Is this for real - Is this P3d

[ErichB 3,650]

I have a hard time switching to P3D until it goes 64 bit

 

 

Why?  If you keep waiting for the 'next best thing' you'll never get there.  Right now, P3Dv2.2 IS the next best thing.  So jump on.

[rparson99 32]

You know.. I have 777 too. And one thing I have to admit... If you truly are faithful to abiding only in the cockpit and instruments.... and never look outside your window.... Except maybe to taxi.... there is probably no meaningful reason to consider p3d and leave fsx at this moment... Except for maybe OOM relief per se'. But if you dare look outside just for a moment..... Then there is no need to delay.... There's plenty of other planes to fly!

[fppilot 4,391]

 

 

Well, in all honesty, even though I am a P3D only user I have to say that the video is good also because of the used addons. With the right addons FSX can look just as impressive (all addons in the video are originally FSX addons). You (nicksort) probably have a vanilla install of FSX and by default it doesn't look too good. ).

 

X2

[ChaoticBeauty 6,692]

I have a hard time switching to P3D until it goes 64 bit (yeah, I know that is going to be a looooong ways out).

 

But why? Since 2.2 VAS consumption has improved a lot (very difficult to get an OOM now), and Lockheed Martin have promised that memory usage will be continually improved with future updates. This might change in the future, but for now 64-bit is not needed.

[s0cks 134]

VAS isn't the be all and end all. There are other advantages to 64bit.

[Cellinsky 15]

VAS isn't the be all and end all. There are other advantages to 64bit.

Can you tell me exactly what advantages this should bring in practice? I have x-plane 10 and DCS. They both are 64 bit. Both are prone to stutter as soon as there are more than average objects in view or some nice shadows to draw. Not having that with P3DV2, wich draws even more objects and ground-shadows on top. And also looks a lot better to me (with addons). AND it has the highest draw-distance of all my sims. I have 16GB Ram @ 2400 and an R290 with 4GB video-memory. So this should  not the problem...i think that optimized code comes first and then going 64bit will be the way....

[ErichB 3,650]

Can you tell me exactly what advantages this should bring in practice? I have x-plane 10 and DCS. They both are 64 bit. Both are prone to stutter as soon as there are more than average objects in view or some nice shadows to draw. Not having that with P3DV2, wich draws even more objects and ground-shadows on top. And also looks a lot better to me (with addons). AND it has the highest draw-distance of all my sims. I have 16GB Ram @ 2400 and an R290 with 4GB video-memory. So this should not the problem...i think that optimized code comes first and then going 64bit will be the way....

 

Good point.  I think, once again, 64 bit is another classic example of a 'buzz term' which people are duped into believing is better than anything else.   However, most who bang the 64 bit drum haven't the faintest clue what a 64 bit application ACTUALLY means for the end user.   

[MikeT707 1,181]

 

 

Can you tell me exactly what advantages this should bring in practice? I have x-plane 10 and DCS. They both are 64 bit. Both are prone to stutter as soon as there are more than average objects in view or some nice shadows to draw. Not having that with P3DV2, wich draws even more objects and ground-shadows on top.

This is a very good point.  I use XPX 64 bit at times and when I crank up the visuals the sim stutters, but I have not hit any OOM's.  I have not hit any OOM's in P3D since 2.2 and guess what.  That is the point.

 

I agree with Erich that the 64 bit buzz word has become a relatively weak excuse now that v2.2 solved the OOM issue.  Nobody is forcing anyone to use P3D, but it is a real shame to see misinformation spread which results in scaring user away and holds people back from such an exceptional experience.  

[s0cks 134]

Can you tell me exactly what advantages this should bring in practice? I have x-plane 10 and DCS. They both are 64 bit. Both are prone to stutter as soon as there are more than average objects in view or some nice shadows to draw. Not having that with P3DV2, wich draws even more objects and ground-shadows on top. And also looks a lot better to me (with addons). AND it has the highest draw-distance of all my sims. I have 16GB Ram @ 2400 and an R290 with 4GB video-memory. So this should  not the problem...i think that optimized code comes first and then going 64bit will be the way....

 

Nothing you mentioned probably has anything to do with 64bit. A badly executed 64bit application will still be a badly executed application. Though I have to say that my personal experience with XP10 is that it blows P3Dv2 out of the water in terms of smoothness (so long as you don't hit that VRAM wall).

 

There's plenty of resource on the net to find the advantages of 64bit applications on a 64bit OS. But like you say, it's not the secret cure for everything.

 

The concern I have with P3D is that we are entering, or rather, we have already entered the next generation of computer hardware. If this is supposed to be the next generation of flight sim then we should be forward thinking here. The thinking that 32bit is "good enough" isn't really innovative. Sure, we can make the sim look better than a fully loaded FSX, but in my opinion it's time to crank it up a notch further. I want to see far more going on in my sim, and a hard 4GB limit (among other 32bit limitations) just seems counter-productive to this.

 

P3Dv2 is a 32bit application, fine. P3Dv3 needs to be 64bit though, and if it isn't, well that'll be a sad day.

[FransCKes 1]

P3D needs to be a good-to-great flight simulator. It is currently somewhere in between, with LM being focused on making it great. If that can be done with a 32-bit architecture, then why would it have to become 64-bit? If and when it does become 64-bit, no current add-ons (aircraft, scenery, panels) will be useable. Very likely, the vast majority of simmers would stay with the last 32-bit version (just like FSX). This would then mean that very few 3PDs would support the 64-bit sim, except for expensive training tools. IMHO, LM should stick with 32-bit and continue working to making P3D great. The 3PD's would flock to P3D, as they are already beginning to.

 

Frans

[s0cks 134]

P3D needs to be a good-to-great flight simulator. It is currently somewhere in between, with LM being focused on making it great. If that can be done with a 32-bit architecture, then why would it have to become 64-bit? If and when it does become 64-bit, no current add-ons (aircraft, scenery, panels) will be useable. Very likely, the vast majority of simmers would stay with the last 32-bit version (just like FSX). This would then mean that very few 3PDs would support the 64-bit sim, except for expensive training tools. IMHO, LM should stick with 32-bit and continue working to making P3D great. The 3PD's would flock to P3D, as they are already beginning to.

 

Frans

 

You clearly have no forward thinking then. Sure addons might not work, but that's why you'll still be able to load up you're old copy of P3Dv2. I get the feeling that a lot of people are stuck in a rut that they don't want to leave.

 

One would hope that after a decade (maybe more) of the Microsoft ESP/FSX engine, that we might be able to advance significantly. I'm thinking procedurally generated urban areas (no more repeating urban ground textures which is sooooo old school), SSAO, gradual night lighting (not just on or off), tides, etc... you name it. If it had all that, but you had to give up your addons and go back to vanilla, who would care? It would be the start of something really exciting.

[FransCKes 1]

I'm sorry to tell you that I am already excited by P3D2.2. IMO, no one is going to develop your dream simulator for a price that I can afford, or for a computer that I can afford. And it would take many years, if not a decade to produce.

 

Frans

[Christopher Low 5,379]

 

I'm thinking procedurally generated urban areas (no more repeating urban ground textures which is sooooo old school), SSAO, gradual night lighting (not just on or off), tides, etc... you name it.

 

Tides are something that I always wanted to see in a detailed first person shooter/adventure game. It could make the difference between being able to walk across an estuary from one side to the other, or having to take a boat. Maybe not the toughest decision you would ever have to make, but it would certainly make the game more atmospheric and believable.

[wolke85 150]

Can you tell me exactly what advantages this should bring in practice? I have x-plane 10 and DCS. They both are 64 bit. Both are prone to stutter as soon as there are more than average objects in view or some nice shadows to draw. Not having that with P3DV2, wich draws even more objects and ground-shadows on top. And also looks a lot better to me (with addons). AND it has the highest draw-distance of all my sims. I have 16GB Ram @ 2400 and an R290 with 4GB video-memory. So this should  not the problem...i think that optimized code comes first and then going 64bit will be the way....

 

 

Good point.  I think, once again, 64 bit is another classic example of a 'buzz term' which people are duped into believing is better than anything else.   However, most who bang the 64 bit drum haven't the faintest clue what a 64 bit application ACTUALLY means for the end user.   

 

Does going 64bit really mean a loss in performance, e.g. lower FPS or stutters or whatsever?

Or to be a bit more precise:

Is there really a connection?

I don't think that's the case as long as all is coded properly!

 

And let's please always bare in mind that today's - and even more so tomorrow's - hardware is and will be capable of - potentially - handling a real lot of stuff. Sure that is only going to happen, if the hardware is adressed/used properly by a dedicated software - but let's assume this is going to be the case.

So please do not get me wrong now:

LM sure has lots of good reasons to not make P3D 64bit compatible - at least not yet as that may really change sometime in the future.

But - generally speaking:

Supporting 64bit can certainly be a huge advantage for a demanding platfrom, which a dedicated, realistic flightsim certainly is!

I just re-read the, IMHO very informative article by Kostas regarding VAS and its "4GB-32bit-limit" by here:

https://#####.wordpress.com/fsx-oom-and-addon-vas-usage/

 

... and agai com eto teh conclution that ataying within the limits of the "32bit's 4GB VAS" simply can't be the way to go in the future as this may mean that lots of potentially great features may - again - never become released or implemented into the sim due to this annoying limitation.

Sure:

Even 64bit has its limits, but compared to the "4GB wall" that surrounds any 32bit application, going 64bit opens and widens up a huge space!

 

And in regards to the video in #1:

The video sure is a great one, but as pointed out by J van E in #3 above:

FSX may - at least by now - look quite as good.

Although P3D 2.2 made a huge step forwra for sure here!

 

Personally speaking though i - and this is only my opinion, so please no need to feel offended - still think that P3D's lighting still looks odd somehow.

There is even a highly frequented thread about this "issue" going on at the P3D forums (so i assume i am not the only one who thinks so :lol:):

http://www.prepar3d.com/forum-5/?mingleforumaction=viewtopic&t=6375.0

 

Now i am most confident that there will be a solution for this "lighting-issue" in the future.

As for now though it remains a compromise.

But then again:

It will most likely be adressed, just as so many other things in P3D.

Therefore i, as so many others, remain most confident and excited about the so far quite interesting andn bright  ^_^  looking future of P3D.

 

 

 

One would hope that after a decade (maybe more) of the Microsoft ESP/FSX engine, that we might be able to advance significantly. I'm thinking procedurally generated urban areas (no more repeating urban ground textures which is sooooo old school), SSAO, gradual night lighting (not just on or off), tides, etc... you name it. If it had all that, but you had to give up your addons and go back to vanilla, who would care? It would be the start of something really exciting.

 

+1

.. well let's see what the future wil be holding for us dedicated flightsimmers!

:wink:

+1

... but

[Snuffleupagus 328]

You don't need to wait. I thought the same way..but curiosity got me...and I grabbed a copy. I have flown for hours, and no O.O.M. or C.T.D.s....even at 32 bits. If that is your worry, then there is none. v2.2 seems to be quite stable...and keep you flying...not dropping to the desktop.  I have all my ORBX regions, Global, ASN, REX-4, and most of my important planes installed...and no problems from any of that, after proper installation.

 

Try it out...for as they all say...it does come with a money-back offer.  I'd bet though...that if you have a pretty decent system...you won't be seeking a refund....

 

I actually did have P3D installed at one point, when V2.0 first came out. I honestly didn't see enough performance increase to keep it so I've used my 1 refund already...  :blush:

 

 

Why?  If you keep waiting for the 'next best thing' you'll never get there.  Right now, P3Dv2.2 IS the next best thing.  So jump on.

 

 

But why? Since 2.2 VAS consumption has improved a lot (very difficult to get an OOM now), and Lockheed Martin have promised that memory usage will be continually improved with future updates. This might change in the future, but for now 64-bit is not needed.

 

I agree that 32 bit wouldn't matter if they have fixed the VAS issue but there is one reason why I believe not many people are seeing OOM's... the lack of addons. Not saying there aren't many addons, but a lot of the high memory ones are missing (PMDG for example). What's going to happen when we get the PMDG 777 making an approach into FSDT KLAX with REX, Orbx, and ActiveSky all on VATSIM? It's hard to see that a 32 bit system could handle all of that.

 

I am running FSX DX9 and about 90% of the time I don't have issues. Yes, there are places where my frames drop in the low teens and if I really push it (FSDT LAX, PMDG, VATSIM) I start losing graphics. I really want P3D to work, but I just feel like there aren't enough addons to really test it's limits yet. And a LOT of my current addons are not P3D compatible.

 

Cheers!