"Or you could wait until November for Prepar3D 2".,the most interesting and sensible  post for me so far,wonderful  if true! esp if released on the 21st

peter

Really?? That's your argument?

 

DX10 is where it's at today in FSX not because of Microsoft, but because of several inquisitive and dedicated people who didn't accept the status quo. I'm mostly talking about Steve, but there are a few others. FSX DX10 is much better than DX9, it is better than P3D, and it's better than XPX. It's the near future of flight simulation.

 

As a lawyer, you should know never to make a statement unless you are sure of the reaction, and never ask a question unless you know the answer. I hope you're a better pilot.

 

Edit: Sorry that's a little harsh, but it sounded good, and sometimes that's all it takes to convince a jury of your peers. "If it does not fit, you must acquit."

You're absolutely right. A lawyer never asks a question if he doesn't know the answer to it. I knew exactly how my question would be answered, and how defensive the reaction would be. I meant it rhetorically.

 

The downside to DX10 at this point is that it's become a distraction in the development process. Having to code for DX10 compatibility when the majority of users are still using DX9 is a lot like trying to cater to FS9 users. It wasn't long ago that someone asked whether the PMDG 777 would be backward compatible to FS9. Development is much easier when you're not trying to accomodate the entire spectrum of the FS evolution.

 

Granted, achieving DX10 compatibility is much easier than making software FS9 compatible. But there's still a cost in terms of development resources. I'm just not sure it's justified when there are other cures for the OOM plague (see Word Not Allowed's blog).

 

The downside to DX10 at this point is that it's become a distraction in the development process. Having to code for DX10 compatibility when the majority of users are still using DX9 is a lot like trying to cater to FS9 users. It wasn't long ago that someone asked whether the PMDG 777 would be backward compatible to FS9. Development is much easier when you're not trying to accomodate the entire spectrum of the FS evolution.

 

 

 

A good point, however I am hoping Steve Parson's upcoming fix program will make this "moot".  (haha .... more lawyer words)

Cmon guys, the fix for lights in dx10 is probably very simple. Someone needs to convert the texture to dx10 compatible format (compression) in dxtbmp.

It's strange that official fix from ORBX is not available already, it's 5 minutes job.

Yes, absolutely. A few hours since release...what's wrong with those people??? 

 

Where's my popcorn...

Me, I've never gone near DX10 yet, in my whole FSX career, but I think I will take a look into that world after reading the last few posts. I've heard about Steve's work. :cool:   I use an ATI card and heard that DX10 cannot do any vsync with DX10, which would be a showstopper for me as I use Track IR.       Can anyone confirm whether this is the case?

 

I am the proud owner of an Asus HD7970 Matrix Platinum (ATI card then) and I am using DX10 exclusively for FSX since several months. The "magic" to correctly uses DX10 is Steve's fix, and for us ATI users, install and use (free) RadeonPro tool that will enable AntiAliasing options and VSync switch for FSX/DX10. I will never go back to DX9.

 

As said, better quality, better colors, better framerate, better smoothness, and rock solid stability. No crash or OOM anymore, and compatibility with addons increases month after month. Steve's next tool should at least allow to get rid of remaining incompatibilities, but I will expect main addon makers to create by themselves compatible products.

 

Regards,

Chris

One more thing: A user on the official forums has found a workaround (not a fix) for the DX10 black boxes during the day. The users name is "HAL9000" and the post is "DX10 Issue with FTXG". 

 

 

I see a few folks, like yourself, popping out of the woodwork and being inconsiderate (for folks who prefer DX10 and its advantages) and condescending (by implying there is "whining" going on). Everyone does not share your thoughts or preferences. Good grief, can you get over yourself?

Folks like myself eh!

Good grief, not everyone agrees with your views on DX10.

I did say if you prefer DX10 then stay with it. Fine.

 

If you consider it condescending to think there is too much whining then consider this,  stop whining.

 

 

The ORBX CEO, John Venema has stated:
 We will be adding intersection lighting in the first patch (they were planned but we ran out of time), also hopefully a fix for DX10
 
Or you could wait until November for Prepar3D 2.

 

The quote is in red, but the P3D november release part is not. Is that not part of the quote?  How do you know its November?

Can you guys also be commenting on the performance of the addon.

It performs about the same as GEX and default. 

It performs about the same as GEX and default. 

 

Same here...and I like it alot.

Can you guys also be commenting on the performance of the addon.

 

On approach with FSDT KLAS and the strip in view at night with all the night lighting effects I was holding locked 30. Never budged. With max autogen no less.

This was in a default plane so in the NGX probably expect it to be low 20's.

 

Point is, there seems to be no difference between default and Global and the night lighting really doesn't effect FPS just like they said (unlike UTX lights and old Orbx region lights, which were a killer).

 

Like I said eariler, the night textures + lighting for the entire world are worth the price of admission alone. I can actually fly at night again.

It performs about the same as GEX and default. 

 

Although the greater amount of trees might cost one or two fps. I run at extremely dense and notice my PC is slightly struggling sometimes, but not in such a way that it bothers me. Of course I could lower autogen one notch: that would probably leave me with the same amount of trees as FSX default shows on extreme... but I want it all!!! ^_^

The quote is in red, but the P3D november release part is not. Is that not part of the quote?  How do you know its November?

 

No, only the red text is the quote.

Have a look at http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/content.php?13740-FlightSim-Com-Interviews-Wesley-Bard-Of-Lockheed-Martin-About-Prepar3D/view/3

 

It's an interview with Lockheed Martin's Wesley Bard about Prepar3d about the support for DX11 and a 2013 release. Can't remember where November came from but it'll be Nov or Dec all being well, but I did read somewhere it was November.

No, only the red text is the quote.

Have a look at http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/content.php?13740-FlightSim-Com-Interviews-Wesley-Bard-Of-Lockheed-Martin-About-Prepar3D/view/3

 

It's an interview with Lockheed Martin's Wesley Bard about Prepar3d about the support for DX11 and a 2013 release. Can't remember where November came from but it'll be Nov or Dec all being well, but I did read somewhere it was November.

I can't remember, does PMDG NGX work in P3D?

 

Sent from Samsung Galaxy Note 2

 

 

DX 10 is better performance than XPX? Sure youre not pushing it a lil too far to mae a point?

 

FSX DX9 has better performance than XPX!!

 

This is XPX with the following render settings, No AI aircraft. Default C172SP KTPA no airport scenery

 

 

 

 

 

This is FSX with  Extreme autogen and scenery (I usually run Dense autogen which would give me about 25FPS here) and 100% UT2 traffic (about 15 aircraft active this area) Default C172SP KTPA FlyTampa!

 

 

 

At a less detailed airport I can easily reach my locked 30FPS target at the same settings, and this is only with a 3Ghz E6850 C2D. It's only when you throw in the much more complex system aircraft like the PMDG NGX that things slow down in FSX.