DX10 AA Performance & A GTX780

[CFIJose 5,485]

Gentlemen,

 

As a recent convert to Dx10, I was doing some AA tests using the fixer settings and Nvidia Inspector's SGSS settings.

 

I found that my gtx480 has a hard time dealing with SGSS and heavy clouds when using the dx10 preview. Without clouds, it's beautiful!

 

This has always been a know issue, but can the new video card (gtx780) perform better with 8x & 8SGSS. This is the sweet spot for shimmer free simulation.

 

I found that 32x & 2SGSS works well but performance still dips into the 20s and the sim becomes choppy approaching certain airports. This is with a BP=40000 and water setting of h1X. Water=5. I've tried with BP=0 but did not see a performance increase and it makes me wonder if BP=0 has an effect at all on FSX's performance.

 

My tests were all conducted at night with 3d lighting on and lots of clouds. When I compare IQ and performance to dx9 in the same scenerios, Dx9 wins easily.

 

If anyone has had success with a new card, please post your results.

 

Thanks.

 

Jose

[AirborneZed 168]

I gave up on dx10 because of this. Couldn't get smooth enough performance with clouds in the area with 8xsgss. Wherever I pan the camera towards any clouds, stutters ensue. The only thing that eliminates it is reducing to 2xsgss, which for me is a no go, too shimmery.

 

 

BTW Paul, sorry but the fix that you provided I thought fixed the stutters turned out unsuccessful. I still commend you for the consideration and help!

 

To answer your question Jose, no, the GTX780 still isn't enough. Check my pc specs.

[ricka47 611]

I currently have a GTX570 HD and have my frame rate locked at 31 using DX10 with the "Fixer."  I get that consistently with pretty high settings except in places like Chicago or New York where it can drop to the low 20s.  I know that FSX is more CPU-based that GPU-based but wonder if I would see any real improvement if I went to a GTX780?

[Paul J 349]

Well - I went from the 580 to the 780 five or six weeks ago, and haven't looked back. It sure did make a difference, and sorry, David 4.4-gig is not the same as 5.0-gig - newer architecture or otherwise. FSX was built with "single thread in mind, and only slightly expanded multi-threading in 2007 with SP2.

 

Here's one quick set of pics.. Anacortes is a sod for frame-hogging. This is 8x SGSS.

Another set here.

 

What the 780 seems to do, is allow a 'heavy' flight down even as low as 16 - 18 frames, without loss of smoothness. At the moment I'm locking at 21 frames, with Inspector set to "1/3 Refresh Rate" and "Standard" for Vsync control, and it just works fine. It is perfectly smooth.

Those pics are here.

[CFIJose 5,485]

I gave up on dx10 because of this. Couldn't get smooth enough performance with clouds in the area with 8xsgss. Wherever I pan the camera towards any clouds, stutters ensue. The only thing that eliminates it is reducing to 2xsgss, which for me is a no go, too shimmery.

 

 

BTW Paul, sorry but the fix that you provided I thought fixed the stutters turned out unsuccessful. I still commend you for the consideration and help!

 

To answer your question Jose, no, the GTX780 still isn't enough. Check my pc specs.

Thanks for sharing. I guess I'll have to compromise some quality for better fps. It's not a deal breaker for me. Have you tried BP=40000 with water set to low or medium? The water setting has a dramatic impact on smoothness. I'm not sure if BP=0 works in dx10 preview.

Well - I went from the 580 to the 780 five or six weeks ago, and haven't looked back. It sure did make a difference, and sorry, David 4.4-gig is not the same as 5.0-gig - newer architecture or otherwise. FSX was built with "single thread in mind, and only slightly expanded multi-threading in 2007 with SP2.

 

Here's one quick set of pics.. Anacortes is a sod for frame-hogging. This is 8x SGSS.

Another set here.

 

What the 780 seems to do, is allow a 'heavy' flight down even as low as 16 - 18 frames, without loss of smoothness. At the moment I'm locking at 21 frames, with Inspector set to "1/3 Refresh Rate" and "Standard" for Vsync control, and it just works fine. It is perfectly smooth.

Those pics are here.

Paul,

 

How does your sim look and perform with other AA setting like 32x & 4SGSS? It looks great on my system but I do loose fps in clouds.

[Paul J 349]

Hi Jose: Almost one year ago - I did around six hundred circuits in downtown Vancouver+ (Jon Patch and Holger Sandemann) working to get a solid 30 frames in DX10, and BP was absolutely central to getting and holding that. I went from BP=0 in DX9 to BP=1, buffersize of 10meg, and an rt of 512 k. I screenshot and hundreds of pics, many of them at about 2 - 3 secs apart, to show no dipping in those settings, and published them on the DX10 Discussions forum here. These are not those shots, but for all intents and purposes, they will do, being pretty much identical. When I started the testing, it dipped as low as 14 - 17, basically all over the place, but improved, with the fluctuations lessening as TBM, FFTF, and other settings were slowly moved up or played with. It took a long time, but the ability to drive the 172 south, across the river and up Cambie street at 100kts and at ground level, 25 set for road traffic with dead solid 29.9fps in the top-left corner was euphoric.

Have you tried BP=40000 with water set to low or medium? You mean a buffer size of 5KB??
The default buffer is 8MB - I found 10 MB to be a slightly better size, with an RT of .5MB.

other AA setting like 32x & 4SGSS? No, no.. I don't bother with sizes that I know my machine cannot handle or I can't see. 4x SGSS is more than enough to stop all the shimmering I need, so 8x CSAA set in the Fixer is where she sits right now, Jose. KSEA and other areas and airports can make mincemeat of high or extreme cfg settings: much better to be conservative with all settings, including processes stopped, and only the airports, sceneries and "trusted" loaded that I need for my regular flying. i.e no Africa, no East Asia, no EU-Popham, no Couatl or Addon Manager, etc., I can't get too hung up on unrealistic settings and expectations, for what is, after all at least a six-year old game, with six year-old code! Given some modest and dilligent setup work, DX10 can look and perform very much better than DX9 does, and provided one can get around "this one issue that keeps me back" then one can get tremendous satisfaction from the many pleasurable benefits that the "New "Sim" gives!

[CFIJose 5,485]

Thank you my friend. I will use conservative settings until I upgrade my card.

 

JOSE

[ricka47 611]

Well - I went from the 580 to the 780 five or six weeks ago, and haven't looked back. It sure did make a difference, and sorry, David 4.4-gig is not the same as 5.0-gig - newer architecture or otherwise. FSX was built with "single thread in mind, and only slightly expanded multi-threading in 2007 with SP2.

 

Here's one quick set of pics.. Anacortes is a sod for frame-hogging. This is 8x SGSS.

Another set here.

 

What the 780 seems to do, is allow a 'heavy' flight down even as low as 16 - 18 frames, without loss of smoothness. At the moment I'm locking at 21 frames, with Inspector set to "1/3 Refresh Rate" and "Standard" for Vsync control, and it just works fine. It is perfectly smooth.

Those pics are here.

 

Very nice pictures.  Thanks for sharing!  Locked at 21 huh?  I'm still waiting for the 780 to drop in price just a little.

[Paul J 349]

 

 

I'm still waiting for the 780 to drop in price just a little.

 

:LMAO:

[alainneedle1 97]

Thank you my friend. I will use conservative settings until I upgrade my card.

 

JOSE

 

Here Jose,

 

This is a vid I made some time ago (way before Steve's fixes), with a GTX480, beside the popping buildings (load at 9.5) this is as smooth as it can be with a lots of clouds with visibility at unlimited...no problems with FPS, bloom enable and more.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvXzJ8ZYGqw

[tf51d 284]

 

 

Have you tried BP=40000 with water set to low or medium? You mean a buffer size of 5KB??
The default buffer is 8MB - I found 10 MB to be a slightly better size, with an RT of .5MB.

 

Are you sure about this default value? I remember FSX RTM having a default of 4MB, but I recall reading something from Phil Taylor stating it was cut to 1mb after SP2?

[Paul J 349]

Nooooo: Can't cut it back, Tom!!!  RTM was 1MB and was moved to 4MB with SP1, then 8 with SP2. Absolutely sure, Tom.

 

Quote from Raf:-

 

 

 

In RTM, the default setting was 1MB (1000000).  The lower this number, the more pools the allocator will have to rummage through to find space for buffers and the more stutters you may have.  In Sp1, we raised the default to 4MB (4000000) and optimized the underlying algorithm for finding free buffers

So be careful here, making this smaller can hurt you, since searching for space takes time and can cause stutters, and making the number too large can waste space. 4-10m is probably the range to be thinking about using unless you have a very high memory graphics card (  >512 ).

 

With Sp2, the default size was moved to 8MB. The limiting factor is GPU memory allocation - the larger each buffer is - the more memory that is used.

 

I have to root around a bit, but I'll find it: that figure has been quoted by Phil and other ACES members in a number of places - and also by folks like NickN. and Bojote. 

[CFIJose 5,485]

Here Jose,

 

This is a vid I made some time ago (way before Steve's fixes), with a GTX480, beside the popping buildings (load at 9.5) this is as smooth as it can be with a lots of clouds with visibility at unlimited...no problems with FPS, bloom enable and more.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvXzJ8ZYGqw

Thanks.

 

I'm using a very different location than you are to test the effects on cloud. At dusk with 3d lighting enabled. I also have more clouds and I'm actually panning in the vc.

 

Overall the sim is smooth, but when I pan inside the VC is when it feels sluggish.

[tf51d 284]

Nooooo: Can't cut it back, Tom!!!  RTM was 1MB and was moved to 4MB with SP1, then 8 with SP2. Absolutely sure, Tom.

 

Quote from Raf:-

 

 

 

 

With Sp2, the default size was moved to 8MB. The limiting factor is GPU memory allocation - the larger each buffer is - the more memory that is used.

 

I have to root around a bit, but I'll find it: that figure has been quoted by Phil and other ACES members in a number of places - and also by folks like NickN. and Bojote. 

Your right I had it backwards!!!

[Paul J 349]

's ok! I've been backwards half me life! My first model aircraft was the old Walrus, and that had an engine that was stuck on backwards - so we're in good company! :lol: