I'd buy your new sim, if

(1) There was a convincing trial period for evaluation,

(2) It was reasonably priced ( ie below $100)

 

I'd invest/donate to your sim development if

(1) You showed me a credible business plan, to develop such a sim.

(2) You showed you had the seed money, technology & people to put that plan into effect.

 

If you are familiar with the Consumer or Commercial flight sim market, you SHOULD already have a much better idea than most, as to what is required, together with a bigger picture of what is technically attainable . both now, and in the future.

 

I wish you every success with your ventures.

 

 

All these people chiming in stating, 'what won't work' in favor of an inferior, aged, buggy, platform is just plain shocking...

 

Almost as shocking as those living in the FS9 Stone Age... :blink:

Almost as shocking as those living in the FS9 Stone Age... :blink:

 

 

In the day and age where many of us are short on time and money I would rather spend time running something that runs well versus tweaking and overclocking CPU's.  This is why I'd love to see a new sim come on the market that takes advantage of hardware features at the time of release and not take 7 years to get up to speed... :blink2:

Almost as shocking as those living in the FS9 Stone Age... :blink:

 

 

In the day and age where many of us are short on time and money I would rather spend time running something that runs well versus tweaking and overclocking CPU's.  This is why I'd love to see a new sim come on the market that takes advantage of hardware features at the time of release and not take 7 years to get up to speed... :blink2:

 

Touche!

Isn't it refreshing to see that with FSX, Microsoft and the various addon developers, provided a simulator with the sophistication to remain viable years after its release. It's almost as if Microsoft knew that a replacement wasn't going to appear for years to come!

Isn't it refreshing to see that with FSX, Microsoft and the various addon developers, provided a simulator with the sophistication to remain viable years after its release. It's almost as if Microsoft knew that a replacement wasn't going to appear for years to come!

 

 

I don't believe they knew anything they were just trying to make a good product because Flight Simulator's future was always uncertain.  Concerning Steve Ballmer and his ilk your giving them way too much credit, almost along the lines of 'common since' and/or 'foresight' which when you take into account Flight, Windows 8, XBOX One, and a host of other failed endeavors it's obvious they are not afforded with either... 

A graphics engine is like a set of wheels, you have to make the rest of the car; ATC/Ai should be a major thrust of the venture, able to run FSX addons would be handy for aircraft dev. It's going to have to aim very high, FSX is hard to beat.

mgh, on 21 Jun 2013 - 3:43 PM, said:

 

I tried all Vertical Sync settings of "Off", "half refresh", and "Full refresh" but they made no significant difference. GPU-Z reported GPU Load as 99% and Process Monitor showed outerra.exe Average CPU fluctuating between 48 - 51%.

 

Obviously I tried all the setting several times, and waited until the second (terminated) outerra.exe process finally stopped before noting the Average CPU when restarting after having changed the settings. I also tried starting GPU-Z and Resource Monitor before and after outerra.exe. but the results were the same.

Hmm, not sure what the problem is, maybe an enforced vsync off in the control panel?

 

On Nvidia 460, roughly at a similar position, we are getting 26% utilization of the GPU when locked to 30 fps. However, on AMD 6850 GPU-Z shows 100% regardless of the sync state. That looks like an issue with the AMD OpenGL drivers, or with the reporting. It's the drivers that wait for the sync and block the rendering thread when there's a free time, and I'm getting 80 fps unlocked. That lime spent waiting for the frame should clearly show on the utilization. But I'm using a beta drivers and maybe there's an issue with it and GPU-Z.

On my system I see 20% CPU utilization.  Period.  I can't measure the GPU utilization as I have nothing to show that.  However, the CPU utilization is excellent... it's showing one core at 80% which is ~20% total CPU usage.

On my system I see 20% CPU utilization.  Period.  I can't measure the GPU utilization as I have nothing to show that.  However, the CPU utilization is excellent... it's showing one core at 80% which is ~20% total CPU usage.

 

What's the effect on CPU when setting vsync to "Off", "half refresh", and "Full refresh"?

 

My DirectX application gives 22% with vsync off, 1.9% with vsync set to the refresh rate (60 Hz), and 1.2% when set to  half the refresh rate (30Hz)? I'm very surprised not to see a similar effect with Outterra.

From the OP - "I am in an information gathering stage. Please answer maturely and honestly from the perspective of a general simmer, enthusiast simmer, and potential simmer;"

 

Let's try to keep your comments centered around the questions asked in the OP.   Thanks to all!

 

Best regards,

Jim

 

What's the effect on CPU when setting vsync to "Off", "half refresh", and "Full refresh"?

 

Both effects (GPU and CPU load) stem from the same thing, and both should appear if the vertical synchronization works correctly. Basically, CPU will block as soon as the GPU queue is full, and the GPU queue gets full after 2-3 frames as the frames are waiting for the vertical sync, and both the CPU and GPU utilization should go down. But this looks as if it didn't really sync, or was doing a busy wait (i.e. not yielding the control to OS but looping and thus not lowering the utilization). It looks like a driver issue, especially if in manifests only on some systems. We will be inspecting it deeper. Oh btw, did you run it in fullscreen mode? The behavior is a bit different in the windowed mode.

OK guys, please be careful of the way you say things.

 

This thread is far too interesting to mess it up with irritation and poor conduct.

 

Kind regards,

I concur. I didn't. Start this thread to attract trouble spinners just constructive criticism and comments.

 

this is a mature and valid thread so it would be appreciated to have it treated that way.

 

thanks all who have provided mature posts.

 

Regards,

 

Kelvin

 

1) Would you support a kick starter project for a new flight simulator or combined simulator platform?

 

2) What would your expectations be for a new flight simulator or combined simulator platform?

 

3) What would convince you to switch to a new flight simulator or combined simulator platform?

 

1) Needs a very large investment, something I do not believe kick starter would be able to generate.

 

2) Everything that is FSX plus true scalable multi-core support, 64bit, and GPU utilization.

 

3) See #2 plus a built-in multiplayer environment that is user friendly and caters to all types of flyers.

 

Kudos to the Outerra development team, I wish them well in their endeavors.

'oxiin', on 21 Jun 2013 - 9:18 PM, said:

Both effects (GPU and CPU load) stem from the same thing, and both should appear if the vertical synchronization works correctly.

Thanks. But my question was aimed at WarpD. My experiments with my own application show a strong correlation between GPU Load and Average CPU. which is why I expected to see that with Outerra. I ran Outerra full-screen when the GPU Load fell from 98% to 95% while the Average CPU fell from 48% to 8.9% which I also find puzzling.

 

I found a couple of points Outerra my wish to consider. I have an 1140 by 900 LCD monitor. After I’ve selected this and Outerra has restarted, the mouse position and cursor become out of sync on the Graphics screen. Clicking on the Resolution dropdown box has no effect. I have to click on the full screen checkbox to get the list. Similarly clicking on the Restart to apply button has no effect. I have to click below it. Also, the top of the toolbar is clipped when it’s displayed.

 

Also more generally, in windowed mode it’s not possible to select another Window because the invisible cursor can’t be moved outside the Outerra window unless Esc is first pressed to bring up the toolbar and make the cursor visible.