can you take the f22 out for a spin for us "big grin" please?

 

Word Not Allowed is that you?  ... sure, let me turn everything that FSX can't do OFF in P3D, then take the F22 out for spin ... actually isn't there an A10 designed for P3DV2?  Oh wait, the A10 can't do 1100 KTS @ 500' AGL ... probably too slow

 

But, I'll do it for you dream chasers ... AB's on?  Until I run out fuel?

 

 

Hi Rob -- has the grainy textures (where shadows fall) with the latest nvidia drivers been fixed? 

 

I haven't noticed any grainy textures, but I'll take a look tonight.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Thanks for the info Rob, all of your other videos are great as well. P3D 2.2 is looking very promising!

 

How is VAS usage at a large addon airport with a complex jetliner, especially once you start throwing AI traffic into the mix?

 

 

How is VAS usage at a large addon airport with a complex jetliner, especially once you start throwing AI traffic into the mix?

 

I have Aerosoft's Dublin and Thessaloniki and Oslo 2.0 ... I don't really have any large Jetliners that are designed for P3DV2.x, I can try the Q400 (that had issues in 2.1 but not in 2.0), I can try the QW Avro RJ100.  Will report back later tonight (or early morning most likely).

P3D is definitely coming together. Thanks for the update!

 

 

Until I run out fuel?

 

No. Until you run into OOM. :lol:

LOL - no this is not Word Not Allowed...but proabably he's thinking the same thing!  I think this is a good way to stress test the new engine...show what the autogen/texture loading can do.

Rob,

Thanks for keeping the community informed with the latest in regards to v2.2.  Sure looks promising.  By the way, have you noticed or heard of any changes to water rendering?  I personally like how it looks, but I believe Beau mentioned some time ago that it is a work in progress.  Thanks again.

 

 

I understand what you're saying about the new 
i7 4960X but any help in this area without a lot more expense would be excellent.

 

Very little difference here for CPU power, even when you compare single core performance which is under 7% difference.  Overclockability is slightly in the i7 3960X's camp as well, now you're looking at maybe 5% better cpu performance.  I would content if you're seeing blurry textures with your max o'clocked 3960X you will likely see them in your 4960X, though maybe a few degrees nearer in your FOV.  At least that is my take from reading benchmarks.

 

 

There are two new lines in the cfg that allow you to configure the range of the LOD

 

Does this LOD affect land class textures (eg. photoscenery) too?

By the way, have you noticed or heard of any changes to water rendering?

 

I have not really looked at water differences from 2.1 to 2.2 ... not my focus, VAS has been my focus -- specifically around AutoGen.

 

 

 

 I think this is a good way to stress test the new engine...show what the autogen/texture loading can do.

 

Not sure I agree with that, but I'll test it out if you like ... my hunch is it will be similar to FSX, P3DV2.0, P3DV2.1, XP10.  I think we're still a few years away from being able to achieve 1100 Kts at 500' AGL and keep frames and data flowing consistently.  But it will be good to see how VAS reacts, so I'll give it a go.

 

 

 

 I would content if you're seeing blurry textures with your max o'clocked 3960X you will likely see them in your 4960X, though maybe a few degrees nearer in your FOV.

 

Tend to agree with you Noel, memory latency and bandwidth are better in the 4960x but if you push the envelope you'll initiate delayed hires texture loads in any of today's hardware ... maybe when we see DDR5 motherboards and chipsets and CPU supporting that and next generation of SSDs (1GBps speeds).  For flight simulations, it's really about taking the entire system into consideration ... it's about moving data, processing data, and avoiding bottlenecks ... and single weak link can negate the benefit or one or more capable components.

 

I really didn't want this to turn into a performance thread ... my focus is VAS and AutoGen.

 

 

I no longer use Unlimited and Vsync and Triple Buffer are OFF

 

You mentioned early on you were setting frames internally in P3D to 30 or something like that.  Every time I use any internal frame limit I get this behavior: if the actual unrestricted frame rate was 30 due high demand conditions, and I had frames locked internally at 30, I would always see a frame rate of around 25 or 24.  I see no downside to unlimited--texture loading is fine, frame rate and ultimate smoothness are excellent.  Why lock frames internally?

I would love to see some serious stress load for VAS and Autogen.  From from P3D1.4 testing days (see older threads).  QW146 took the most VAS from all the other big famous tubeliners.  Fly low and full speed with QW146 for famous KSEA area with full autogen to stress.  And KSEA inside Orbx's PNW.  Maybe a flight from KSEA to KPAE at 1500-1900Ft.

 

I use Eyefnity resolution at 5760x1200, and VAS is critical for me also.

 

Thanks,

 

-S

Holy batman !

 

These are dramatic improvements which will obviously give LM ample room and time for further improvements until a 64bit version of P3D is released. Was this an entire re-write of the autogen scenery management ?

 

I'd appreciate the following test: 1 hour flight, large aircraft, high speed flight over forested areas preferably in cloudy/rain weather. Ex:Airbus 300mph, 18,000-24k ft alt, overcast 25,000ft approaching Seattle from the east.

 

Thanks for your time and efforts

 

 

Why lock frames internally?

 

Stutters is the reason why.  If I lock to a few frames below what I can achieve I get NO stutters at all.

 

Did some more testing tonight from Oslo 2.0 ENGM (Aerosoft) to ENCN in the QW BAe146 (RJ100).

 

TEST 1

Add-Ons Used

Aerosoft Oslo 2.0

Orbx FTX Global

PILOTS FS Global 2010 FTX Edition

Orbx Vector 1.1

Opus P3D 3.41 for weather (many clouds and layers)

QW BAe146 (HD livery) - FL200 

 

Same settings as before, VAS started at 2.4GB, landed with 2.9GB.  Clouds remain a significant performance hit when using NI SGSS 4X.  Notice that as I gained altitude the terrain was using a much lower texture resolutions (much lower than in 2.1) -- I've reported this to LM to determine is this is expected behavior.

 

TEST 2

Add-ons used

Aerosoft Dublin v1.2

Orbx EU Ireland & North

Orbx Vector 1.1

QW BAe146 (HD livery)

Customer weather stratus layer only

 

VAS use was extremely high, started at 3.7GB and hit 3.9GB with just a few view changes (started getting the chimes).

 

TEST 3

Add-Ons Used

Aerosoft Thessaloniki

Orbx FTX Global

PILOTS FS Global 2010 FTX Edition

Orbx Vector 1.1

Opus P3D 3.41 for weather (many clouds and layers)

QW BAe146 (HD livery)

 

VAS use was 2.3GB start, flew around Italy for about 1 hour and returned to Thessaloniki, finished with 2.7GB VAS

 

TEST 4

Add-Ons Used

Aerosoft Thessaloniki

Orbx FTX Global

PILOTS FS Global 2010 FTX Edition

Orbx Vector 1.1

Opus P3D 3.41 for weather (many clouds and layers)

P3D F22 - 1100 Kts at 500' AGL

 

No OOMs, but as expected the terrain and autogen system can't keep up ... massive blurries 

 

Not sure what is going on with Dublin?  Find it hard to believe a single airport is consuming 1.4GB more VAS than other Aerosoft airports like Oslo and Thessaloniki.

 

Off to bed, exhausted.

Hello !

Thanks for your video =)

Did you make this video with your i73960x at 4.8-5 Ghz on not ? and with HT off or not ?

DId you OC your video card ?

Have a nice day

JM