Not a nice thing to say. I bought the professional version, and I have been trying it out for couple of days now. Right now only have some mesh, landclass and FTXG installed, and what I have seen is surprising.

What bonchie has posted before, having 29-31fps in a GA, is not really impressive. I also own KDFW and the CYUL, and I did a test. Airbus X in CYUL gives in one specific situation around 58fps (only things worth mentioning are that scenery and autogen are on full and water is off, and the cursor is off the fsx window). Same situation in P3D2.0 achieves about 36fps. I call that a significant drop and it makes me rethink my purchase. This is why I asked for another opinions and if you tested. I cannot find a situation in which P3D2.0 actually performs better than FSX, except when visuals are below FSX level.

In the end, FPS are not everything, but if you have 15fps instead of 25, then you will certainly notice it.

 

Sorry, but 29-31 FPS at FSDT KDFW, with FTX Global, with 100% AI traffic, and max autogen is plenty impressive.

 

In FSX or P3D those are good results.

 

If I was in the default trike you might have a point. 

 

And I'd love to see an actual screenshot of you sitting at FSDT CYUL in the Airbus X in FSX and getting 58FPS. Please include your settings as well.

 

I had one of the better running FSX setups around and while I had pretty great performance in the Airbus X at FSDT airports, there's noway in hell I was approaching 58 FPS. That doesn't even sound possible unless you are literally running minimum settings with no AI traffic.

 

 

And I'd love to see an actual screenshot of you sitting at FSDT CYUL in the Airbus X in FSX and getting 58FPS. Please include your settings as well.

 

Why a shot? Don't believe me? It's FT, and not FSDT. And the settings have been turned down for comparison reasons. I usually use UTX, but the AI has been turned down to 0, as I don't have it in P3D2. The NI has been set to 8x Multisampling and FXAA on to try to imitate the P3D2 setting. You are missing the point: it's not about 58fps at CYUL but about the difference between the sims, while trying to maintain the same settings and visual appearance.

Why a shot? Don't believe me? It's FT, and not FSDT. And the settings have been turned down for comparison reasons. I usually use UTX, but the AI has been turned down to 0, as I don't have it in P3D2. The NI has been set to 8x Multisampling and FXAA on to try to imitate the P3D2 setting. You are missing the point: it's not about 58fps at CYUL but about the difference between the sims, while trying to maintain the same settings and visual appearance.

 

To be honest, I'm not sure I believe you. 58FPS at CYUL in the Airbus X is fairly unbelievable. 

 

The kind of linear relationship you are trying to establish doesn't exist. Settings simply don't scale the same way nor does each option react the same way when it's turned up or down.

 

For example, AI doesn't provide nearly the performance hit in P3D as it does in FSX. Maybe FSX runs better with zero AI, but who uses zero AI? And if you are using zero AI do you care if you are getting 58 FPS or 36 FPS? It's irrelevant at that point.

 

In my shots I setup what I feel is a normal FSX tube liner pilot's setup. High AI, a lot of autogen, a complex airport, etc. Under those kinds of loads, I'm seeing fairly like performance with the FSX vs. P3D and P3D offers me a bunch of other features on top of what FSX is giving me. I'm also using a bad GPU for P3D to complicate matters. A 570 is right above what the minimum requirements call for.

 

What I haven't tested is VAS usage yet. Until I get an OOM I probably won't bother.

 

 

 

To be honest, I'm not sure I believe you. 58FPS at CYUL in the Airbus X is fairly unbelievable.

 

Well, sorry, but I'm not gonna post a shot, as it would require quite some time to set up again. You're gonna have to take my word on this. Thx.

 

 

 

The kind of linear relationship you are trying to establish doesn't exist. Settings simply don't scale the same way nor does each option react the same way when it's turned up or down.

 

Don't fully agree. While settings are different and how both sims work, still can be compared fairly well. And no one can tell me that 58 to 36 is viable. As I said, turned off any in-fsx-non-existing functions.

 

 

 

AI doesn't provide nearly the performance hit in P3D as it does in FSX.

 

Not using AI in my test for this reason.

 

 

 

It's irrelevant at that point.

 

Not entirely. When you start loading the heavy addons, like we have only two now, P3D2 comes down dropping to its knees, way before FSX even starts to. In both FPS and VAS (just look at other posts, from J van E for instance). What I want to say, it's not about maintaining the 30fps, but having an overhead. If you have no overhead (and FSX has more of that than P3D2 has), the next best thing, like high res clouds, high detailed cockpit or whatnot, is going to give you below those magical 30fps everyone is reporting.

 

Q_flyer, on 01 Dec 2013 - 4:30 PM, said:

as (no offence), I think your mind is 'fixed' on this matter.

 

 
Not a nice thing to say.

 

I can't see what is "not a nice thing to say" about my thinking that you've made your mind up about something.  :smile:

Not entirely. When you start loading the heavy addons, like we have only two now, P3D2 comes down dropping to its knees, way before FSX even starts to. In both FPS and VAS (just look at other posts, from J van E for instance). What I want to say, it's not about maintaining the 30fps, but having an overhead. If you have no overhead (and FSX has more of that than P3D2 has), the next best thing, like high res clouds, high detailed cockpit or whatnot, is going to give you below those magical 30fps everyone is reporting.

 

In your specific test, you may of found that, but such a strict linear relationship doesn't exist. I'm seeing the opposite and posted screenshots to prove it. That was the point I was making about AI. With zero AI does FSX outperform it? Perhaps, I haven't tested it, but perhaps. With heavy AI does it? Not from my testing. And that is just one example. The sims process different settings in different ways with different results. 

 

It's nowhere near as simple as "FSX provides x% more performance in every situation compared to P3D." 

 

The gap, on a GTX570 no less, is simply not there when I load up actual heavy settings I used in FSX all the time with intensive add ons. 

 

And this is comparing to a fully tweaked FSX setup (with all the bugs that come from tweaking...black flashes from BP=0 for example). If I were running a tweak free FSX it wouldn't even be close. FSX would be in the low teens at FSDT KDFW with 100% WOAI traffic and FTX Global with autogen on max. 

 

I can't see what is "not a nice thing to say" about my thinking that you've made your mind up about something.   :smile:

 

I didn't perceive it as a kind statement, that's all.

My apologies if it upset you - but it's far from an insult or attack, someone saying that they feel you have made your mind up about something.   A lot worse things get said on these forums sometimes!

Just installed my 780ti superclocked ac, and I can now pretty much max out everything in Graphics, Scenery and Lighting and still get v-sync locked at 30fps. Even it sometimes drops below 30 it still feels very smooth and stutter-free.

 

Last night I also opened my good old FSX in DX10 and I have to say the difference is huge - no way for me to go back to FSX. The DX11 in P3D2 with shadows, enormous amount of autogen, ultra water with reflection (never even dreamed that I could live to the day of running FSX water in Ultra) is just miles and miles better. After only a few hours in P3D2 I'm totally spoiled.

 

P3D2 is still far from being perfect, but with modernized graphic engine its future is incredibly bright I'd say.

Now load up the NGX or iFly 737 at an FSDT airport such as PHNL with thunderstorms and report back with your findings...

Well, after a week I am now back to P3D1.4 for some real flying. Sadly my two year old computer can't keep up with the new featured in P3D2, so I'm giving it a rest for now.

 

Yeah, I know I can turn down some settings, but it isn't an option for me. I've got P3D1.4 and FSX running with very high settings and extreme autogen levels, dense clouds as far as the eye can see and lots of AI traffic. Advancements of 3D waves, shadows and HDR lighting isn't good enough for me to switch just yet.

 

The combination of 10m mesh, extremely detailed vector scenery and custom airports created mayhem in P3D2 on my computer. I will still play around with P3D2 to get to know it, but it isn't a suitable tool for flight simulation for me just yet. Once a 5GHz Intel CPU is on the market I'll be joining the future, as of now I'm just a supporting bystander.

Reporting back after a few days using it. My rig is a i7 plus nVidia GTX700 w 4Gb and 16Gb of RAM.

 

I am running P3d v2 with FTX Global (v2) and NGX737 and AirbusX so far.

 

With the above it is quite difficult to not stay in v1.4 right now (v1,4 runs extremely well for me) as v2 although works it goes extremely slow when you have undocked panels as I need for my 737NG cockpit MIP's. Apart from FPS and this blogging down with undocked windows with the original planes it does work pretty well. I keep my fingers crossed for PMDG to be quick on their side.

 

Maybe someone has other ideas how to get the undocked windows not to bog down the system?

After reading Word Not Allowed's review of P3D v2 I will wait to see what LM does to fix the issues he described...

Last night I did some flying around in FSX (AXE from MKJP to KFLL and RealAir Legacy and Duke v2 around Orbx PNW) and found the experience to be better than that of P3D 2.0. I am assuming here that my system is not powerful enough to run P3D to give me the same experience as I have with FSX. The biggest issue I have is when panning around in the VC, it is not as smooth as FSX despite giving roughly the same amount of FPS. SweetFX also seems a major pain point for P3D on my system as well. All my sliders are at "Normal" and I make sure the menu is always hidden.

 

I think there are a couple of issues here:

 

1. My system may not be powerful enough to run v2.0 even at modest settings

2. Updates for v2.0 may resolve some if not all of the issues

3. Updates from nVidia may resolve some if not all of the issues

4. No PMDG support B) (Yes I know this not a performance issue but not being able to fly the 777 IS an impediment for me)

 

I am sure many here would be happy to see the back of FSX but to be quite honest, at least for me, I don't see FSX going away anytime soon. There are many great add-on's on the way for it and many brilliant simmers are always finding tips and tricks to make the performance better. I think once PMDG gives their blessing, then 2.0 will be the future. I personally know quite a few simmers will not give serious thought to switching until they can run the -NGX and the 777 in the 2.0.

 

That being said, I may have made a right hash of my system by installing P3D and FSX on the same box (I have a laptop so unfortunately not much of a choice there) so that may or may not be contributing to my problems. I am going to prepare a laptop HD specifically for P3D and see if that makes a difference.

 

All views expressed are my own

 

Apologies for my rambling........

I`m going back also.

P3D V2 is not what i hoped it should be. It`s just a service pack for FSX.

There are improvements over FSX, but they are just minor in my eyes.

It looks that they tried to implement the technology from MSFlight but failed. P3D still has the same issues FSX had.

MSFlight has better shadow, fog, landclass, mesh, vector, scenery, flight physics and so on.

P3D is just too ugly, and performance still bad.

I know MSFlight lacks so much, but it is just nice to fly vfr with it. Much more immersion and eyecandy.

 

Still hoping and waiting for a worthy successor.

is-anyone-going-back-to-fsx-now-after-2-days-with-p3dv2?

 

Going back to the post quote, I think its a bit unlikely that anyone would make a wise decision in just 2 days with a complex system like P3Dv2. These apps (P3dv2, FSX, FS9,Xplane, etc) are quite complex. And the Expectations of each user can vary quite a bit depending if you are a serious simmer or a casual gamer.

 

All I can say is that time will tell.

 

Perhaps, as many in this thread have hinted, this is like asking: who, after 2 days of having FSX went back to FS9? .... I wasn't. Once I went to FSX I stayed with FSX....

But I surely was n't an early adopter... If I recall right I believe I switched about 1 or 2 years after FSX came out. Once there were enough good add-ons!

 

 

One of the themes I'm picking up on is that people are trying to shoehorn all the old things that were designed for FSX into P3D and then getting put off when they don't quite perform better or even produce worse results.  T

When the only thing one has is a screwdriver one trends to look for screws!