DX10 Fixer released!

[wolke85 150]

Perhaps you're right and it is all based on the individual aircraft being used; it's complexity, modelling, texturing, effects etc.

 

Unfortunately the tests I would be interesting in seeing from others are all with complex heavy resource airliners, which you've said aren't your thing.

 

Here's a quick and dirty comparison of all of the add-on aircraft I have tested so far.  All tests at FlyTampa Vienna, with like for like settings:-

 

PMDG NGX             DX9 performs better by a significant margin.

PMDG 777              DX9 performs better by a significant margin.

PMDG MD-11          DX9 performs better by a small margin.

PMDG 747              DX9 performs better by a significant margin.

Aerosoft AXE           DX9 performs better by a small margin.

Coolsky DC-9          DX9 performs better by a significant margin.

QA 146s                  DX10 performs better by a small margin

Aerosoft T,OtterX    DX10 performs better by a small margin

A2A C172                DX10 performs better by a small margin

MilViz 732                DX9 performs better by a significant margin

Eaglesoft CX 2.0     DX9 performs better by a small margin

Carenado C208      DX10 performs better by a significant margin

 

Thank You very much for these informative observations here!

Aside performance the main reason for now and only for me personally speaking why i am on my way fiddling around with the DX10 fixer is VAS.

So my questeion is:

Did You or any other user note - and proofed - a better handling of VAS under DX10?

 

I recently ran into an OOM again with PMDG's 777 under DX9 and although all was really set up very carefully in the sim and as instructed by the 777 manual, this OOM occured.

And no: I do not blame PMDG or any other other add-on developer here for this OOM and FSX-OOM's in general.

I know why they occur and i am doing my best to avoid them, but obviously i have overseen something or maybe i just had got bad luck and "overloaded" my VAS for whatever specific reason.

 

Now as we can't fix the 4GB VAS limitaion of FSX i am very hardly looking forward to at least any potential way of how to keep FSX safe below this 4GB limit ( i know OOM's may still happen, but mabye even less) and switching to DX10 may be one way to gain that.

 

So i'd very much welcome if some info regarding VAS under DX10 with demanding aircrafts such as let's say the NGX or 777 or so could become available.

If i had DX10 up and running already i would certainly check out personally as well, but at the moment i am still at the beginning of the "transitioning process" so to speak.

But maybe some of You the community members who already use DX10 and also have the 777 in their hangars can offer some feedback regarding VAS.

Thank You very much in advance!

Cheers, Christoph

[Q_flyer 766]

Thank You very much for these informative observations here!

Aside performance the main reason for now and only for me personally speaking why i am on my way fiddling around with the DX10 fixer is VAS.

So my questeion is:

Did You or any other user note - and proofed - a better handling of VAS under DX10?

 

 

Hi, I didn't look at VAS with any degree of depth, but from a quick glance it does appear that DX10 is using less VAS on 'like for like' rendering.    And thus, even though FPS and smoothness may not always be superior to DX9, it does seem the case that running the DX10 Fixer will make OOMs a lot less likely.

 

To be honest I don't see many OOMs at all in DX9, mainly because, as a TrackIR user, I rate fluidity, smoothness and good frames very highly, and I lower my visual settings accordingly.   When flying complex airliners for example, I usually have autogen at sparse, AI airline traffic at 10%, and road traffic at around 7%.   Just enough to see some of the candy.   But I rarely see OOMs, as I'm not maxed out, and I don't tend to use hyper memory intensive packages like Drzewiecki New York X, etc.   

 

But for those plagued by OOMs, DX10 offers a good solution.

[MarkW 1,502]

FWIW, I was the original poster who gave Dave the idea to look at the smoke effect. In my case, the effect was already a drag on my system. Conversion appeared to make worse. I am happy to keep the FPS irrespective of the Fixer by leaving it off (no engine smoke, but worth it).

 

Thanks, is this the smoke at engine startup?  I think I have looked at this effect once 2 years ago when I first purchased the aircraft, every other time I am looking at the flight deck.

[Christopher Low 5,415]

Does disabling this "smoke" effect in the PMDG 737NGX improve the framerates when sitting in the VC?

[Q_flyer 766]

FWIW, I was the original poster who gave Dave the idea to look at the smoke effect. In my case, the effect was already a drag on my system. Conversion appeared to make worse. I am happy to keep the FPS irrespective of the Fixer by leaving it off (no engine smoke, but worth it).

 

You certainly were sir, and it was a great call.  I am defininately seeing a 3-5 FPS consistant improvement in FPS, with that effect de-activated.   I am not sure how it would impact performance when the engines aren't even running, but I've compared a new load up, with and without that effect active, and I get 3-5 FPS more (quite significant when it's the difference between 19 and 24 FPS) with the effect disabled.

 

 

Does disabling this "smoke" effect in the PMDG 737NGX improve the framerates when sitting in the VC?

 

Definitely worth a try Chris.   Although as odourboy said, the effect seems to become even more resource-intensive under DX10 conversion, so I'd try it under DX9 initially.   Load a flight and check your FPS after 20 seconds on the ground.   Then remove the engine smoke effect and go back to the same scenario and see if you too get a few more frames.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

Yes well done DAL. Perhaps the whiners will go elsewhere to complain about how unfair life is. FSX is so much better with this investment ..... no need to upgrade to a higher speckd pc now, so have therefore saved myself hundreds of dolleroes. Well done Steve.

 

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 4

That is a good way to look at it! People just need time to think about what the Fixer can offer them beyond the initial introduction a couple of days ago.

[Groovin_DC-10 51]

I did BEFORE I purchased DX10 Controller. I have sent the vendor an email suggesting that they add an option to know if someone is going to be using DX10 Controller. They then can calculate some higher settings than the ones used today without DX10 Controller. FSX Booster 2013 did make it easer for some of the tweaking (which can all be done without FSX Booster 2013). I am no longer using it since installing DX10 Controller.

 

Thanks for the info.  I may get it because I still have aircrafts that won't function properly in DX10, so I will most likely be going back and forth between 9 and 10.  Would be interesting if they did a DX10 version.

I also like the idea that it makes it much easier for someone like me with very limited knowledge of the cfg.

[odourboy 1,291]

Although as odourboy said, the effect seems to become even more resource-intensive under DX10 conversion, so I'd try it under DX9 initially.

First, since my original post is buried, let me remind everyone that this was in the MV B732, not the NGX. I suggested Dave try it in the NGX because the symptoms sounded similar.  It was after DX10 Fixer Conversion not conversion from DX9 to DX10 - so I'm saying it seemed to be worse in DX10 after Fixer conversion than in DX10 before Fixer conversion (I never use DX9 except to troubleshoot problems). The effect was already troublesome before fixer conversion in Spot View. It was most noticeable during takeoff. Once in the air, it diminished greatly - so I'm presuming it was an interaction of the effect with the tarmac and/or the extra load due to proximity to the airport. After Fixer conversion, it affected me in the VC (I did not notice before the fixer, but I have not compared FPS in the VC before to after, it was probably there, just not as obvious). I can't explain why since the smoke is not visible from the VC. I am also puzzled because the change in the effect made by the Fixer conversion seems like it should be inconsequential - perhaps even performance enhancing. However, it's a simple process to remove the effect from Fixer conversion so no big deal.

 

Finally, I suspect that the B732 cascades the smoke effects (there's about 7 of them) one on top of the other, as you advance the throttle so the impact multiplies. A test using the 'smoke' from another plane didn't help at all. My choice so far is rather than adding it as a Fixer exception, I've removed it altogether because I stay near 30 FPS during takeoff (spot view) rather than dropping to about 15 (without fixer conversion) or about 10 (with fixer conversion).

[fluffyflops 1,880]

Sorry to be a pain and go through all the pages.  Before I fork out $30 can someone confirm for definate it works with dx 10 

 

UK2000 scenery

Flytampa Boston

Aerosoft airports

Dreamteam Klas

Flightbeam sfo

Latin vfr Miami

Gsx vehicles

 

 

Many thanks in advanced, as I can't take any more ooms with dx 9

[Alan_A 1,650]

Am just returning to this thread to say that, thanks to Jeroen's recommendations for setting FSAA in the Fixer and Inspector, as explained in this thread, I've finally got DX10 looking extremely good and performing extremely well.  I'm beginning to see the point.  Have still got some tweaking to do, especially with water, but it's getting there.  I never thought I'd say this, but I'm even considering turning off some of the more problematic airports (I've still got that big gray square in the Potomac next to Tropicalsim KDCA), because the rest of DX10 is so satisfying.  To be honest, I'd thought of the DX10 community as sort of a cult, and maybe it is... but I think I'm going to apply for membership.   B)  Wanted to get that across since my earlier posts here were a bit skeptical.  

[Manny 1,293]

Does anyone here who has ported over Flighscenery's Flightzone02  FS9 (KPDX) and FT KSEA to FSX?

 

I noticed that with Steve's fixer, I am able to see the autogen house/buildings side walls are back. They were missing earlier.  All  I saw was floating roofs.. Now I see that they have walls..albeit they are black.  Its better than nothing.

 

Can you confirm this?

[MarkW 1,502]

Sorry to be a pain and go through all the pages.  Before I fork out $30 can someone confirm for definate it works with dx 10 

 

UK2000 scenery

Flytampa Boston

Aerosoft airports

Dreamteam Klas

Flightbeam sfo

Latin vfr Miami

Gsx vehicles

 

 

Many thanks in advanced, as I can't take any more ooms with dx 9

 

All FSDT and GSX work.  Others will have to comment on the rest of the scenery.

[Q_flyer 766]

First, since my original post is buried, let me remind everyone that this was in the MV B732, not the NGX. I suggested Dave try it in the NGX because the symptoms sounded similar.  It was after DX10 Fixer Conversion not conversion from DX9 to DX10 - so I'm saying it seemed to be worse in DX10 after Fixer conversion than in DX10 before Fixer conversion (I never use DX9 except to troubleshoot problems). The effect was already troublesome before fixer conversion in Spot View. It was most noticeable during takeoff. Once in the air, it diminished greatly - so I'm presuming it was an interaction of the effect with the tarmac and/or the extra load due to proximity to the airport. After Fixer conversion, it affected me in the VC (I did not notice before the fixer, but I have not compared FPS in the VC before to after, it was probably there, just not as obvious). I can't explain why since the smoke is not visible from the VC. I am also puzzled because the change in the effect made by the Fixer conversion seems like it should be inconsequential - perhaps even performance enhancing. However, it's a simple process to remove the effect from Fixer conversion so no big deal.

 

Finally, I suspect that the B732 cascades the smoke effects (there's about 7 of them) one on top of the other, as you advance the throttle so the impact multiplies. A test using the 'smoke' from another plane didn't help at all. My choice so far is rather than adding it as a Fixer exception, I've removed it altogether because I stay near 30 FPS during takeoff (spot view) rather than dropping to about 15 (without fixer conversion) or about 10 (with fixer conversion).

 

Thanks for the clarification.   And apologies if I caused any confusion, in my subsequent reports.

 

(This whole thread has been a bit like Chinese Whispers).  :smile:

 

Smoke effects can cause stutters and micro-pauses even in MS default aircraft, so it seems that perhaps the way FSX renders any smoke effect may be the issue.

 

There was a thread a while back where someone was getting a huge micro pause stutter every time they landed, and thought it was a sound file playback issue (the touchdown sound causing the pause), but it ended up being related to a touchdown smoke effect........

 

So yes everyone, do your own tests, back up anything that you 'remove' as part of a test, and reach your own conclusions. 

[Christopher Low 5,415]

 

 To be honest, I'd thought of the DX10 community as sort of a cult, and maybe it is... but I think I'm going to apply for membership.

 

Excellent. Just pop your clothes on the floor, climb on to the sacrifi......er, I mean "Membership" altar, and try not to worry about the knives and the blood.

[DAL1850 51]

Sorry to be a pain and go through all the pages.  Before I fork out $30 can someone confirm for definate it works with dx 10 

 

UK2000 scenery

Flytampa Boston

Aerosoft airports

Dreamteam Klas

Flightbeam sfo

Latin vfr Miami

Gsx vehicles

 

 

Many thanks in advanced, as I can't take any more ooms with dx 9

 

FT Boston - Yes

FSDT KLAS (and KORD) - Yes, but only if you set the legacy slider all the way to the left

FB KSFO (and KPHX) - Yes

GSX  -Yes

 

Can't speak to the others.