I hope someone is collecting a tweaks guide for P3D.  Sounds like it'll be substantially less than the FSX version but it'd probably save folks a boatload of angst.

 

 

Here's that tweaking guide for you:

 

The unofficial P3D v2.2 Tweaking Guide!

 

Don't use any tweaks!!!!!!!!

 

That's about it, really. For the first time since I started flightsimming on the PC (well, that's how it feels, at least), I don't need ANY tweaks anymore but only the options in the sim itself. It's absolutely great.

 

 

 

of course it run well with a default FSX P3D aircraft. Ive seen some issues with more sophisticated aircraft and heavy/stormy weather.

 

That's why I flew with the A2A C172. It's a simple plane but a sophisticated simulation. I also flew with Orbx weather theme 3 and Building storms which are medium themes, I think. I don't own ASN yet: could well be it will hurt performance but since I don't use NI and SGSS anymore (for now) I doubt if it would hurt performance a lot.

It's really an amazing update to the sim. One thing that unfortunately is true is that Cloud Shadow is just something to have fun with, then turn off for serious simming.

 

I was taking off from an airport with a OVC and BKN cloud cover, and my fps was 8! Turned off Cloud Shadow, back to 60! And I'm running a 780Ti, doesn't get much better than that!

 

The impact is not nearly as heavy at my side: What are your cloud settings? What is the draw distance (do you need clouds over 100 miles away?)? What is your cloud coverage? What is your cloud shadow range? What else do you use (AA-settings) with regard to the cloud shadows. Go and find a reasonable setting! A 780Ti is certainly able to give you a better experience then what you have!

Here's that tweaking guide for you:

 

The unofficial P3D v2.2 Tweaking Guide!

 

Don't use any tweaks!!!!!!!!

 

I fully agree, for the best results don't use any tweaks and don't use Nvidia inspector.

I was taking off from an airport with a OVC and BKN cloud cover, and my fps was 8! Turned off Cloud Shadow, back to 60! And I'm running a 780Ti, doesn't get much better than that!

 

With BKN or OVC sky conditions and cloud shadows, performance really takes a huge hit (with ASN). On my system with a 780 frames drop from a steady 60 fps in other sky conditions to around 15 fps (and for me this is not smooth anymore, just to mention before all those people jump in who want to tell you that in Prepar3d even 10fps look smooth. LOL). LM should really check if optimizations in the code are possible. Otherwise you can only use cloud shadows either with good weather or with SLI once this is supported.

 

 

 

That's why I flew with the A2A C172.

 

Jeroen, sorry to say, but this is definitely not an aircraft which has a strong impact on performance. Totally different story with PMDG NGX or Aerosoft Airbus and the likes...

 

 

My new PC parts have arrived and are scattered all over the couch downstairs. A whole lot of work to do before I get to try this new sim out!

 

ahhh, the smell of new pc parts...dont you just love it :rolleyes:

With BKN or OVC sky conditions and cloud shadows, performance really takes a huge hit (with ASN). On my system with a 780 frames drop from a steady 60 fps in other sky conditions to around 15 fps (and for me this is not smooth anymore, just to mention before all those people jump in who want to tell you that in Prepar3d even 10fps look smooth. LOL). LM should really check if optimizations in the code are possible. Otherwise you can only use cloud shadows either with good weather or with SLI once this is supported.

 

 

Yes same here, running  P3d on a 780Ti. Really unfortunate, since the sim looks so much better with cloud shadows turned on.

of course it run well with a default FSX aircraft. Ive seen some issues with more sophisticated aircraft and heavy/stormy weather.

Said 'sophisticated aircraft' are not v2.2 compliant.

 

In short, any aircraft that is complex and has a negative performance impact on this sim... needs to be redesigned from the ground up.

 

I'm a developer, and I can say this with serious authority.

In short, any aircraft that is complex and has a negative performance impact on this sim... needs to be redesigned from the ground up.

 

I'm a developer, and I can say this with serious authority.

 

Ed,

 

Why is that?  Is it because they have to redo all their optimizations or are there new things that P3D doesn't tolerate well that they were doing?  There is so much that needs to get caught up on the P3D aircraft side of things. 

 

Gregg

Ed,

 

Why is that?  Is it because they have to redo all their optimizations or are there new things that P3D doesn't tolerate well that they were doing?  There is so much that needs to get caught up on the P3D aircraft side of things. 

 

Gregg

Having tested some of my own stuff in Prepar3D that behaved decent in FSX... I'd say it's Prepar3D not tolerating well things we're doing. It's not just code, it's the way we design the 3D objects, how we define the textures... all of it combines to impact the sim's performance.

I've done more testing. Dawn or DUsk + Cloud Shadow = 8 Fps here. When there's normal daylight, the fps goes back to 21. So this is the main issue LM should work on IMO. But even at 21, Cloud Shadow at BKN or OVC condition makes the sim Stutter a LOT here, it really looses all the smoothness, it's unflyable in my POV. Turning it off makes it butter smooth again.

 

 

The unofficial P3D v2.2 Tweaking Guide!

Don't use any tweaks!!!!!!!!

 

I think the most important thing that needs to be realized by the community, is the two reasons we don't need "tweaks" anymore.

 

1. Lockheed has gone out of it's way to implement the tweaks we have been using in FSX into the engine, i.e. HIGHMEMFIX and correct AffinityMask settings.

 

2. A lot of the "tweaks" we used to use with FSX were simply variables in the engine that MS didn't trust us users modifying. Lockheed has taken the "tweaks" out of the prepar3d.cfg and moved them into the display settings interface because unlike MS, Lockheed assumes it's users are capable adults (though I question that sometimes when reading forum posts around here... ).

 

The future is bright!

Ed,

 

Why is that?  Is it because they have to redo all their optimizations or are there new things that P3D doesn't tolerate well that they were doing?  There is so much that needs to get caught up on the P3D aircraft side of things. 

 

Gregg

 

I am a developer too. Most addon aircraft, including most of the sophisticated, heavy systems simulations, still use the single process model. They will drop FPS while 3/4 of your CPU is not used at all (only one core used). Only a handful of developers offloaded much of the computation to a separate process, thereby reducing the load on the main sim, and better utilizing the CPU. Those achieved much higher frame rates and smooth simming even in a complex system modelling.

 

This optimization can sometimes be hard to do if you have a large existing code base that was not designed from the ground up for parallel execution. For existing addons like the PMDG NGX this could be a very expensive piece of work that would be hard to get approved by management without incremental revenue associated with it. I can totally understand that.

 

Having said that, I think that developers of complex sims like PMDG would do well to re-architect their base code to support one or two additional processes. At least for new releases. Some of us may be willing to shell out more money for a paid upgrade of some of the existing addons just to get the performance boost. It would be fair to fund these guys if they do the effort. Heck, many of us pay hundreds of dollars for upgraded GPUs, sometimes with only marginal improvement. Paying an extra $30-$100 for a high performance version of a 737NGX with all the features that it has today would not be a high price in my book.

Hi Jaroen,

It's interesting that you advise not to use tweaks, while myself and many others are now swearing by AF set to all logical cores to eliminate blurries and slow texture load. No other tweaks necessary and no NI in my case.

I tried the AF=14 tweak yesterday after I noticed that on my i7 950 cpu, the first core was rather idle while the next core was maxed and the next two cores were about 60-70% busy. The tweak didn't do anything.

I tried the AF=14 tweak yesterday after I noticed that on my i7 950 cpu, the first core was rather idle while the next core was maxed and the next two cores were about 60-70% busy. The tweak didn't do anything.

 

It would be AF=15 to use all cores