ORBX...I had GEX, but now have ORBX covering the planet..

 

Please...you now have $99.95 AUD of my money this morning...

 

...so....PLEASE....please take another $99.95 for:

 

ORBX X-Plane GLOBAL...

 

A most satisfied customer, again!

 

There will be no sleep this early morning....gonna put an 8 cupper of coffee to perk....

 

Life is good...ah....that's why I work....life is good...

 

Ses

 

POST EDIT: Wow...the neighborhoods around KFNT look like the real deal!   That's the good news...

 

Title modified by Spirit Flyer. That was pushing it. Don't!

 

Please note: I had in this space, stated that I had gone down from my usual 29 FPS to around 12 after first running a post install ORBX GLOBAL.  I found within a short time that some UTX files were written below some ORBX products in my FSX scenic library. I brought all landclass to the top layers, before anything ORBX, and rebooted....defragged, and ran FSX once more. My FPS came right back to original.  I wanted to state this in my O.P. and that will explain some of the comments where people read my plight and responded. Please disregard any mention of a loss of FPS, as I guess it was a system thing at my end.  If you find you also have a drop in FPS, post install...check out your scenery layers in your FSX library, and bring all landclass to the top before anything else. Reboot, and defrag. You should also enjoy pre-install FPS activity.

 

Thanks,

 

Ses

 

 

the bad news..is that with no setting difference after installing FTX-GLOBAL with using the HYBRID mode and all checkbox's armed...I have gone down from 29 FPS to 14-16 FPS.

 

Wow that doesn't sound good at all!  What kind of hardware are you using?  I hope to heck they do this for XPlane 64, but I think I've ORBX doesn't want to play w/ LR.   Sad to put all that work into a simulator engine that is 7y/o and then some, can't use multicore very well, isn't native 64bit, etc etc.  I hope that if what I heard was correct that ORBX & XPlane 64 is not in the cards that the reason this is so has to do w/ P3D going 64bit.  That is the only justification IMO for not supporting XPlane 64.  This is exactly what XPlane needs, then another developer to shoot out basic decent airports and voila, we have something really new.   Since I just finally got around to decent hardware there is no way I will go back to 14-16fps! Hopefully it's not so bad and sliders may make it work adequately.  My fantasy is that it is essentially like AUX areas, and those run well for me.

Odd. Other guys say there's no performance difference from default (and why would there be? It's just replacement textures, not higher res or anything).

 

Something else has to be going on.

 

Gonna wait around for the answer to this one.

On my PC I have absolutely no performance loss with FTX Global. Just putting that out there..  it might not be like that for everyone.

Wow that doesn't sound good at all!  What kind of hardware are you using?  I hope to heck they do this for XPlane 64, but I think I've ORBX doesn't want to play w/ LR.   Sad to put all that work into a simulator engine that is 7y/o and then some, can't use multicore very well, isn't native 64bit, etc etc.  I hope that if what I heard was correct that ORBX & XPlane 64 is not in the cards that the reason this is so has to do w/ P3D going 64bit.  That is the only justification IMO for not supporting XPlane 64.  This is exactly what XPlane needs, then another developer to shoot out basic decent airports and voila, we have something really new.   Since I just finally got around to decent hardware there is no way I will go back to 14-16fps! Hopefully it's not so bad and sliders may make it work adequately.  My fantasy is that it is essentially like AUX areas, and those run well for me.

 

They aren't supporting X-plane because the market is tiny compared to FSX. Simple as that. Until that changes many developers aren't going to bother. I don't think it's personal.

Wow that doesn't sound good at all!  What kind of hardware are you using?  I hope to heck they do this for XPlane 64, but I think I've ORBX doesn't want to play w/ LR.   Sad to put all that work into a simulator engine that is 7y/o and then some, can't use multicore very well, isn't native 64bit, etc etc.  I hope that if what I heard was correct that ORBX & XPlane 64 is not in the cards that the reason this is so has to do w/ P3D going 64bit.  That is the only justification IMO for not supporting XPlane 64.  This is exactly what XPlane needs, then another developer to shoot out basic decent airports and voila, we have something really new.   Since I just finally got around to decent hardware there is no way I will go back to 14-16fps! Hopefully it's not so bad and sliders may make it work adequately.  My fantasy is that it is essentially like AUX areas, and those run well for me.

Hi Noel,  first off, I have to say above all else...ORBX GLOBAL transforms the planet beautifully!  I'm in a paused flight near Flint, Michigan, and my gawd...it REALLY now looks like the area. I can work the FPS out. I wouldn't go back for the world, if you excuse the pun.

I also shut down OPUS weather tonight because in the area, there are voluminous clouds and that is a known FPS killer. I have FSX canned 'fair weather' right now, and have climbed 5-7 FPS as a result.   I would still recommend this, for what it does to the user's sense of real-world viewscape.  But...to be honest and fair, you do take a FPS hit to bring this eye-joy to the screen.  Back to my flight.... 

hmm Shame on the fps, I wouldn't expect it to change from changing textures. The night lighting I expect to give a small hit, but not half. I struggle enough with fps as is, and I just purchased. WORRIED.

They aren't supporting X-plane because the market is tiny compared to FSX. Simple as that. Until that changes many developers aren't going to bother.

Chicken and the egg... If respected developers jump on board simmers will follow!

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk 2

Odd. Other guys say there's no performance difference from default (and why would there be? It's just replacement textures, not higher res or anything).

 

Something else has to be going on.

 

Gonna wait around for the answer to this one.

Interesting, I went from 29 FSX in my GEX viewscape and no diff in FSX settings, to 12-14 FPS upon start up at my FBO.  I will right now get out of my flight, and reboot my system, and see what gives...but for now...I have taken quite a hit.

hmm Shame on the fps, I wouldn't expect it to change from changing textures. The night lighting I expect to give a small hit, but not half. I struggle enough with fps as is, and I just purchased. WORRIED.

 

If you don't mind will you go make a test flight in a semi-heavy area and then compare FPS when you install global?

Chicken and the egg... If respected developers jump on board simmers will follow!

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk 2

 

They aren't jumping on board because Xplane is too full of holes in regards to features to attract the larger audience and it's in constant beta. LR isn't very forthcoming and filling said holes either. But I digress, I don't need to turn this into an Xplane argument.

Interesting, I went from 29 FSX in my GEX viewscape and no diff in FSX settings, to 12-14 FPS upon start up at my FBO.  I will right now get out of my flight, and reboot my system, and see what gives...but for now...I have taken quite a hit.

 

Something has to be wrong or conflicting on your system.

 

Even if you loaded up a full fledged FTX region vs. default you wouldn't see near that kind of hit. Much less what Global is, being just replacement textures at the same resolution.

If you don't mind will you go make a test flight in a semi-heavy area and then compare FPS when you install global?

Bonchie, after my install, (which went well, no problems...) I fired up FSX and my default plane and FBO  (KFNT) came up. No CTD's or anything strange. I went from my usual GEX installation FBO start of 29 (locked at 30) FPS, to 12-14.  Geez....I then took off and went down to 10-11 as I panned right and left, and a spot view. I going to reboot now (have not system defragged yet) and see what happens to those FPS when I bring FSX back online....  I'm a little bummed out to be honest, but am WAY PLEASED at what I see...that is a fact.  I hope that I can with doing things sort my FPS out. If I can get back to 27-29...I'll be ecstatic!

If you don't mind will you go make a test flight in a semi-heavy area and then compare FPS when you install global?

 

They aren't jumping on board because Xplane is too full of holes in regards to features to attract the larger audience and it's in constant beta. LR isn't very forthcoming and filling said holes either. But I digress, I don't need to turn this into an Xplane argument.

 

Something has to be wrong or conflicting on your system.

 

Even if you loaded up a full fledged FTX region vs. default you wouldn't see near that kind of hit. Much less what Global is, being just replacement textures at the same resolution.

Before I shut down FSX, I'll go to the library and see where things went...perhaps I have to manually set the levels to the other ORBX scenery (regional)  perhaps bring it down below the regional. I dunno...there was no advising to go into the library and manually set anything up.

Bonchie, after my install, (which went well, no problems...) I fired up FSX and my default plane and FBO  (KFNT) came up. No CTD's or anything strange. I went from my usual GEX installation FBO start of 29 (locked at 30) FPS, to 12-14.  Geez....I then took off and went down to 10-11 as I panned right and left, and a spot view. I going to reboot now (have not system defragged yet) and see what happens to those FPS when I bring FSX back online....  I'm a little bummed out to be honest, but am WAY PLEASED at what I see...that is a fact.  I hope that I can with doing things sort my FPS out. If I can get back to 27-29...I'll be ecstatic!

 

Something has to be wrong.

For example, I can load up default KSEA and then Orbx PNW KSEA and the FPS difference is only 3-4 frames. And a full Orbx region is much more detailed then Global.

There's noway simply replacing the default textures with textures of the same resolution should be costing you 16-18 FPS. I'd go start a post on the Orbx support forum and not just settle with what you have.

Sesquashtoo, if you're using night lights from UTX, turn them off.

hmm Shame on the fps, I wouldn't expect it to change from changing textures. The night lighting I expect to give a small hit, but not half. I struggle enough with fps as is, and I just purchased. WORRIED.

 

I doubt it's the textures - Orbx products have massively increased autogen density vs default FSX at the same settings. They tell you in the manuals not to expect to run city type areas at completely maxed out settings unless you have a bleeding edge top of the line machine. I bet if you guys pull the autogen back to a reasonable level the FPS will be better.

I sure hope with that massive amount of textures being put into/overwritten fsx during install that you all are doing a defrag

 

Sent from Samsung Galaxy Note 2