FS9 and the new setup: I have FINALLY reached the Holy Land!

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

You must have been reading my mind, Jan. Your thoughts were my silent ones------but I just didn't publish them...(smile). I just had some fun using the KBOS custom scenery and a POSKY 'shiner'. The result? No change....30-50's on the ground, into the 80's up in the pollution. I can't ask more than this. Totally satisfied. I mean, REALLY s*a*t*i*s*f*i*e*d*. If your rig NEVER goes below 24 frames, from the start to the end of your sim'ing session, than you have equal to T.V. and total fluidity. What can you ask more of?Cheers!Mitch Robbins

[greggerm 312]

>If your rig NEVER goes below 24 frames, from the start to the>end of your sim'ing session, than you have equal to T.V. and>total fluidity. What can you ask more of?Aah, the myth of 24FPS rears it's head once more. :) For the benefit of everyone, here's the scoop on FRAME RATES. The most important thing to understand is that there has been no scientifically determined LIMIT to the human eye with regards to frame rates. Most humans will start to percieve fluid motion at the 60 FPS range or better. Some people will see fluidity at a lesser number, and others at a greater number. It is very dependant on the person. Air Force pilots have been tested to be able to not only see, but IDENTIFY the outline of an airplane flashed before them at 1/220th of a second - 220 FPS! This goes to show that the eyeball is not as slow as we may think!DISCLAIMER - All of what I am about to say is not meant to say that more FPS is better. People have their personal preferences - I fly at 25, even though I know I can see more. This is just to explain the myth a bit. How you fly, and what FPS you strive for is your personal choice!If you've ever watched a movie, you'll notice that when you freeze-frame an action scene, the movie is most likely blurred. Even in a mildly active scene, you may notice a slightly unfocused blur. This blur is created due to the photographic nature of film. Television and movies shot on film have this "motion blur" inherent to it. It is this blurring which helps trick the eyeball into thinking it is seeing motion. It so happens that the 24 FPS is used as a standard - providing a reasonable picture and speed. Your mind puts together the sucessive blurred pictures and percives motion. (Television blurs by interlacing the frames together, displaying half of one frame and half of the other at the same time). Less than 24 FPS and the blur starts to effect picture quality - any more, and, well, it improves it - but 24 is where they standardized way back when. Likewise, when watching an action movie in an intense motion sequence, you may detect odd blurring or tearing - this is due to the fact that there aren't enough frames to adequately capture the motion on the screen. I see this often in during action movies. Flipping around to your COMPUTER screen - It is not blurring anything when you play a game. You get a crisp, clean image every time the screen is refreshed. In essense, you lose the motion blur which aids the eyeball during a movie. This breaks up the illusion of motion to a standard lower than television or the movies. Primarily it is this LACK of blur that makes differences in frame rates so visible. As you increase frame rates, this need for blurring gets lower. If you've ever watched a home movie filmed on a handheld digital camera, you may notice it's a touch jittery - this is partially because the camera isn't smoothing between frames - it's just taking a lot of snapshots. It's a crisp, vibrant image, but you may be able to "just tell" that its slightly less smooth. A few years ago, I believe with their 5000 series of Voodoo cards, 3DFX attempted to make the hardware accelerators create this motion blur - and it worked with great sucess on supported programs.By adding the cinematic blur, it increased the percived smoothness of motion considerably WITHOUT increasing the frame rates being generated. These days, graphics card designers are overlooking this method and going for raw power - trying to beat each other into submission with the greatest processing, and thus frame rate, power.Again - you may be satisfied at a steady 25 FPS - I know I am. But Our eyeballs can easily percieve a smoothness many factors higher than this. (Getting our computers to produce it is another story!) When playing first-person-shooters, I cannot accept a rate lower than 40 or 50 FPS - I can very easily tell the difference between lower rates and higher rates when playing such a game. The smoothness is key if your tracking a target with a sniper rifle in Battlefield:1942. But I digress...The moral of the story is that 24 FPS is not the lower or upper limit of motion perception for humans. It's just the standard adopted by a fledgling movie industry way back when. Our eyeballs can percieve a rate far higher than this - but as always, it comes back to what you as a simmer would consider acceptable. For some, a steady, slower rate is preferred - others, a possibly jumpy higher rate - and still others get top-shelf systems for top-shelf performance. Simming isn't a competition, it's only an exhibition - please, no wagering. Hope this helps a bit on the frame rate thoughts,-Greg

[Guest Paragon]

Very good post, I was just looking on the net for information on that statement, because I seemed to remember something similar. I found a rather interesting article in which it states that "Simply put, according to our brains frames per second doesn't exist".

[Ray Proudfoot 8,942]

Jan,<>Radar Contact is not a frame rate eater. It uses very little machine resources. Please think a bit before you hit the send button. Other 3rd party addons may affect frame rates but Radar Contact is not one of them.Cheers,

[Reset XPDR 1,271]

I probably rate as one of the "parade rainers" in this thread, but that was not my intention. I am truly happy that your FPS are pegged to the right, and that your simming experience is all the better for it. My intent was to see how your system performed under a similar circumstance to one which brings mine to it's knees. It was not to bring you down, rather to see whether your holy grail would help me find mine. Unfortunately, you are not running enough of the same addons as me to make a direct comparison. But indirectly what you have shown me, particularly with that screenshot you provided of KBOS with good cloud cover at dawn and a handful (relative to UT) of AI aircraft, is that your new system churns out nice frame rates and beautiful graphics in a medium-high complex situation. This is a great thing to have achieved, and I hope I haven't spoilt your enjoyment whilst struggling to find mine. Gary

[Guest Crazed One]

Ok, this has me curious because I am a semi hardcore tweaker and run Doom3 and BF vietnam smoothly almost maxed, but I am still trying to find better fps in FS2004. I still need to do some win xp tweaking but havent had time.I have a system I recently built and use Simflyers, PMDG 737, Ultimate traffic, AUE6, Waterzone, USA Roads,FS Genesis, fs landclass, and GA traffic w/ some third party aircraft as texture reduced ai aircraft, and 1280x1024 4x aa, 100% traffic, most sliders maxed. Was going to try the reduced autogen textures and HIFPS. But I can only get about 7-9 fps in Simflyers KLAX in the PMDG 737 on a cloudy day. I refuse to tone it down heheh, so I suffer. Im going to try some tests myself, was hoping to get a new 6800 ultra, but im waiting a bit.Im wondering how much the Prescott has to do with it, since I went with the cooler C with less cache, or if its the new PCI express?I for one interested and am sure others are because we definitely want to know if the PCI express excels over the 6800 ultra, for future upgrades, specially since i would need a new mobo.

[Guest Jan Bergwall]

>Jan,>><fps-eaters like UT, Simflyers etc. Otherwise you're not>reliable. Kill the poor PC with PMDG 737NG VC+cabin,>Activesky, Active camera, FSnav, Weather radar, Radar>Contact,...>>>>Radar Contact is not a frame rate eater. It uses very little>machine resources. Please think a bit before you hit the send>button. Other 3rd party addons may affect frame rates but>Radar Contact is not one of them.>>Cheers,Hmm... Like the devil reads the bible...If you use all these add-ons - including RC3 - at the same time in FS9, of course it effects the performance and use up resources. And pls. notice, I did not mentioned RC3 as a "well-known fps-eater". And don't tell me it's not using any computer power. I've been using RC3 for many years and know it's kind to the fps. But all add-ons together will make a difference.So, pls. think a bit before you hit the send button as my post earlier is an example on how the respons to Mitch R's joy was. Not to take RC3 down.Thank you./Jan Bergwall

[Ray Proudfoot 8,942]

Jan,I'm sorry but you included RC in with known frame rate eaters so by definition you did even if you didn't mean to. Taken in isolation RC does consume memory - of course it does - but that alone does not cause FS to lose frame rates and that is all I wished to say. Those potential customers of RC may have been put off buying it by your comments and that is the reason I chipped in.I always think before I press the send button. I did so again on this occasion.Regards,

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

Hey there, Gary. I have large shoulders, lol. I knew what you asked, and tried to respond with what I could do for your comparing your system to my new one.I know I could post screen shots to Kingdom Come, and still would be asked for one more CPU/Graphics load on.You know, really, the bottom line here, is that from the moment I start a session, to the end, and with everything at 100 percent in the sim, I get steady-eddy FPS that never fall below 25, storms, heavy frontal build, all at 3D and WEATHER maxed out! I know for a fact that there are many ATI systems that would come to their FPS knees on that one setting alone!Today, as I climbing out for FL270, I ran through some truly heavy well-developed, much displayed SCUD and had great FPS. Fluid motion, no stutters and no jerk-fest. I have attached a screenie for your viewing pleaseure.This system rocks, and no matter what scenery to date I have asked of the X800XT, like for instance custom KBOS that can be downloaded from AVSIM, it just keeps churning out the figures. Also, whether I have 4 A.I.'s or ten ahead of me or in taxi view, again---no matter. I do not go below 25 FPS.What more do I need, nor can I ask? As for FPS, I have a 'max-out-FS9-set-'n-forget' system. I highly recommend it to anybody. My purchase experience with Dell, has been a very good one. I would certainly buy again. I truly wondered about an O.E.M's quality---but as for Dell, I have now no issues. Do you think that I should buy some stock? LOLOLOL! Heck, maybe I should.....lol.No matter, I see all posts through goood nature and a sense of humor. The only way to handle one's life.Cheers!Mitch R.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

Hi Ray!Ray, what I have seen so far (been using this system for about a week and a half) is that as I load up programs in the back-ground, there does NOT seem to be a difference in the frame rates. What I am suggesting is that the Prescott has lots of cycle-headroom left.On my Celery 1.4 with the BX chipset, just the CLOUDS that I am asking this Prescott 3.4E to process would enough for a reset.It is totally satisfactory to have the WEATHER with all sliders MAXED, and yet pull 35's as a constant when not locked down. If you notice, on most of my screen-shots in response to Gary, I have the sytem locked down to 30 fps and it has stayed there or above.I really lack any issues with this beast. I LOVE it!I will add on, now that I have a system that can process the overhead. The screen capture resulting in a compressed JPG pic does not justice to what I am seeing on the monitor as supplied by the X800XT part.Simply amazing....Cheers!Mitch R.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

This is CYYZ, FLIGHT ONTARIO's massive custom scenery. Here is a shot of multiple A.I.'s heading out to the active.Frame rates sustained in the 40's... (large smile)Cheers!Mitch R.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,942]

Hi Mitch,I'm pleased you're happy with your system. Having had many PCs over the years I can remember the very few occasions when the hardware did briefly manage to keep up with the software and give me a level of performance that was totally satisfying. Because I fly with 3rd party aircraft and have several addon airports and most of all, have Ultimate Traffic running at 100% (for testing of Radar Contact v4) my frame rates take quite a hit.Most 3rd party support programs for FS do not impact on frame rates. All they use is memory and providing you have sufficient your system can handle everything with ease.What I have personally found to be the biggest killer of frame rates are multiple levels of cloud - cumulus especially and complex 3rd party panels such as that on the PMDG737-700.If you fly using r/w weather supplied either intrnally by FS2004 or by programs such as FS Meteo then it will only be a matter of time before frame rates suffer because of the amount of cloud. As I live in NW England and do a lot of local flying cloud is something that plagues me. Those flying in southern California are much luckier!You're quite right to lock the system at 30. That will give the CPU time to load scenery so the fluidity remains.Enjoy your system!Cheers,

[Noel 4,492]

Jan, you may be missing the point as I think you may have stated. The reason, of course, is that not too many people thus far have seen high & smooth frame rates in these complex situations. So if someone is able to confirm that some new config of hardware will, literally, run all these addons with never a fall below some arbitraryish threshold, like 24 frames and smooth, then THIS IS NEWS. I doubt it has anything to do with ruining anyone's party for the sake of sheer terrorism!Cheers,Noel

[Mike T 208]

Amen to that! If I play any of the first person shooters, even in highest resolution and all the bells and whistles, I get motion sickness (literally!) because it is so fluid.Fast forward to MSFS and with all the complex add-ons, framerates can vary from fluid to slideshow. It is the way it is.The bottom line is that MS sold us a product that gives great frame rates out of the box on any mid to high end system, but then the sim us pretty awful. Add all the stuff that we demand for absolute realism and *pow* down the tubes the frames go. It seems, it is one or the other, it is not possible to have both...*Sigh* there IS no holy grail :-(Best,Mike T.

[Mike T 208]

Here, Here, Gary:Many in this thread are missing the point. I have a top end system so I am not "hating on the brother" for having a great system at all. Likewise, many asking for screenies have high end systems too.Rather, little of us here have a default FS setup. The vast majority of us "avid" simmers are running 100% UA traffic, with AS weather providing many cloud layers, a highly complex panel and aircraft, at a complex airport. All of these above scenarios bring our 'puters to their knees regardless of the speed.With that said, we are not bashing the fellow, actually, I am quite happy for him, BUT, we are all sensitive to there being a "holy grail". If it turned out he was getting 35fps with all the complex stuff running, it would have been a revolution here at Avsim and a windfall for PCI Express video card manufacturers because I have no doubt that we would have ALL been down at Best Buy drooling on our wallets and selling our children to buy em :-lol.So, for him to move from a low end to a high end 'puter, it TRULY is a holy grail...for him. For the rest of us searching everything we can to get more performance even after having the fastest chips that AMD or INTEL makes and STILL sucking wind in complex FS scenarios, it is a bit touchy.Look at my 'puter specs below. I hand built her with loving care, over clocked her, massaged her and after all is said and done, there is STILL no consistant high frame rates in all situations with FS9. It is a fact of life and ALWAYS has been with MSFS.Best regards,Mike T.