legacy

Recommended Posts

Hello fellow simmers,

 

I just overclocked my PC to a stable 4.1Ghz. I also uninstalled FSX and every addons I have, then reinstalled from scratch.

 

I then proceeded to tweaked my graphic settings, went through Bojote's fsx.cfg tweaker as well. Step by step, one by one, I reinstalled my add-on, making sure to run my test flight each time and monitor the FPS to see if any addon cause an FPS drop. Before reinstalling any addon plane or AI traffic, I'm runnning a steady 60 fps, locked by an external frame limiter.

 

I bought the Relair Lancair Legacy, as this seems to be an extremely polished payware plane, and most people says they have close to no FPS drop after installing it (some reports a 3-5 fps drop... I could live with this, especially since when I unlock the frame rate, I get about 75 FPS.). I was shocked to see my FPS drops to about 25-30 when I switched to this aircraft! Even with no AI traffic, no VSync, in an uneventful airport (CYQB), same setup I used to test any other steps of my installation. Switching back to a default FSX plane give me back my FPS. 

 

Any suggestion on how to fix this? Anyone ever experienced something similar with this plane?

 

My computer specs:

Motherboard: Asus Crosshair Formula IV

CPU: AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition 3.2Ghz Overclocked to 4.1Ghz

GPU: NVidia GTX 650 Ti BOOST 2GB Superclocked

RAM: G.Skill DDR3 8GB 1600 (Overclocked to 1720Mhz)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Against the stock planes a lot of payware drop fps.  Most people don't notice it because they lock fps and if you ask them they'll say they don't notice it.

 

That loss seems a little bit excessive but against the stock C172, with no addons, unlocked framerate, my Legacy lost about 40% of the fps.  The Flight1 Mustang loses about 60% (in VC), NGX about 50%, Lotus L39 only about 15%.  I did tests a long time ago against the stock C172's VC just for fun...  I had zero scenery sliders, clear skies, no weather addons, really no addons except the airplanes.  I also tested about 15 other addons against it.  Framerate was unlimited with no vsync.

 

No real way to fix it.  Addon planes are just much much more complex than stock.  I think there is an option for the Legacy for a lower polygon model in the config...  you could try that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Asking for 60 fps for anything but default fsx aircraft and scenery is wishful thinking. Lock at 30 and tweak to maintain that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Against the stock planes a lot of payware drop fps.  Most people don't notice it because they lock fps and if you ask them they'll say they don't notice it.

 

That loss seems a little bit excessive but against the stock C172, with no addons, unlocked framerate, my Legacy lost about 40% of the fps.  The Flight1 Mustang loses about 60% (in VC), NGX about 50%, Lotus L39 only about 15%.  I did tests a long time ago against the stock C172's VC just for fun...  I had zero scenery sliders, clear skies, no weather addons, really no addons except the airplanes.  I also tested about 15 other addons against it.  Framerate was unlimited with no vsync.

 

No real way to fix it.  Addon planes are just much much more complex than stock.  I think there is an option for the Legacy for a lower polygon model in the config...  you could try that.

 

Thanks for the detailed response! I will try a lower quality settings of the Lancair Legacy and will post my results here. I did not try, as the Realair user manual says this reduces de functionalities of the cockpit. 

 

 

Strange. I have the Legacy and my framerates are amazing.

 

Right, this is what most people say. Unfortunately, this is not what I am seeing. I've checked you PC setup and it looks a bit lower-end than mine. I wonder why I get such a drop here! Do you have your frames locked, if so, at what fps? How is your simulator setup for the autogen/traffic sliders?

 

Asking for 60 fps for anything but default fsx aircraft and scenery is wishful thinking. Lock at 30 and tweak to maintain that.

 

While I agree that flight simulator is not very optimized to use the newest PC ressources efficiently, I do find it surprising to get such an important FPS drop by just switching to a higher polygon aircraft. With the default aircraft, I can max out autogen, traffic density, view distance and more, and still get a good smooth 60fps when I cap the frame rate using an external limiter. 

 

I simply find it shocking that by just switch to this aircraft, even if I turn off autogen/traffic/VSync, my computer struggles to maintain 25-30 FPS, even if I lock frame rates to 30. This is an important drop, while most people mention they barely see an FPS drop with this plane!

 

 

 

I will try other addon planes, any suggestions of high quality general aviation planes that are easy on the frame rates? I'd like to compare with what I am getting with the Lancair Legacy.

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The older Carenado's like the Arrow and Seneca are basically like default.

 

The Baytower RV7 is pretty efficient too.

 

I'll see if I can find my list of planes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not just a higher polygonal model. There are custom glass gauges for the engine. The other gauges are all fully 3d. The hands in the gauges are 3d and vibrate. There are custom sound "gauges". Environmental sounds. All the switches have sounds. The angle of attack custom gauge. The 3d bezel for the reality xp gns if you use that. Reflections on the canopy. Awesome prop animation. It goes on and on. All that takes cpu cycles. All this stuff is way way beyond stock fsx planes. The stock Cessna is like a pinto, realair legacy aston martin vanquish. Night and day. So yeah, frames will drop a lot. But when people say they don't see a performance drop with a plane, it's because they limit their fps to 30, so yeah they don't see a drop. And you don't need to see more than 30. This isn't an fps or combat sim. You could max out all your settings and get 60+ fps with default Cessna. You can't with pay ware. Dial back lod, autogen, clouds, ai, texture res, limit fps to 30, and you should be able to keep it pegged at 30 in the air. On the ground it might dip a bit. Just adjust settings until the performance is agreeable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

crazydread18, on 01 May 2013 - 03:10 AM, said:

 

Hello fellow simmers,

 

I just overclocked my PC to a stable 4.1Ghz. I also uninstalled FSX and every addons I have, then reinstalled from scratch.

 

I then proceeded to tweaked my graphic settings, went through Bojote's fsx.cfg tweaker as well. Step by step, one by one, I reinstalled my add-on, making sure to run my test flight each time and monitor the FPS to see if any addon cause an FPS drop. Before reinstalling any addon plane or AI traffic, I'm runnning a steady 60 fps, locked by an external frame limiter.

 

I bought the Relair Lancair Legacy, as this seems to be an extremely polished payware plane, and most people says they have close to no FPS drop after installing it (some reports a 3-5 fps drop... I could live with this, especially since when I unlock the frame rate, I get about 75 FPS.). I was shocked to see my FPS drops to about 25-30 when I switched to this aircraft! Even with no AI traffic, no VSync, in an uneventful airport (CYQB), same setup I used to test any other steps of my installation. Switching back to a default FSX plane give me back my FPS.

 

Any suggestion on how to fix this? Anyone ever experienced something similar with this plane?

 

My computer specs:

Motherboard: Asus Crosshair Formula IV

CPU: AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition 3.2Ghz Overclocked to 4.1Ghz

GPU: NVidia GTX 650 Ti BOOST 2GB Superclocked

RAM: G.Skill DDR3 8GB 1600 (Overclocked to 1720Mhz)

The Bojote tweaker may be your problem. He did excelent job at his time, but now we have the new hardware.

 

Try Word Not Allowed's guide, just google for "Word Not Allowed fsx" to find his blog. There is a big difference, really.

 

I recommend Nick N. windows 7 tuning guide too. This can be find on "simforums". There is a section in this guide about how to install fsx and simconnect in the right way.

 

My "bonus tips" :P

- After everything is set and you are pleased with performance, use Acronis True image 2011(2013 had some issues with Windows 7 last time i checked) for backup, to avoid reinstaling and tuning in the future

- in FSX.CFG TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=2048 never above this value, to avoid OOM errors

- if you use REX, use DXT optimized texture from REX options

- In fsx, disable all scenery that is not used for curent flight, especially all payware sceneries(if you fly in USA, you don't need Asia, Africa, Europe etc) This is to preven't OOM errors and for better performance and faster load times

 

 

After Word Not Allowed's tweaks, i have 30fps(locked on 30)with PMDG NGX on FSDT CYVR + ORBX + REX + AS2012 etc.... So, it's worth to try. If i can get 30fps with NGX, i have no doubt that you can get only higher FPS

 

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Bojote tweaker may be your problem. He did excelent job at his time, but now we have the new hardware.

 

Try Word Not Allowed's guide, just google for "Word Not Allowed fsx" to find his blog. There is a big difference, really.

 

I recommend Nick N. windows 7 tuning guide too. This can be find on "simforums". There is a section in this guide about how to install fsx and simconnect in the right way.

 

My "bonus tips" :P

- After everything is set and you are pleased with performance, use Acronis True image 2011(2013 had some issues with Windows 7 last time i checked) for backup, to avoid reinstaling and tuning in the future

- in FSX.CFG TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=2048 never above this value, to avoid OOM errors

- if you use REX, use DXT optimized texture from REX options

- In fsx, disable all scenery that is not used for curent flight, especially all payware sceneries(if you fly in USA, you don't need Asia, Africa, Europe etc) This is to preven't OOM errors and for better performance and faster load times

 

 

After Word Not Allowed's tweaks, i have 30fps(locked on 30)with PMDG NGX on FSDT CYVR + ORBX + REX + AS2012 etc.... So, it's worth to try. If i can get 30fps with NGX, i have no doubt that you can get only higher FPS

 

 

Cheers

But PMDG NGX need TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=4096 I think. Can I see difference, if set to 2048 instead ?

 

 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But PMDG NGX need TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=4096 I think. Can I see difference, if set to 2048 instead ?

 

I didn't tried to compare, but at 2048 looks very good. I can't see anything bad with this settings, if i need to choose between OOM errors and a little bit better looking virtual cockpit... 

I'm not sure if PMDG looks much better with 4096, i can say that VC is good enough for me at 2048 and i didn't get any OOM error for a very long time... More than 1 year i think, and i did some long-haul flights with PMDG MD11, and again using REX, AS2012, ORBX, Aerosoft and FSDT airports

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't tried to compare, but at 2048 looks very good. I can't see anything bad with this settings, if i need to choose between OOM errors and a little bit better looking virtual cockpit... 

I'm not sure if PMDG looks much better with 4096, i can say that VC is good enough for me at 2048 and i didn't get any OOM error for a very long time... More than 1 year i think, and i did some long-haul flights with PMDG MD11, and again using REX, AS2012, ORBX, Aerosoft and FSDT airports

I will try it and testing the different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

High poly count doesn't affect performance. It's drawcalls that does it.

 

It's not just a higher polygonal model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interior models

 

Default Baron : 88 draw calls ,  26794 triangles

Legacy (high detail model) :  427 draw calls , 297675 triangles

PMDG 737NG : 1005 draw calls, 134454 triangles

 

Legacy nearly 5 times the number of draw calls and 11 times the number of triangles (people speak polygons but when it all gets broken down triangles are what really matter).

 

As Hughes says, with modern graphics cards the number of triangles really doesn't make much difference. The main issue is draw calls which is the number of times a new texture is called. Thing with FSX is that anytime there is a new animated part it makes a new drawcall.

 

The processing time for gauges is actually really really really small and makes little impact on framerates (unless one is using the default GPS logic).

 

The PMDG 737 has less polygons than the legacy but over twice as many drawcalls and on my system at least the PMDG gives worse framerates than the Legacy. In fact, I've found similar framerate hits as what Ryan talks about in his post.

 

People claiming that they only lost 2-3 fps with the Legacy are ... well, they probably have FSX at a locked framerate already so they don't notice the dip in framerates.

 

Regarding Texture max load.

 

It is important to understand what this tweak does before using it.

 

If you have a texture with no mipmaps then texture max load it useless. If the texture is 4096x4096 then it will get drawn as 4096x4096 no matter what the texture max load setting is. It is only when the texture has mipmaps that texture max load has an effect. Example: If you have a 4096x4096 texture with mipmaps and texture max load set to 2048 then FSX will draw only the 2048 mipmap (and the smaller sizes as well) but it will not draw the 4096 texture. On the other hand if the 4096x4096 texture has no mipmaps then there is only one texture available to draw ie the 4096x4096 texture so this texture is always used. FSX will not rescale this on the fly to a smaller texture, that's a waste of CPU time and is the reason why they have mipmaps.

 

In case you don't know mipmaps are smaller copies of the original texture. If you have a 1024x1024 texture with mipmaps it will inlcude the base 1024x1024 texture as well as 512,256,128,64,32,16,8,4,2 and 1 sized textures. Which one is drawn depends on your distance from the object. Mipmaps are used for scenery objects as it improves framerates, if you have a hangar 10 miles away which may be only a few pixels on screen it is quicker to draw a 4x4 texture on it rather than a full 1024x1024 texture. Mipmaps are rarely used for aircraft (users usually complain about blurry textures if you use mipmaps on aircraft and almost never used in virtual cockpits, the text textures in the 737 is an exception). The PMDG advice in the manual of the 737 to set your texture max load is actually useless as their textures are not mipmapped so it makes absolutely no difference.

 

The most common place you will find 4096x4096 textures with mipmaps are in weather scenery packages such as REX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to all of you for your answers! 

 

Yesterday I worked on improving my frame rate and it believe I got everything running smoothly now.Previously, locking my FPS to 30 in FSX, or with an external limiter, I was getting 30 FPS, but constantly stuttering and oscillating between 20-30 fps. What I finally did is follow these tips:

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/369500-adaptive-vsync-30fps-new-levels-of-smoothness-in-fs9x/

 

The title of the article says "Adaptive Vsync", but really, this is not what they are doing exactly, In summary, I use NVidia Inspector to set the vsync rate to 1/2 the refresh rate, and set the vsync method to "Standard" (not "Adaptive"), Then I lock the frame rate to 30 in FSX.

 

 

This made the sim run at 30 fps smoothly 99% of the time. It sometimes stutters to 25 momentarily when I initially load an area, after starting the sim, but it ramps up to 30 fps stable quickly.

 

I did not have to lower the detail of the Realair Lancair Legacy to achieve this. This is really a gorgeous plane and I can't wait to do another flight with it. Unfortunately, I encountered some other graphical issues, but I believe this is another matter and I will start a new thread for this.

 

Cheers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to hear.

 

Also,thanks Anthony for your excellent and interesting post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


. If the texture is 4096x4096 then it will get drawn as 4096x4096

 

 FSX SDK states about aircraft t4extures:

 

For Aircraft, texture maps cannot currently exceed 1024x1024 pixels in size. However they can be smaller, as long as the dimensions remain a power of 2.

 

 

Has that limit been lifted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 FSX SDK states about aircraft t4extures:

 

Has that limit been lifted?

 Apparently so. One shouldn't believe everything one reads in the SDK.

 

I did testing on 4096x4096 textures where I created a test square of single pixels placed one pixel apart. If there were any texture degradation caused by loading into FSX then the test square wouldn't display properly. As long as the texture didn't have mipmaps it displayed in full resolution regardless of the texture_max_load setting. 

 

There are many aircraft released nowadays that use larger than 1024x1024 textures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently so. One shouldn't believe everything one reads in the SDK.

One shouldn't also believe everything one reads in the forums either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FSX SDK (and the P3D SDK) both have this limitation.

 

Don't you think that quadrupling the size of the bitmaps and increasing the number of pixels to be handled by a factor of 16 might perhaps have something to do with frame rates, OOMs and crashes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely. So does adding undocumented changes to your cfg like LOD increase lol - but I still do it. I know the cause for my OOMs are me ... Never said otherwise. Still though, I prefer to push the limits to see what FSX can really do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Still though, I prefer to push the limits to see what FSX can really do.

 

I've no problem with that given that any adverse consequences are accepted and not blamed on FSX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...