Simply amazed at first demo try so far

 

 KEWR to  KJFK (both from NewYork X DEMO) in Aerosoft 319 with Manhattan X active

 

Full P3D original clouds thru ASN (5000 partially OC)

most sliders at or near max, shadows at 40000 with shadow detail 50%, scenery at one knotch from highest, AG at 50%, road 5%, no water detail

UT2 at 60%

 

Before I would get 11 taxying, goes to 14-18

In cloud was down to 9 at times, now 15++18 wow

rest of flight at 7000 in cloud and out was reg +20 fps compared to -13 before

Seems to reduce jitters by half if not more

22+ on final, 20- at touchdown. (was 14 or so before)

 

Amazing, even avoided OOM until touchdown at KJFK just enough to get to tarmac thats it though ran out of neurons....

this OOM was happening over LGA at 7000 before, enroute for plan for 31L at KJFK with no chance of getting near final even.

With fiber accelerator I landed with almost full scenery showing at least

 

NICE UI as well

IM sorry just try it and i dont see no benefice on my system . they should do a program for stutter lol

I'm afraid there are so many variables at play here that it'll be next to impossible to glean anything beneficial/informative from other users tests. Even if they establish some sort of repeatable benchmark, precisely recorded /documented it and then share their results with us...it's only going to be indicative of their system.

 

Regardless if the general consensus is positive or negative;  "YMMV" has probably never been more accurate.

 

I am going to use my remaining test sessions carefully to try and evaluate if it's worth the cost/effort for me, my system, and the way I like to fly.

 

I'd like to add that I think it's great that the developers have given us the ability to test before purchasing.

I guess if you put it in a situation already optimized to P3D basic performance, it will most likely not change much of anything that dont need a'changin.

I guess if you put it in a situation already optimized to P3D basic performance, it will most likely not change much of anything that dont need a'changin.

 

I agree on this 100%

 

 

FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.01

 

Shouldn't this read:

FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.10

 

??

I agree on this 100%

I do as well,  but it's the concept of being able to dynamically change some of the parameters of the sim while it's running in order to reduce the load and attempt to maintain a set fps that is interesting.

 

Similar in theory to the traffic optimizer that has been discussed here recently.

 

If your not taxing your system any to begin with then it really doesn't need to change a thing.  If you slam dunk it like I did on my first test run  there's only so much it can do to try and improve the situation,  I think it does have some promise getting you a few fps where you may not have had them before under taxing situations.  Might be worthwhile yet I'm staying a bit optimistic until I can test further.

 

I think it was a mistake for the developers to come out and say, "give it your worst"!  a bit too optimistic I believe!  

I also suspect that some imposed reduction in texture advance loading enabled my RAM usage to not grow as fast as it  otherwise would have, yet, eventually the textures did get loaded and a OOM resulted, albeit just before touchdown, with a sufficient grace period (by not touching the notice pop-up) to get to the tarmac, then it quit.... as expected

 

Is there any on-the-fly tweaking in the accelerator that can avoid this final OOM? Using Sysinternals process explorer, I read a high 3,95 G RAM virtual usage just before the expiration date, P3D seeming to do quite well just prior to that at a loading of 3,91G

 

We also need a 64 bit platform... obviously

 

ADDENDUM:  I realized I forgot to reduce cloud layers in ASN to 8 (from 12) this eliminated the OOM  so all completed

Parked at the gate @ KJFK ; loading = 3,91G without the dreaded OOM

I did some tests with the demo I must say its pretty impressive once your system is setup for it!

 

First test was with FSXMark11, first 120 seconds, recorded with Fraps, no AI traffic. This showed no change with FA, I always got 31 FPS average, with or without.

 

Second test was with CLS 747 (in fact all other tests were this) on approach to KJFK runway 31L over water. This again showed no improvement with FA. I was always averaging mid 20s in the beginning and mid teens while landing.

 

Next up, Aerosoft Heathrow. So I am just parked and turning FA on/off, while I check FPS in VC and spot (viewing in different directions). Here I get about 20% increase in FPS. Something like going from 24-25 to 29-30, but base FPS differs in the view. Surprisingly to me, the VC view, in which I am just looking at the terminal wall, also shows a 20% FPS increase, from 14-15 to 18-19.

 

Next up Flytampa Dubai and DD's UUEE. Here I saw no difference. So what I did is lowered my scenery complexity from max to Normal. And voila, I see a 20% FPS increase in these airports also.

 

I ran the FSXMark11 test again with reduced complexity and now I see a 25% FPS increase, from 20 to 25!

Note: In these runs of FSXMark11, I had AI traffic turned on with AI limit at 100 with traffic optimizer running. Hence the overall FPS is lower compared to the 31 without traffic.

 

My suggestion to folks who say that it does not show any difference is to lower your settings, scenery complexity at least, and try.

 

I have 5 more runs left in the demo, but I am almost convinced.

 

I have 5 more runs left in the demo, but I am almost convinced.

 

 

7 here and "almost" convinced as well

 

its money after all

 

ADDENDUM: After re-doing the flight without FA and getting up to at times 37% less fps and more jitters, and the RAM usage running way to high too fast,,,,

 

I bought a license for the Fiber Accelerator.

 

BUT have already submitted a ticket since it would not load after activation

So I restarted computer, and NOW it requested an activation AGAIN ?? and it will not activate ???

had uninstalled demo as told to

 

what ???  talk about frustrating !

Shouldn't this read:

FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.10

 

 

 

0.01 does even more than 0.10. It could lead to blurry textures in FSX but I never had any blurries with it in P3D.

 

I'd like to share my thoughts on FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.01 and Fiber Accelerator:

 

When I limit the FPS within P3D (I noticed some stutters in turns with unlimited FPS on my system that I don't have with limited FPS) it leads to a FPS decrease of about 20-30 %. When I add the above tweak to the prepar3d.cfg I get these FPS back. So I'm happy with limited FPS and the above tweak on my system.

 

I tried FA without that tweak and also noticed an FPS gain of about 20-30%. But I achieve the same with the above tweak.

With the tweak in my .cfg I didn't  notice any changes by using FA.     

 

So my thoughts were that FA isn't doing very much more than adding the above tweak.

 

Could you guys who reported an FPS gain with Fiber Accelerator please make sure that you can't achieve the same with this tweak and without FA (add the above line to the [main] section of your prepar3d.cfg) and report back?

 

Thanks

 

Ralf

Guys, do you realize that you are paying 30 euro for a software that doesn't do anything that you can't do yourself by changing a simple value in your p3d config file? Yes, you will get higher FPS if you reduce your graphical settings. Nothing new here, no magic.

They tried to do this before with FSX booster, and now this. Seems like people will still throw their money at anything as long a the advertising mention increased FPS. Amazing.

Yeah, pass. My sim left on unlimited fps gets WAY higher fps. It literally caused low frame rates and stutters.  

0.01 does even more than 0.10. It could lead to blurry textures in FSX but I never had any blurries with it in P3D.

 

I'd like to share my thoughts on FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.01 and Fiber Accelerator:

 

When I limit the FPS within P3D (I noticed some stutters in turns with unlimited FPS on my system that I don't have with limited FPS) it leads to a FPS decrease of about 20-30 %. When I add the above tweak to the prepar3d.cfg I get these FPS back. So I'm happy with limited FPS and the above tweak on my system.

 

I tried FA without that tweak and also noticed an FPS gain of about 20-30%. But I achieve the same with the above tweak.

With the tweak in my .cfg I didn't  notice any changes by using FA.     

 

So my thoughts were that FA isn't doing very much more than adding the above tweak.

 

Could you guys who reported an FPS gain with Fiber Accelerator please make sure that you can't achieve the same with this tweak and without FA (add the above line to the [main] section of your prepar3d.cfg) and report back?

 

Thanks

 

Ralf

 

Guys, do you realize that you are paying 30 euro for a software that doesn't do anything that you can't do yourself by changing a simple value in your p3d config file? Yes, you will get higher FPS if you reduce your graphical settings. Nothing new here, no magic.

They tried to do this before with FSX booster, and now this. Seems like people will still throw their money at anything as long a the advertising mention increased FPS. Amazing.

 

Thanks for the push guys. You are right.

 

The FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.01 is indeed the solution. Actually even before trying out FA I tried Ralf's suggestion but it made no difference.

 

But there is one significant difference now with FA experiments. I reduced my complexity to normal! Now I changed the fiber frame fration to .01 and my FSXMark11 FPS went to 27.7/27.8. So that's an increase of 36%, even better that FA!

 

So in my case, reducing the complexity gives the system some headroom for fiber frame time to do its magic.

 

My money stays in my pocket for now.

 

Edit: Sure I have blurries now, but that can be sorted by balancing fiber time. And I think that's what FA is doing, its not pushing the fiber time to 0.01 but a little higher value to keep blurries out.

Im starting to get disappointed indeed

 

Cannot activate the thing

 

It was activated then it got itself de-activated

 

ERRGGGG

 

 

Filed a ticket last night, no response still

 

 

Guys, do you realize that you are paying 30 euro for a software that doesn't do anything that you can't do yourself by changing a simple value in your p3d config file? Yes, you will get higher FPS if you reduce your graphical settings. Nothing new here, no magic.

They tried to do this before with FSX booster, and now this. Seems like people will still throw their money at anything as long a the advertising mention increased FPS. Amazing.

 

The only diff is it does o "on-the-fly", and varies with conditions.

You dont notice the reduced texture filtering at altitudes above 4000 or so