FSX Fiber Accelerator?

[1st fltsimguy 466]

Tried the demo, was still in process of testing.  The best method I could think of was turning the application on and off in same environments.  Unfortunately, I didn't get to finish all my testing. I was just doing a circuit around Vancouver and turned if off and wanted to test it again, and its locked.

 

I picked Orbx Squamish area.  I started a tread over at Orbx about how Squamish brought my FSX to its knees.  I have to turn off all the features and delete several files like lighting to get the thing to produce reasonable performance.

 

My computer specs are with my profile info.  i7 920 2.7 Ghz, GTX 260

 

So here goes:

 

1. All Control panel options turned on

With Orbx PNW+Squamish (with every control panel item turned on - all the flow stuff)+Scout

Weather set to fair with clouds.

 

Target Frames=30, FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.15 (did not try any adjustments), LOD_RADIUS=4.500000, AffinityMask=84, TextureMaxLoad=4096, MipBias=6

 

No fiber accelerator:      Low 4.2 fps, Average 9.7-10 fps, High 15.6

With Fiber accelerator:  Low  8 fps, Average 13-15, High 18.4    low fps setting of 16

 

2. All Control panel options turned off

No fiber accelerator:      Low 4.8 fps, Average 18 fps, High 25.5

With Fiber accelerator:  Low  7.3 fps, Average 20.4, High 25.9        low fps setting of 21

 

Seems to work.

Seems to adjust the Target Frames on the fly, switching to "unlimited" where necessary.  Seems to affect the draw call distance for objects and terrain texture sharpness.

 

Not sure what actually is going on here but it does appear to live up to what it is being marketed to do.

 

Bryan

[barrel_owl 304]

I have just placed my order.

After trying the product in 3 different saved approaches with known (poor) frame rate, I can say I am pretty satisfied with the results. The product basically does what it promises. While it appears to be mainly targeted to low-end and laptop users like me, it may be worth a try even for owners of powerful desktops.

 

Thanks to FSPS for changing their unfortunate original marketing move and listening to the customers.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

Too funny, I actually suggested this idea to LM (about a month or so ago, better keep that email) to incorporate dynamic settings in order to maintain a set fps in P3DV2.x ... and now someone has done that for FSX. Can we expect to see a P3D V2.x version?

 

Hey but wait a minute ... everyone keeps telling me FSX is butter smooth, great fps, and doesn't need any performance improvement because it's "perfect" ;)

 

Cheers, Rob.

Although I've never seen this done on a PC based 3d app, websites that stream video do something similar routinely. When the connection quality from the server to the user is degraded, the video resolution and often the amount of compression changes. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the result is very uneven. The frame rate is maintained but the video looks awful. Think about it. You start off at 1080p and then you drop down to 720p, 480p and worse.

[Guest]

Think about it. You start off at 1080p and then you drop down to 720p, 480p and worse.

 

Absolutely, whatever gets done to retain FPS will be a visual compromise ... my petition to LM was to allow "priority" control over the many graphics and display settings ... since LM is the source, best place for this to be done.

 

By priority I mean let the user decide what graphics settings are important or not to them to retain a specific fps.

 

For example a user could specify:

 

Target 30 fps (use the same value as "locked")

Tree Shadows Cast = 1

Tree Shadow Receive = 2

Cloud Shadow distance = 3

etc. etc. on down thru the various graphics settings.

 

1,2,3 = evaluation priority ... start with tree shadows cast, then move to tree shadow, etc.

 

Done at the code level with appropriate smoothing (aka prevent on/off chase situations) ... i.e. adjustments are only made every 2 seconds or something (dynamic would be better).  Of course allow the dynamic frame rate adjustment system to be completely turn ON or OFF.

 

I can certainly see the advantage for long haul flights where one may drop to 12 fps on arrival making a manual landing impossible (which from what I can tell not many long haulers actually fly the aircraft, hehe).

 

I have seen some 3D games do this with some success.  But 3D games and flight simulations are "worlds" (literally) apart graphically speaking.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[JRBarrett 3,070]

Hi,

What version of .net FW do you have? And did you have to revert to 3.5SP1 or is that the version you had in the first place?

I have found plenty of links telling how to go backward but I don't have the time to do so presently. I would like to see some reports from those who had to revert to 3.5SP1 before I try it. I'm not really chicken but I don't want to do it until I have plenty of time if it's a hassle.

You do NOT have to "revert" anything if you already have a later version of .NET installed, like version 4 or version 4.5. Do NOT uninstall the later versions.

 

Several posters here seem to be confused about how the .NET frameworks work. It is perfectly OK to have multiple versions of .NET installed on the same computer at the same time - they do not interefere with each other in any way. If you are missing version 3.5SP1, simply download the installer for that version from the Microsoft web site and run it... It will not damage, change or interfere with your already-installed version 4 or 4.5 .NET - the installer will just add the missing version 3.5 files.

[etien 1]

Hello,

 

Donno if it has been covered before, but I seem to remember that there was a way to launch an app automatically from FSUIPC could this be a good candidate to simplify click management ?

The sad thruth is that now the concept has been demonstrated, at least in some instance, one can expect a rush of alternate strategies, and the best candidate to do it would be   FSUIPC itself as one option.

 

Etienne

[tf51d 284]

Well I guess I'm odd man out! Not surprising as I don't have a very strong system. I currently get 20FPS in the NGX at KSEA runway 34R. This is with max scenery, dense autogen (I usually fly with it set to Sparse which gives me about 26-28fps), 2XLow water, and no traffic. My VSYNC is set to 1/2 refresh. I get this by using low res textures including VC, and setting the 3D HiDef cockpit off. Setting my locked frames to 30FPS, which matches the VSYNC setting, and running this utility, no matter what setting I use I actually lose frames, I drop to 13 and 14fps. Shut it down and it bounces back up to 20FPS. Ah well!! I could live with what I have now, which is fine unless I add traffic to the mix, which is still acceptable (To me under the circumstances) but it's a lot smoother without it. With the way PFE handles chatter for ATC, except on the ground, obviously, I still get the illusion I'm not alone up there!!

[infinitythruster 0]

Hi guys,

 

tried the demo yesterday on my rather ordinary 17 inch notebook (Intel Core i7-3630 CPU, 2.4 GHz) using a PMDG 737 at Brisbane (YBBN) airport from ORBX, where I usually get one of my lowest frame rates between 4.5 and 11 and running Active Sky in the background among other programs. Where I usually tend to get a stuttering performance, the frame rate has picked up between 4 and 10 more frames/sec and even while the demo version of this FSX Fiber Accelerator run out of time while still flying 9000 feet above the Brisbane area I was impressed by the improvement so far. For further testing I think I am willing to give it a go and purchase this product. So at this point I'd like to recommend this product.

Someone asked me, what Net Framework I use: 4.5.1, win 7, 64 bit, NVidia 660 with 2 Gig graphic card and 12 Gig of Ram and dedicated 4 Gig Ram for FSX "This has to do with the command prompt:

 

BCDEDIT /set increaseuserva 4072 (go to run and type/copy this in)

 

It essentially increases your virtual memory above the 2GB set by Microsoft. It only works if you're operating system has more than 2G RAM.

 

The 3072 values means your operating system now has 3GB of RAM to use. Any more, and you're computer might completely crash"  If you have like myself 12 Gig Ram you can easyly dedicate 4 Gig Ram and you should be fine without crashes.

 

The old Microsoft FSX environment uses only 2 Gig Ram, as you probably all know by now.

[ZKOKQ 984]

BCDEDIT /set increaseuserva 4072 (go to run and type/copy this in)

Not required for W7 64bit

 

 

The old Microsoft FSX environment uses only 2 Gig Ram,

In a 32bit OS

[Guest JustanotherPilot]

Here is a video of it in action

 

[infinitythruster 0]

Someone asked me, what Net Framework I use: 4.5.1, win 7, 64 bit, NVidia 660 with 2 Gig graphic card and 12 Gig of Ram and dedicated 4 Gig Ram for FSX "This has to do with the command prompt:

 

BCDEDIT /set increaseuserva 4072 (go to run and type/copy this in)

 

It essentially increases your virtual memory above the 2GB set by Microsoft. It only works if you're operating system has more than 2G RAM.

 

The 3072 values means your operating system now has 3GB of RAM to use. Any more, and you're computer might completely crash"  If you have like myself 12 Gig Ram you can easyly dedicate 4 Gig Ram and you should be fine without crashes.

 

The old Microsoft FSX environment uses only 2 Gig Ram, as you probably all know by now.

As it is often said, there is a lot of confusion out there but personally I think every bit of advice you'll find on PMDG's manuals how to set up your 737 NGX can help and they are really the ultimate experts in that field. They also recommend highly only to use win 7, 64 bit but this is not really the topic right now.

I haven't mentioned yet, that I ran every slider in the graphics section of FSX to the max, except water, which is 2 high, but not very high. Active sky and similar programs do a better job anyway as standard FSX

[ZKOKQ 984]

As it is often said, there is a lot of confusion out there

Not sure why you keep quoting your posts, and why you mentioned the incorrect info about ram in a 64 bit OS.

Trust me, you are confusing me. I repeat, you do not need to use BCDEDIT /set increaseuserva 4072  in a 64 bit OS.

 

I repeat.......... Phew!!!!

[Japo32 52]

One question...

 

if we purchase now for FSX, when there is a P3D v2 version, you would give the FSX costumers for free o would you make them spend some money on the P3D version? (or a little ammount with discount)?

 

Just to know clearly. 40$ is not cheap.

 

Thanks!

[infinitythruster 0]

My apology for some false info!

[BD - FSPS 0]

Absolutely, whatever gets done to retain FPS will be a visual compromise ......

 

Just to make some things clear about Fiber:

 

We could - really could - had made the application to make your system , whatever system , give 50fps STUCK ON ALL SCENERIES, on all situations.

(Had been done successfully during development, but the quality of visuals was tragic in some cases)

 

The target of the application was however to do a frame stabilisation without dropping user's graphic settings. Give frames without taking from what user can see , but mainly from what he can't see.

 

FSX's code is so badly written that even doing this was a compromise in some cases, but in general it worked. Giving frames without totally degrading visuals!

You won't see , a totally blurred picture even if you set the frames to 90. We had put some limits.. Who would like to get a green/blue screen just to get 90fps in his old core 2 duo ?

 

---

 

if we purchase now for FSX, when there is a P3D v2 version, you would give the FSX costumers for free o would you make them spend some money on the P3D version? (or a little ammount with discount)?

 

The answer is not easy. As already said, we hadn't go into the vast - totally different - code of P3D yet, because we want LM settle things (technically speaking). In airplanes and scenery addons category, this is almost done. In the graphics part, certain parts of code are changing all the time. We are not going to release a software that will live for 3 months, and then we may need 2 more months to publish a new update. 

 

Whenever - anyway - this day comes, as we proved in the past, we always think about our existing customers. Either with special upgrade prices or something, users will benefit and will not probably pay twice the originally set price of the application.

 

------------------

 

Oh, and because we found out that users who had installed net 4.5 in win 7, MAY have some core elements of .net 2 - let's say "overwritten" , and as a result application crash with apparently no reason, we are preparing an update that will handle this issue. Stay tuned.