LOL I was thinking about asking that, but thought it might be a breech of the NDA because then it would clearly show the technical aspects of v2.0 for that PC running P3D.

 

Waiting...

 

I don't think it would make a difference really. The way Prepar3D 2.0 looks and performs on a system has already been shown with those screenshots. I can't see an FSX screenshot breeching the NDA.  :Cuppa:

Awesome screenshots, Mike! I only have to say (why do I always find something negative to say...? :rolleyes: ) that the shadows on the water on that second shot, look really odd...! Apparently the shadows don't work together with the waves? Those shadows should be dancing on the water but they look as if the are on concrete! Other than that, I think it looks awesome.

 

Can't we skip Sunday somehow...?!?!

 

BTW How is the P3D 2.0 installer for the A2A C172 coming along...? B) ^_^

So, are all four screenshots above from P3Dv2? If so, what is the framerate comparison with FSX using the same settings? I "only" have a 1GB GeForce GTX 560Ti graphics card, but I would be surprised if this did not give me a significant performance improvement in P3D when compared to FSX. You guys may not rate the card these days, but it has enough power to make a big difference if it can finally be used!

Chris, you're one generation up from me. My current sim machine has a GTX550Ti card. I may wind up swapping my dev machine in my office with the sim machine in my sound/sim studio, since it has dual Radeon 7770s in SLI configuration.

Are you on the P3Dv2 beta team, Bill? Don't worry, I am not going to ask you how well it runs on that 550Ti powered system, since I suspect that you will not be able to give me an answer until Monday :smile:

No I am not. I had considered it briefly, but ultimately determined that I simply would not have the free time available to do any form of competent testing.

 

I'm just not one to take on a pretended role of "beta tester" simply to have an earlier peek at the new program. ^_^

I don't think it would make a difference really. The way Prepar3D 2.0 looks and performs on a system has already been shown with those screenshots. I can't see an FSX screenshot breeching the NDA.  :Cuppa:

 

I don't know if he'll take the time to or not but I had pretty great performance usually in FSX and noway would I have 52 FPS in FSX looking at downtown NY, especially with water on 2.0high, which he has in that last shot (reflections show this). Most would be in single digits or the teens. With water 2.0low, I'd probably be around 30 or so. 

 

His last shot illustrates pretty well the difference between FSX vs. P3Dv2 setup to look like FSX. If anyone is getting 52FPS in FSX in that situation (no matter what your hardware is) with water on 2.0high/max I'd love to see a screenshot of it.

 

Not to mention that P3Dv2 shot is without tweaks. To even approach that kind of performance in FSX you'd have to be running BP=0 and a slew of other tweaks.

Not to mention that P3Dv2 shot is without tweaks. To even approach that kind of performance in FSX you'd have to be running BP=0 and a slew of other tweaks.

 

But Prepar3D 2.0 is not meant to be tweaked. None of the FSX tweaks work, so you can't do anything to increase performance except for tuning down the graphics.

As an aside, the way the terrain and buildings respond to lighting is just great compared to FSX, where night was just awful.

But Prepar3D 2.0 is not meant to be tweaked. None of the FSX tweaks work, so you can't do anything to increase performance except for tuning down the graphics.

 

Wasn't that my point? That's a good thing. That P3Dv2 shot with no tweaks far outpaces anything I've seen from FSX fully tweaked out. 

Like I said, if anyone is getting 52 FPS in FSX with max settings in that situation in NYC (he has P3D setup in that shot to look like FSX on max) I'd love to see a screenshot of it.

 

But I bet anything people will uncover some tweaks in P3Dv2 down the line.

Here's FSX for comparison. Mostly maxed settings, increased LOD via cfg, and some tweaks like bufferpools=0 (don't remember other). I've got roughly 40 fps at these settings in DX10, but that's without ground scenery shadows . With shadows from the scenery enabled, I'm in low twenties and the screen looks exactly the same, since the shadows are visible only on the ground texture. 

 

 

 

Even at the same location it's hard to compare things. The autogen distribution is different (thanks to FTX Global) and there's less autogen visible on this particular shot, so FSX has less things to draw. You can see that in P3D there's more autogen in the far distance. 

Thanks for taking the time...

 

I know it's not the RTM version and it's not my PC. So, it's impossible to translate the numbers to anything meaningful.

 

Time will tell.

All this comparison talk is useless in my opinion. P3D has not processed scenery and autogen since 2 or 3 versions ago, yet people hell bent on finding a smoking gun continue to use mirror settings and find discrepancies. In 1.4, fsx did not inject the same amount of autogen and scenery textures as P3D even though the settings had the same name. The same would be evident for 2.0 so my guess is, with an unreleased product, the only valid comparison is customer satisfaction.

 

Sent from my Mobile thing

 

 

This thread demonstrates why I'll be glad when this thing gets released tomorrow, ending a lot of pretty meaningless performance speculation. I am currently still in need of persuasion that this is the right move. Recently invested in an overclocked version of the GTX 770 with 4GB on board, so I am technically more than ready. My previous dabble in P3D 1.4 ended in frustration at all the messing around you have to do, plus certain expensive software, 777 included of course, just won't install. The eye candy is impressive, but just how compatible is old stuff going to be? We'll know soon enough now, but I am a supremely happy FSX DX10 camper and very wary of the merits of anything with potentially much less universal compatibility. A wait, watch and listen strategy being deployed here.

TBH the FSX pic looks better....especially the water (REX?)

Might as well post screenies here for a bit until the new sim smell wears off..