Nope.

 

At the same time, I am not attempting, would not care to, and won't be bothered to prove anything to you in the first place.

 

The only participant in this conversation, that has no idea what they are talking about, is you. 

 

it is one thing to ask, another thing entirely to argue, when you haven't a clue to begin with.

 

You have been answered, multiple times, by multiple people. 

And he's the only one who has done such thorough testing with proof (screenshots). Of course, I'm more inclined to believe him right now.

 

ChaoticBeauty,

 

Can I ask if you have installed P3D2? And if so, how do you find it?

While I have gone back to FSX I would absolutely kill to have P3Dv2's autogen system..  It was easily the biggest highlight for me.. 

Play nice guys.

Play nice guys.

 

My apologies Tom.

 

Probably just time to take a break from the forums for a few days and spend some time enjoying the new sim.

 

My patience is just gone, so I will self-moderate.

And he's the only one who has done such thorough testing with proof (screenshots). Of course, I'm more inclined to believe him right now.

As much as I respect Word Not Allowed, his knowledge and contributions to the hobby, in this instance I believe his testing methodology is flawed. He is using a GPU whose VRAM size is barely at, (if not below) the minimum required to run P3DV2 reliably at high graphics settings. When the GPU's VRAM in use goes to 100%, it has an immediate adverse impact on CPU performance and VAS size in P3DV2. I have proven this to my own satisfaction using my own 2GB GTX660 while monitoring GPU, CPU, VRAM and VAS, while trying different graphics settings.

 

I think in another post on his blog, Word Not Allowed said he has, or is about to, acquire a higher performance GPU - I think he mentioned a 780 - I would be interested in seeing him repeat his autogen test using a card with 3 or 4 GB VRAM.

To what end ? 

 

I'm not interested in proving Word Not Allowed wrong/right/otherwise, it would honestly, for me anyway, be a waste of time that could be better spent enjoying the features that I am apparently imagining exist.

 

From the learning center:

 

 

Regardless of what Word Not Allowed or anyone else has to say, this bears out for me in my experience with P3D2.

 

I can't even imagine the FPS hit the NY area would take, in FSX, if we attempted to draw as many objects as are drawn in P3D2 at full right sliders. I literally LOLd when I saw it the first time myself. 

 

You act like none of use have any experience with previous versions of the sim. As if none of us have a frame of reference. I most certainly do, and I have no agenda to promote anything either way. P3D2 is much, much better, period. Take it, leave it, believe whatever/whomever you want.

 

My experience to date has been a more fluid and pleasant ride in P3D2 than in FSX. Whilst I admire what Word Not Allowed has given to the community, I cannot help but notice that sometimes he misses the wider picture and can be too pedantic in his approach. He is and always has been a frame chaser  (  :p0502: ) and I think this attitude, (whilst it has a place), can be quite misleading at times - often distracting others view of what one can do or achieve by looking at "the wider picture".

 

Maybe he just needs to bring P3D2 back into focus as the running app to get those frame rates back  :lol:  :lol:

 

Did you see Word Not Allowed's comparisons? The autogen system is horrible compared to FSX.

 

 

Do you actually own P3D 2.0? Have you seen the autogen for yourself?

 

The topic of this thread is "how is it" not "how I think it is..."

My experience to date has been a more fluid and pleasant ride in P3D2 than in FSX. Whilst I admire what Word Not Allowed has given to the community, I cannot help but notice that sometimes he misses the wider picture and can be too pedantic in his approach. He is and always has been a frame chaser  (  :p0502: ) and I think this attitude, (whilst it has a place), can be quite misleading at times - often distracting others view of what one can do or achieve by looking at "the wider picture".

 

Maybe he just needs to bring P3D2 back into focus as the running app to get those frame rates back  :lol:  :lol:

Sorry but he's doing an apples to apples comparison on his system. While I'm sure on stronger systems with a GTX780 or Titan, P3D2 results may and probably will be better, but for his system and others with even less horsepower like mine, they're not. In that respect his findings are very informative. It tells me I don't stand a chance at running P3D v2 on my system without reducing settings, way below what I have in FSX now with my system. I was hoping I would at least be able to get what I got in FSX with similar settings. This saves me even additional money as to move to P3D V2 I would also have to upgrade my OS to Win 7 from Vista. Something I've been trying to avoid, because I don't feel like doing a complete reinstall of all my software. With UAC off, I don't have any issues with Vista, that many others seem to have, and FSX performs relatively well for my configuration. So up til now, I had no real incentive to upgrade. P3D would have given me that incentive. Now with this information and other similar posts, it looks like moving to P3D V2 is too much of a risk for me. Someday when I can upgrade my system again, I'll take another look, but for right now it looks like I'll be on FSX for the time being.

Did you see Word Not Allowed's comparisons? The autogen system is horrible compared to FSX.

 

Yes, I read Word Not Allowed's opinion ... his testing methodology isn't sufficient to support his conclusion.  There is missing key information that wasn't posted regarding his FSX.CFG and the Prepar3D.CFG.  He's also using FTX on both even when Orbx have admitted there is a problem with FTX v1.1 for P3Dv2.  Word Not Allowed also states that P3Dv2 does indeed show more AutoGen (I agree based on his screenshots of a specific area).  

 

His hardware is simply not up to the task and hence why he's not seeing the performance gains (I think many are finding this out and immediately call P3Dv2 a terrible product which is unfair to LM), but with that aside, just too many other variables to support his conclusions regarding AutoGen.

 

LM have moved much of the CPU intensive process over to the GPU, implications are obvious, the GPU is doing a lot more work now so the older GPU's (like Word Not Allowed's 580) are showing their age.  So all those years of people optimizing their system for CPU are now finding the need a really good GPU also.  If v2.1 utilizes multiple GPUs then we'll all be in a better place in terms of fps ... it's a lot cheaper and much less hassle to just add GPUs than it is to add CPU/Motherboard/RAM every time one wants to see an fps improvement. 

 

Partial list from LM's documentation:

 

 

Sorry but he's doing an apples to apples comparison on his system. While I'm sure on stronger systems with a GTX780 or Titan, P3D2 results may and probably will be better, but for his system and others with even less horsepower like mine, they're not. In that respect his findings are very informative. It tells me I don't stand a chance at running P3D v2 on my system without reducing settings, way below what I have in FSX now with my system. I was hoping I would at least be able to get what I got in FSX with similar settings. This saves me even additional money as to move to P3D V2 I would also have to upgrade my OS to Win 7 from Vista. Something I've been trying to avoid, because I don't feel like doing a complete reinstall of all my software. With UAC off, I don't have any issues with Vista, that many others seem to have, and FSX performs relatively well for my configuration. So up til now, I had no real incentive to upgrade. P3D would have given me that incentive. Now with this information and other similar posts, it looks like moving to P3D V2 is too much of a risk for me. Someday when I can upgrade my system again, I'll take another look, but for right now it looks like I'll be on FSX for the time being.

 

This is exactly what he's talking about when he says Word Not Allowed's findings are misleading.

 

The autogen system simply doesn't react in such a linear matter as performance compresses on the bottom end of the scale. I've got a lowly (in terms of P3D) GTX 570 and I'm running autogen just fine in heavy load situations with good FPS. 

 

The upper frame rate possible in P3D with max autogen may be lower then FSX, but that doesn't translate to how it reacts toward 30 or so FPS and heavier settings. This is what some of us are pointing out. 

 

 

 

 

Now with this information and other similar posts, it looks like moving to P3D V2 is too much of a risk for me.

 

I'm not sure why it's a risk?  You can try it out for $9.95/mo and make your own decision and not rely on others (it's pretty rare two human beings have the exact same opinions or expectations), it's easy to cancel the developer subscription.

 

I can understand the financial decisions to add a $600-$1000 GPU is not an easy one ... but the reality is that as 3D simulations continue to evolve over time they will continue to require more CPU/GPU processing power ... this is never going to change regardless of "active" platform.  There is no magical software only process (aka code and using DX11, DX12 ... DX16) that will make this any different.  Think about it, the software is emulating a living planet ... the closer one gets to reality the more the environment needs to be emulated (shadows, and non-popping 3D objects).

Why is Word Not Allowed using an affinity mask setting when v2 already automatically keeps core 0 free?

 

Makes zero sense.

 

 

.. but the reality is that as 3D simulations continue to evolve over time they will continue to require more CPU/GPU processing power .

 

Be alright with me if you just keep developing it then let us know when its been perfected. BTW I trust Word Not Allowed's sim opinions far more than yours. It's just a personal thing I reckon. No offense.

I can understand the financial decisions to add a $600-$1000 GPU is not an easy one

 

 

Although this statement is true, purchasing the flagship video card is really the only way that you can run a 3D app like P3d2 with either most or all of the eye candy enabled. I've spent the past week tinkering with the various P3d2 display settings and I have become resigned to the fact that I can get 30 fps and reasonably decent image quality with P3d2. I can also max out many of the sliders and stumble along at 10-12 fps. There is no tweak or "magic bullet" that is going to change that result.

 

The only solution is to upgrade hardware and I am watching the GTX 780 market at the moment, since in addition to the GTX 780 and the GTX 780 TI, there have been announcements of so-called "black editions" of the TI card. These reference versions have either 6 or 12 GB of VRAM and a bigger cooler.While the  GTX 780 Ti runs at 876/928 MHz clocks, the black edition will jump to 1000/1033 MHz:

 

http://videocardz.com/47530/nvidia-geforce-gtx-780-ti-also-special-edition