How is it?

[Guest]

Concerning SLI/Crossfire: I don't have it and never had experience with it but I wanted to say that officially it indeed isn't supported by the sim but I did accidentally read on the LM forum yesterday that it wouldn't hurt to give it a try anyway. Apparently they did some work on it already but not enough to officially support it. So if things don't work out, disable SLI again (or whatever you have to do) and maybe report it on the LM forum. But it could well be that it does somehow work! So those who DO see a difference with SLI/Crossfire aren't necessarily delusional.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

Concerning SLI/Crossfire: I don't have it and never had experience with it but I wanted to say that officially it indeed isn't supported by the sim but I did accidentally read on the LM forum yesterday that it wouldn't hurt to give it a try anyway.

 

 

Again, there have been some recent threads showing that SLI does give a small performance boost in both FSX and P3d 1.4. I used to run both with two GTX 580 cards in SLI and it definitely improved performance over a single GTX 580. That is really not the issue, though. The issue is whether running two previous generation cards in SLI is as cost effective as running one equivalent present generation card. It isn't. Or whether running two present generation cards in SLI gives you a substantial performance increase over one identical card. It doesn't. 

 

That's because none of the flight sims is optimized  for SLI. Then you also have to factor in the power demands of running two video cards vs running one. You might need to buy a new PSU to accommodate the power demands.

 

Basically, until LM says P3d2 is optimized for SLI, you are probably throwing your money away on buying a second video card.

[coryb13 102]

Hey Cory are you able to comment on the VAS usage with those addons? Ill be disgusted if its higher than 3GB.

 

Sorry for taking so long to get back. I haven't had a chance to check, but I've heard form other's it's better. I loaded up at FSDT KLAX with the Airbus X Extended and had 25-30 fps in all views on nearly maxed out settings.

 

Also did a flight from KORD to KMCO, and I took a few shots. Enjoy!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also did a quick test with clouds the day before, and got this great shot of the difference volumetric clouds make.

 

[Brian Doney 127]

...the difference volumetric clouds make...

 

 

Absolutely, that's a great shot  :smile:

[Nazze78 0]

 

Sorry for taking so long to get back. I haven't had a chance to check, but I've heard form other's it's better. I loaded up at FSDT KLAX with the Airbus X Extended and had 25-30 fps in all views on nearly maxed out settings.

 

Also did a flight from KORD to KMCO, and I took a few shots. Enjoy!

 

 

 

Also did a quick test with clouds the day before, and got this great shot of the difference volumetric clouds make.

 

 

 

Hey!

Nice pics.

Is that with ftx global?

 

For me autogen looks like this:

 

:blink: :wacko:

[coryb13 102]

Hey!

Nice pics.

Is that with ftx global?

 

For me autogen looks like this:

EDDL_P3dpng.png

:blink: :wacko:

 

Yes, it is FTX Global.

[NGXfanatic 85]

A very well-balanced advanced look on what to expect from P3d v2:

Sascha

Thanks for sharing this video.  This is exactly what I was looking for, a concise explanation of what v2.0 offers in the way of improvements to FSX and if the platform change is worth the effort.  Froogle has a way with words, and he pretty much answered all my questions!

 

After building a new system and reinstalling FSX from scratch a mere few weeks ago, and because I only fly PMDG aircraft exclusively, I'm going to wait a few months until the initial kinks get worked out and PMDG rolls out it's P3D products.   I a little apprehensive about the costs of upgrading from FSX to P3D, so I want to be sure the benefits really outweigh the costs, both monetary and intangible.   I'll tell you what, I am glad I chose the 780GTX vs the 770GTX, as it looks like P3D is going to squeeze every bit of power it can from the GPU.   I also hope the much hyped Active Sky Next will work on v2.0.

[sascha 314]

 

 

I also hope the much hyped Active Sky Next will work on v2.0.

 

Well they announced a separate P3D version, so I'm sure they will get it working for v2.0 by the time you enter the market!

 

Sascha

[bjratchf 80]

Good grief guys!  Spend 10 bucks and try it for a month.  If it works then spend the money, if not then you are only out 10 bucks!  Me personally, I could care less about the shadows, they will be shut off! I want low visibilty and fog that doesn't pop in and out!!! I want clouds that act like clouds when you fly through them. Don't care about the scenery either.  Just give me accurate weather and it's affects on my plane.   To each their own right!?   I have to agree with an earlier post on the PC requirements. I have I5-2500K oc to 4.6G  660ti veideo and 8G of ram.  I can run FSX on mulltiple monitors flying NDX with undocked displays at a smooth 25-30fps.

 

Applause! It's very rare that I find another user that looks for the same "training experience" I do- while shadows add to ambiance and realistic look, I find that the volumetric fog (and lack of cloud pops as you fly through them) is what really pushes this sim forward in the realm of IFR simulation. I wish ORBX would get on board with that philosophy too, as their FTX Global, while pretty, ruins the IFR experience.

[Guest]

 

 

ruins the IFR experience

 

In what regard does it ruin the IFR experience?

[bjratchf 80]

In what regard does it ruin the IFR experience?

Visibility obscurations aren't compatible with the new vector lights engine (as acknowledged by the orbx team)- you'll still see the lights displayed through the fog, due to the way they are rendered (UTX lights are more performance eating, but do not display this problem).

[Guest]

Visibility obscurations aren't compatible with the new vector lights engine (as acknowledged by the orbx team)- you'll still see the lights displayed through the fog, due to the way they are rendered (UTX lights are more performance eating, but do not display this problem).

 

Thanks, didn't know that. That's a bummer indeed.

[Tom Allensworth 1,532]

Guys, this isn't the screen shot forum. One or two example shots are okay, but posting any more than that should be put in the SS forum. Thanks for cooperating.

[styckx 1,872]

Welp.. I'm processing my refund as we speak..    I'm having flashbacks of FSX..   

 

crashy menus

mouse clicks that start out unlocked in the beginning of a flight, then mysteriously return locked mid-flight

non rendering auto-gen

Questionable VAS usage in default scenery

A bevy of other issues I tried to ignore.. You only need to read the forums to see the mess this is

 

What worked, worked well, just unfortunately too much didn't work well. I just didn't trust this sim.  I didn't trust FSX either and that's what I'm being reminded of.. Could be fine one day and the next day you find yourself tweaking for 8hrs because suddenly FSX relized you were possibily having a good time and created another problem that didn't exist the day before. 1.4 was completely incompatible with Windows 8 and ran better.. More importantly I trusted it...  

[Guest]

Welp.. I'm processing my refund as we speak.. I'm having flashbacks of FSX..

 

Well, I suppose it's too late now but why the heck did you ask for a refund now...??? You can use the software for 60 days! That's two months! The program has been released 4 days ago. LM seems very open for all reports and suggestions so there is a big chance that a lot problems will be solved within that two months. Heck, a lot of problems have been 'solved' already (or better said: there are a lot of workarounds for most problems already).

 

Anyway, I would suggest everyone who is thinking about a refund, to take care off that on day 59 of your totally free trial period. No real use in doing it now, also because that means you won't be able to participate in the further development of the program and to help find solutions for the current problems.

 

^_^