My P3D settings are higher (way higher) than FSX, yet I get better performance with P3D than I do in FSX, which I still have on my PC. I can directly compare, using the same save points, between the two platforms, and there is no comparison, with P3D outperforming FSX across the board. This is using cloud, cockpit and building shadows (veg and other options receives) along with volumetric fog and HDR... and vastly more autogen, esp. trees [pop free too].

 

Currently FSX can give better smoothness at times, with the ability to use 1/2 vsync, but it can't compete on performance, and is a million miles away in visual terms.

 

I don't have a super computer either... just a 2500K @4.4ghz with a GTX670 and 8GB of RAM, which is far from cutting edge. TBH I'm not sure what some are doing to make p3d give such poor results... I can't believe FSX can run that well in comparison, and certainly not look better, or even close to what p3d can achieve.... I'm baffled to be honest.

And this isn't just you, it's repeated over and over and over and over again. Normally I just ignore the ignorance and "walk away", but for whatever reason, today I feel the need to let it go ... call it therapy

 

well since fsx and p3d and both 32 bit programs then the VAS issue will never go away.

 

I wouldn't call my system moderate unless you compare it to yours. It's an i7 4770K @4.7ghz and a gtx 780. I have no problems with fsx with most of the settings turned up and I certainly don't have any problems with newer games like crysis and watch dogs.

Even though I'm a software developer by trade mostly business apps using the. Net framework, I've never don't any direct X programming and don't really care about fsx or p3d code. I just want it work mainly the cloud issue because that seems to be what alot of people are having issues with. Now you seem to not have this problem and that's fine. After all you do have $1000 i7 and gpu. Not everyone can afford this combo to get p3d to perform better in bad weather.

Edited August 27, 201411 yr by devgrp
Removed excessive quote. Again!

I also tried that mod you posted for the VAS and 15 minutes into the flight with a2a Cessna I ran oom. Like I said my settings are moderate. Dense autogen and scene complexity. No Shadows except for planes and 1024 textures

 

It's an i7 4770K @4.7ghz and a gtx 780.

 

There must be something wrong with your computer... but I suppose you know how to set one up, being a software developer. I have an i7 4790 but at 4.5Ghz and also a GX780 (but with 6 GB). Not too different from your system, I think. (The 6GB VRAM is of no importance here.) I have flown nothing else but the A2A Cherokee 180 which is very similar to the C172: I think the Cherokee is even a bit heavier on the system. I fly with Extremely dense scenery, really ALL shadows on (apart from terrain which is bugged), volumetric fog, HDR, all reflections enabled, well, I gues you could call my settings pretty high. I have Global+Vector+OpenLC and use ASN for weather (set to 3 layers max btw). And I have not had one OOM on this computer. With your moderate settings it should be impossible to get an OOM, it seems to me...! My flights usually are short but certainly longer than 15 minutes (usually between 30 to 60 minutes). Again, seems to me something is wrong with your PC.

 

EDIT

I have 16 GB RAM CL8 1600 and don't use AI (apart from cars and boats at 10%).

I wouldn't call my system moderate unless you compare it to yours. It's an i7 4770K @4.7ghz and a gtx 780.

Your system is stronger than mine and yet I run Prepar3D without the issues you complain about. I wonder why?

 

I must have a magical computer!

There must be something wrong with your computer... but I suppose you know how to set one up, being a software developer. I have an i7 4790 but at 4.5Ghz and also a GX780 (but with 6 GB). Not too different from your system, I think. (The 6GB VRAM is of no importance here.) I have flown nothing else but the A2A Cherokee 180 which is very similar to the C172: I think the Cherokee is even a bit heavier on the system. I fly with Extremely dense scenery, really ALL shadows on (apart from terrain which is bugged), volumetric fog, HDR, all reflections enabled, well, I gues you could call my settings pretty high. I have Global+Vector+OpenLC and use ASN for weather (set to 3 layers max btw). And I have not had one OOM on this computer. With your moderate settings it should be impossible to get an OOM, it seems to me...! My flights usually are short but certainly longer than 15 minutes (usually between 30 to 60 minutes). Again, seems to me something is wrong with your PC.

there is nothing wrong with my pc. I do know my way around computers and the Windows of. P3d 2.3 was a clean install. I also have fsx installed on separate hdd. Go take a look at some of my videos. I have fsx running very good. Like I said the I only issue I have is with clouds and I'm not the only one have this problem.

Your system is stronger than mine and yet I run Prepar3D without the issues you complain about. I wonder why?

 

I must have a magical computer!

maybe that's what it is but I've seen many people complain about the same issue with clouds cutting fps in half. So unless you you really do have a magical computer or you are only flying in clear weather.

In just about every aspect, P3D is performing better and more consistently for me right now than FSX. This is with moderately complex planes (i.e. A2A 180) and moderately complex scenery (FTX PNW). It's smooth, good frame rate, absolutely sharp terrain graphics, no stutters, beautiful graphics, no visible autogen pop-in, and no endless tweaking or fiddling with settings (at last!)

 

I am actually surprised how much I can crank the sliders in 2.3. The highest detail water and tesellation has almost zero impact on performance. I can now go very dense autogen for trees and dense for buildings (before was dense/normal). Compared to 2.1, I've gained perhaps 30% in slider headroom while also gaining a few frames (and more consistent frame rate). I am, in fact, having a hard time optimizing any further because turning down anything doesn't really provide any benefit. Perhaps that means my CPU and video card are nicely balanced.

 

Keep in mind this is not a top-notch system. It's an older 2600K CPU and a GTX 770. I'm not sportin' twin Titans here or anything.

 

The one exception to overall great performance, I would say, is heavy weather/overcast with cloud shadows. If I turn off cloud shadows, it all sorts itself out quite nicely. I perhaps wouldn't expect my current settings to work well with a complex airliner at complex airports. I know others are seeing bigger problems with clouds, and this is probably a big deal for the IFR heavy iron guys -- so I hope it gets sorted.

 

Meanwhile, I couldn't be happier. They've done amazing things with FSX. It's got me back into simming after giving up on FSX some time ago.

 

 

maybe that's what it is but I've seen many people complain about the same issue with clouds cutting fps in half. So unless you you really do have a magical computer or you are only flying in clear weather.

I've seen the same complaints and that's what puzzling me... This evening I flew with a heavy overcast, in and out of clouds, and had no real problems... (other than those that are to be expected with my rather insane settings ^_^ ). Clouds seem to give me no extra problems. Maybe it has to do with the kind of clouds you use? Do you use REX or default clouds or HDE v2? I am using HDE v2 right now (512x512 DTX5). Maybe it also has to do with the kind of clouds the weather engine is using...? Do you use Inspector for SGAA? That's killing for any PC. It's very strange because a lot of people do NOT have this problem.

I've seen the same complaints and that's what puzzling me... This evening I flew with a heavy overcast, in and out of clouds, and had no real problems... (other than those that are to be expected with my rather insane settings ^_^ ). Clouds seem to give me no extra problems. Maybe it has to do with the kind of clouds you use? Do you use REX or default clouds or HDE v2? I am using HDE v2 right now (512x512 DTX5). Maybe it also has to do with the kind of clouds the weather engine is using...? Do you use Inspector for SGAA? That's killing for any PC. It's very strange because a lot of people do NOT have this problem.

I'm not using ni. As a matter of fact I asked about ni one of the threads about rob's settings and never got an answer. But no ni because I've seen post that says it's not necessary and to tell the truth the aa in p3d looks fine at 4x. I'm also not using ssaa. I didn't even know u could use that because I haven't even messed with the cfg file until rob posted the mod for VAS issue in another thread.

 

I'm using rex4 clouds at 512. When I get home I'll make another video showing my settings.

 

Here is first flight I did when I install p3d

 

 

I wasn't aware that NI worked at all with P3D?

well since fsx and p3d and both 32 bit programs then the VAS issue will never go away

 

Ok, getting closer ... so in order to get out of the 32bit VAS limit we need a 64bit version ... how do we get a 64bit version?  

 

We need someone (a development group) to be actively coding and expanding the platform ... so who is currently doing that?

 

Lockheed Martin is currently doing that with P3D ... Lockheed have indicated they "plan" to do a 64bit version (believe it or not, they have indicated such) ... but before they do that, they are bringing the 7 old technology current to DX11 and adding some new features along the way and getting it stable ... a solid plan IMHO.  Get a new platform going, do a 64bit product, allow a gradual migration and 3rd party transition to 64bit.  What's the FSX plan?  Anyone?  

 

Lets put XP10 aside because I know someone will eventually drag it into this thread because it is 64bit ... so lets just try to keep the focus on FSX and P3D (nothing against XP10 it's good in it's own rights and some 3rd party may move in that direction, fair enough, all good).

 

3rd party is already at their limit, they keep on producing better and better products with more and more reality and they keep on using more and more VAS ... they have to ... no choice, they can't lower the bar because they'll use more VAS if they do ... that just doesn't sell -- who would buy a FlightBeam KSFO v2 that looked worse that v1 but it did use less VAS??  Would you - I wouldn't?  3rd party can not indefinitely keep telling everyone to keep turning down their graphics details, or not to use XYZ product, or don't do this because it uses XXX VAS, etc. etc.  there is a REAL FINITE limit and this process is NOT sustainable long term in a 32bit address space.

 

Now if I were a 3rd party provider and/or company owner, I would have long ago realized this finite limit -- add to my knowledge of the possibility of a 64bit product from LM -- I would be extremely relieved that my company has a long term viable future.  Some 3rd party vendors have embraced LM (some have not) and yes it's not been easy for them to do so ... but those companies embracing LM are looking out for a long term future.

 

Is there uncertainty, sure there is ... but one thing is VERY certain, NO development is happening to FSX ... if you are looking for Dovetail to "save the day" you'll not see that happening any time soon if ever.  I asked them point blank if they are going to modify the FSX code and they simply avoided the questions and said they plan to release DLC for it in 2015.  Since you're a developer, if you are interested Dovetail are hiring http://www.dovetailgames.com/vacancies/2014/jun/11/software-engineer-with-graphics-ref-seggo009 but notice this position is for "Trains Core" and looking for Unreal 3/4 engine experience ... nothing for Flight Simulation/ESP experience so I'm 99% sure there is NO development happening with "Dovetail FSX" or else one would expect to see a lot of open "for hire" positions.

 

As far as hardware costs and affordability ... that's not relevant ... if it were, FSX would have never been produced, FS9 would have never been produced and we all would still be playing pong ... don't know about you, but I used to play Pong back in 1970's ... it was fun ... for about 2 hours and then I never touched it again.  

 

Threads like this are equivalent of putting a gun to your foot, pulling the trigger and blowing your foot off just because you have another foot and you don't really need two feet as you can make do with just one foot.  But some of us like two feet, in fact if we had 3 or even 4 legs that might be great also, never need to buy a chair again.

 

Cheers, Rob.

I wasn't aware that NI worked at all with P3D?

 

Well, it does. It always did afaik too. And you can get awesome AA with it!!! Unfortunately the price is too high: bad performance. I learned to live with the shimmering here and there.

 

 

there is nothing wrong with my pc. I do know my way around computers and the Windows of. P3d 2.3 was a clean install.

 

Respectfully, because I have been coding for over 40 years - your results indicate the opposite. If what you are doing isn't working, you have a few options - change what you are doing or blame someone else. You seem to have chosen the latter.

 

YOUR system as you state it, is perfectly capable of running P3D exceptionally well - all you need to do is learn how to set it up properly because what you are doing is not working. Possibly accepting the fact that even with your experience you may not have a clue what to do in THIS situation might be a start.

 

Vic

Ok, getting closer ... so in order to get out of the 32bit VAS limit we need a 64bit version ... how do we get a 64bit version?

lol that's a lot of typing. Didn't actually read all of it but yeah I know the limitations of the 32bit system. Maybe I should rephrase what I said to until p3d goes to 64bit there will be a vas issue. I know I'm not the only one to run oom using p3d that's supposed to have been better with the VAS issue.

I'm not I interested in working for dovetail nor do I think they will save fsx. Personally I don't care. For a platform that hasn't been developed for I while it runs pretty well if you ask me and the addon developers keep raising the bar. With all the wonderful addons that's been released this and last year who am I to complain .

If lm fixes the cloud issue then I'll be a happy camper and I can fly my GA planes without sim becoming a slide show in bad weather. Like I said I paid money for fsx and p3d so I have no allegiance to either. Hardware costs and affordability has everything to do with this hobby, because having a decent system makes the hobby alot more enjoyable.

Respectfully, because I have been coding for over 40 years - your results indicate the opposite. If what you are doing isn't working, you have a few options - change what you are doing or blame someone else. You seem to have chosen the latter.

lol look around the p3d forum and you'll see I'm not the only one having cloud problem. So who am I suppose to blame but the developer? Never once did I say I had bad performance. I said the game was Smooth, it's only when there is bad weather and lots of cloud coverage when things get ugly. Oh and the VAS issue in orbx land. Those are the only 2 issues I'm having

 

Oh and think I'm some noon who don't know what I'm doing. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to change a few settings and and go do a test to see how performance is. I don't have my settings maxed out. Don't even have cloud shadows on

Edited August 27, 201411 yr by devgrp
Removed excessive quote.

Threads like this are equivalent of putting a gun to your foot, pulling the trigger and blowing your foot off just because you have another foot and you don't really need two feet as you can make do with just one foot.  But some of us like two feet, in fact if we had 3 or even 4 legs that might be great also, never need to buy a chair again.

 

My god I want to frame this. Like seriously. I may print it out and put it in my cubicle.

 

Regarding the cloud FPS issue. I had a thought:

 

devgrp,

 

Can you turn off all your reflections in the water? See what that does. I current have no reflections, they don't look right to me. The clouds to my knowledge do not mirror like that in real life, building do but not nearly as perfect. Same for trees. I just wanted the light, which still reflects.

 

Bathemetry can be turned off as well probably.

My god I want to frame this. Like seriously. I may print it out and put it in my cubicle.

 

Regarding the cloud FPS issue. I had a thought:

 

devgrp,

 

Can you turn off all your reflections in the water? See what that does. I current have no reflections, they don't look right to me. The clouds to my knowledge do not mirror like that in real life, building do but not nearly as perfect. Same for trees. I just wanted the light, which still reflects.

 

Bathemetry can be turned off as well probably.

I'll try when I get home but I've never had bathemetry turned on