Heavily populated areas, lots of autogen, SHIFT-Z show framerate, hit V take screenshot, switch to other sim, same thing, post pics.

 

Sounds fairly reasonable.

I'd love to do it for ya, but you'd have to work on your pleases and thank yous first.

I love it when someone asks for this.

 

The same max settings in FSX are absolutely nothing in comparison to the max settings in Prepar3D.  They are not the same levels!

Call me a skeptic. It's a common occurrence in the flight sim community, and I mean all flight sims, combat sims, etc... I'm putting money on the fact that your supposed FPS gains may be more like 10% a little more a little less. But don't appease me, think of all the flight simmers who don't have a forum account but are just stopping by Avsim to peruse this forum. They'll read posts like this and think heck why isn't anyone posting performance gains? Hmm.. Must not be that great...

 

I'm just the messenger for the masses who wanna know.

Call me a skeptic. It's a common occurrence in the flight sim community, and I mean all flight sims, combat sims, etc... I'm putting money on the fact that your supposed FPS gains may be more like 10% a little more a little less. But don't appease me, think of all the flight simmers who don't have a forum account but are just stopping by Avsim to peruse this forum. They'll read posts like this and think heck why isn't anyone posting performance gains? Hmm.. Must not be that great...

 

I'm just the messenger for the masses who wanna know.

 

Why don't you try it  and compare it for yourself. So far it's running great on my system. I believe LM is offering a 30 day refund policy.  B) B) B)

Why don't you try it  and compare it for yourself. So far it's running great on my system. I believe LM is offering a 30 day refund policy.  B) B) B)

 

 

FSX runs great on my system too.  'Great' doesn't mean a thing.

 

 

I believe LM is offering a 30 day refund policy.

 

60 day, actually.

 

 

 

FSX runs great on my system too.  'Great' doesn't mean a thing.

 

1. If you're gonna come down to these forums and demand a comparison, you're not going to get one.

 

2. If you're going to be rude to other members, you're definitely not going to get one.

 

 

 

They'll read posts like this and think heck why isn't anyone posting performance gains?

 

Like someone already mentioned above, there's no sure-fire way to post "performance gains" if both software depict different things at similar graphics settings. There are simply too many variables between the two. I can attempt it, sure, but it won't mean a damn thing because of the way P3D handles it's settings.

Call me a skeptic. It's a common occurrence in the flight sim community, and I mean all flight sims, combat sims, etc... I'm putting money on the fact that your supposed FPS gains may be more like 10% a little more a little less. But don't appease me, think of all the flight simmers who don't have a forum account but are just stopping by Avsim to peruse this forum. They'll read posts like this and think heck why isn't anyone posting performance gains? Hmm.. Must not be that great...

 

I'm just the messenger for the masses who wanna know.

 

Without commenting about the post in general, if people drop by Avsim and don't have an account they will never see this forum or any other forum other than a welcome, please sign up thread. Log out and see what is visible to you from the primary portal.

It is quite simple... you cannot compare.  The sliders are not apples to apples comparison.  As another poster mentioned, it is a totally different rendering engine.

So OK, another rendering engine (I reckon it's better/faster?, supported by the GPU), and turn off settings that are not comparable (autogen, shadows, water, fog, clouds..., leave terrain only), should mean that P3Dv2 should be way faster (=more FPS?) than FSX ever was?

 

Is it?

My fps with P3D v2 , P3D v1.4 and FSX are identically locked at 30.

 

The difference with P3D v2 is that I have 10 times the buildings and trees with zero autogen popping (not exactly true, I can see the autogen being generated way out in the distance if I really look for it.)

 

Many more factor's to come, I just haven't had enough time with v2 yet.

Sounds fairly reasonable.

 

 

It's not.. The two are not the same sim and haven't been for awhile.  Stuff like this is why people run around here and say it performs worse than FSX and claim sort sort of internet trophy for themselves 

 

Take it from a person who hammers out code for Prepar3D

 

http://www.prepar3d.com/forum-5/?mingleforumaction=viewtopic&t=3920

 

My settings are the same as FSX/Prepar3D1.x but…?

Not possible. Our settings and rendering have both been totally overhauled for 2.0. Very few of the sliders still behave as they did in 1.4 and 1.4 was already markedly different than FSX/ESP.

 

FSX and/or Prepar3D 1.4 ran great on my rig. Why doesn’t v2?

Most likely you don’t have a powerful enough GPU to run our new features. We’ve offloaded tons of work to the GPU such as the terrain mesh generation and particle simulation. We’ve also added many new features such as shadows and 3d water that stress the GPU. You will get poor performance on low end GPUs unless the settings are tuned carefully. We’ve optimized for high end hardware because we want Prepar3D to be a viable platform for years to come. Hardware will keep getting better and cheaper.

 

Beau Hollis

Rendering System Lead - Prepar3D® Team

 

 

My fps with P3D v2 , P3D v1.4 and FSX are identically locked at 30.

 

The difference with P3D v2 is that I have 10 times the buildings and trees with zero autogen popping (not exactly true, I can see the autogen being generated way out in the distance if I really look for it.)

 

Many more factor's to come, I just haven't had enough time with v2 yet.

 

Show us?

So OK, another rendering engine (I reckon it's better/faster?, supported by the GPU), and turn off settings that are not comparable (autogen, shadows, water, fog, clouds..., leave terrain only), should mean that P3Dv2 should be way faster (=more FPS?) than FSX ever was?

 

Is it?

 

 Exactly.'

 

The excuses I've seen so far (this is so much better graphically they cannot compare, there's  whole lot more going on you cannot compare, apples and oranges!, etc...) are older than time itself.  It's an old cop-out in the flight simming world.  Whether it be Jane's World War 2 Fighters, Flight Unlimited, or DCS, and now P3D, they are cop-out excuses we've seen played out time and time again.

 

Notice the lack of evidence anywhere on this forum, screenshot versus same screenshot.   The reason is that you are not experiencing significant gains in performance.  It's the old placebo affect.

Did you even read anything posted in here? Stop with this.. No one cares

I can't expect much with my laptop, but all I can say with P3D that's it is ok, not great, not bad. So to each his own. Just stop bashing people how are asking for proof and are not on the same side concerning P3D. Who the hell cares is xyz doesn't like fsx or p3d. I'm keeping both.

 

Sent from my Lumia 900 using Tapatalk