Any card that supports shader 3 should work with DX11.

 

That depends on how Lockheed Martin chose to handle older cards. DirectX 11 has feature levels that run from 11.1, 11.0, 10.1, 10.0, 9.3, 9.2, to 9.1 reflecting earlier versions of DirectX.  

 

An application attempts to create a device for the feature level wanted. If that's successful then that feature level exists, if not, the card doesn't support it. The application can either try to recreate a device at a lower feature level (provided it's coded for that) or can simply exit..

Sorry, but new software requires new hardware to run it properly!

 

The question is not if you can run 2.0 with a DX9 GPU but if it makes any sense! An old GPU (most likely together with a old CPU) can hardly run FSX well and will certainly fail to provide a reasonable performance in P3D 2.0.

 

In the LM forum it was stated clearly that they have shifted a lot of calculations from the CPU to the GPU. Thus 2.0 will require a more powerful GPU then FSX does. And this does not only relate to the GPU itself but also to the RAM available on the card. So I doubt that it is reasonable to expect P3D 2.0 to run well with 5 year old hardware.

 

At least this is what I hope! I hope that 2.0 will bring the Titan to melt and has enough potential to stress the next generation of GPU (maybe even in SLI/Crossfire from 2.x on) so that we will continue to see as much eye candy as the most current hardware can buy ...

 

I am afraid, however, that we will see a lot of users complaining after the release because of bad frame rates. A look into their hardware will reveal why!

 

 

I am afraid, however, that we will see a lot of users complaining after the release because of bad frame rates. A look into their hardware will reveal why!

 

I agree, I don't know what it is about many (not all) Flight Simmers (or gamers), but they seem to think you get something for nothing -- IMHO, I think this expectation stems from consoles where you have a "set" level of hardware and the game (for the most part) will just work.

 

Take a look at CoD Ghosts in DX11, the details are simply amazing (on a PC) ... so long as you have a very powerful computer to turn up all the graphical settings.  Now, I'm not a 3D shooter person any more (gave that up many years ago), but I do like to "enjoy" the technology behind those DX11 3D Shooters.  Ghosts on my PS3 (which I use for NetFlix and it's wonderful BD player) looks just "ok" ... but Ghosts on my PC is clearly a massive visual improvement (the lighting, the facial details, the hair on the dog, the shadows, object details, etc. etc.) ... it's a great demonstration of DX11 ... IF you have a powerful PC.

 

But if the expectation of many is that P3D V2.0 (DX11) will magically make a low to mid end computer suddenly work well with all the graphical details turned up, they are going to be disappointed.

My thoughts from another thread:

 

I too am hoping that Prepar3d V2.0 will be a big step forward in simulation. I am afraid that many folks may be in for a let down if they expect that their older computers or cheaper video cards are going to all of a sudden become super computers. Yes, Hopefully better written and modern code should help many to enjoy the hobby more. It is important for all of us to realize that V2.0 very well may not only be an update. It very well may mean that this is where we stop "playing a game of flying" and start using a "Flight Simulator" in our homes. That change in thinking is going to be very important. I like most of you don't have a clue how this is all going to work out. I do know for sure Microsoft has built a huge money making machine that is designed to get all of "little Johnny's" lunch money for silly games. On the other hand, LM is a Defense Contractor who is active through out the world. I can assure you that although they have offered to sort of take us alone for the ride, which may turn out to be great, they will be playing by "grown up rules" and simply will not ever care if your 10 year old computer will keep up or not. You guys can make as many so called "petitions" as you want and it will mean nothing to them. Most of us deal in thousands of dollars and LM deals in Trillions.

 

If you decide to go the Prepare3d route, I think that it is important that you just kind of change your mind set a little and it will be a great thing. If you are going to the local hobby shop to buy a model car then you approach that a lot different than going down to the Ford dealer and buying a new full size truck.

 

So...FSX = flying game and Prepar3d = Simulator.

Take a look at CoD Ghosts in DX11

 

 

Battlefield 4 on the PC is also most impressive. The water effects are literally real enough to make one seasick. It's probably too much to expect that LM will create a virtual world that rivals either COD Ghosts or BF4, but at least P3d 2.0 will get mainstream flight simming back to the norm (DX11) for computer graphics.

Battlefield 4 on the PC is also most impressive. The water effects are literally real enough to make one seasick. It's probably too much to expect that LM will create a virtual world that rivals either COD Ghosts or BF4, but at least P3d 2.0 will get mainstream flight simming back to the norm (DX11) for computer graphics.

 

But Prepar3D 2.0 is not meant for mainstream flight-simming. Lockheed Martin have made that perfectly clear.

 

 

But Prepar3D 2.0 is not meant for mainstream flight-simming. Lockheed Martin have made that perfectly clear.

 

1.  P3D IS being sold and is listed as a "Product"

2.  P3D versions are "Professional", "Student", and "Developer"

 

Someone would have to really go out of there way NOT to qualify for any one of those three.

 

If you work, you're can call yourself a "Professional" (could be a professional toilet clearner, burger flipper, doesn't really matter).  If you're going to any school or taking any training courses (in anything), then you're "Student".  If you want to produce content for P3D (say like PMDG, Aerosoft, JustFlight, MSE, etc. etc.) then your a "Developer" ... technically if you just add a building in a BGL (using Instant Scenery Designer) and put it in your Scenery folder then your a "Developer".

 

Since just about everyone on the planet could "qualify" for any of those, it's hard to imagine that as not "mainstream"?  If you can buy the software and install it on a PC then you are mainstream.  If your talking about PMDG's statements on the issue then I think you are being pushed away from P3D for a reason beyond the EULA ... read between the lines what you will.

 

But I think this has been debated over so so so so many times it really does NO good to keep bring up the P3D EULA unless you just want to see the thread get locked.

 

I'm very glad LM are selling their product to the mainstream and moving it to DX11.  This is a good thing for flight simmers in the mainstream

I thought  discussion of licences was now prohibited but you brought up EULAs

 

The point that the previous poster brought up was that Lockheed Martin's main stream market is not flight simulator enthusiasts but its training and simulation requirements. That's nothing to do with EULAs.

1.  P3D IS being sold and is listed as a "Product"

2.  P3D versions are "Professional", "Student", and "Developer"

 

Someone would have to really go out of there way NOT to qualify for any one of those three.

 

If you work, you're can call yourself a "Professional" (could be a professional toilet clearner, burger flipper, doesn't really matter).  If you're going to any school or taking any training courses (in anything), then you're "Student".  If you want to produce content for P3D (say like PMDG, Aerosoft, JustFlight, MSE, etc. etc.) then your a "Developer" ... technically if you just add a building in a BGL (using Instant Scenery Designer) and put it in your Scenery folder then your a "Developer".

 

Since just about everyone on the planet could "qualify" for any of those, it's hard to imagine that as not "mainstream"?  If you can buy the software and install it on a PC then you are mainstream.  If your talking about PMDG's statements on the issue then I think you are being pushed away from P3D for a reason beyond the EULA ... read between the lines what you will.

 

But I think this has been debated over so so so so many times it really does NO good to keep bring up the P3D EULA unless you just want to see the thread get locked.

 

I'm very glad LM are selling their product to the mainstream and moving it to DX11.  This is a good thing for flight simmers in the mainstream

 

Firstly, I didn't bring up the EULA, you did. Secondly, I never said that there are people who are not allowed to purchase Prepar3D because everyone can. What I meant is that Prepar3D is not mainstream in the way jabloomf1230 described it (like Call of Duty: Ghosts and Battlefield 4). It's meant for those who are serious with flight simulation or want to train. You mention that Lockheed Martin are selling it to the mainstream, but will you ever see it as a boxed copy in stores? No. It's not a game. It's a simulation platform, and I'm glad it's this way because when you try to cater to the mainstream, something like Microsoft Flight happens.

...when you try to cater to the mainstream, something like Microsoft Flight happens.

But Flight Simulator 1 - 10 also happened!

But Prepar3D 2.0 is not meant for mainstream flight-simming. Lockheed Martin have made that perfectly clear.

 

I don't think mainstream flight-simming exists so it's kind of a pointless distinction. 

 

Unless we are going to call console shoot-em-ups flight sims.

I don't think mainstream flight-simming exists so it's kind of a pointless distinction.

I suggest it isn't to Lockheed Martin who needs to knows "which side its bread's buttered"  to coin a phrase.

 

 

It's meant for those who are serious with flight simulation or want to train.

 

There is no way you can make that determination.  It's available for anyone that wants to buy it.

 

 

 

Firstly, I didn't bring up the EULA, you did.

 

My apologies, but your "mainstream" statement sounded very "EULA like" in it's indirection.  If that's wasn't your intention then I'm sorry.

There is no way you can make that determination.  It's available for anyone that wants to buy it.

 

http://www.prepar3d.com/product-overview/prepar3d-license-comparison/

 

While it is available for anyone who wants to buy it, personal entertainment is not supported. It will never be in the same league with a game like Battlefield 4.

http://www.prepar3d.com/product-overview/prepar3d-license-comparison/

 

While it is available for anyone who wants to buy it, personal entertainment is not supported. It will never be in the same league with a game like Battlefield 4.

 

    I was told that the bible says personal entertainment is not supported but it goes on anyway..

 

    It's the wrong genre, flight simulation will never have the same audience as those massive shooters no matter what the platform or whom they are selling to.