New GeForce drivers

[Richard Sennett 2,499]

Thanks man, but you know how this is... It could run buttery smooth and we will still look for something to tweak, just because... LOL

 

Welcome - something to tweak yah been there a million times   

[denali 74]

I don't know, but I think I see less micro-stutter with this driver.

[supersym 60]

Thanks for the explanation Rob, much appreciated.

 

Since the release of 344.48 drivers and NvidiaInspector settings set as below I'm very happy with P3D, the dreadful shimmering has pretty much been completely eliminated:

 

AA Mode: Enhance

AA Setting: 8x CSAA

AA Transparency Multisampling: Enabled

AA Transparency Supersampling: 4x Sparse Grid

 

Hello !

What are your settings in P3D ?

I read it in the following post  :smile:

[georgio1952 52]

driver working

[Aeroflux 0]

 But yes, P3D is low on nVidia's priority list, Goat Simulator is however high on their priority list ... a sad reality of the state of this industry.

 

.Cheers, Rob.

 

It is up to LM to make this title a priority with Nvidia.....so far I have not seen any betterment in optimizations including antialiasing, G-sync and performance in general!

[Guest]

 

 

It is up to LM to make this title a priority with Nvidia.....so far I have not seen any betterment in optimizations including antialiasing, G-sync and performance in general!

 

I think you got your quoting a little mixed up there Aeroflux ... but I'll disagree with your statement.

 

LM can only go so far with nVidia, they have no power to MAKE nVidia do anything nor bump their requests up in priority.  The only way to get priority with nVidia is if "we the masses" purchased millions of copies of P3D.  Given that Dovetail recently released sales information that indicated FSX sold 280,000 copies and given that goat simulator has now sold over 1 million copies in a relatively short period of time ... that's where nVidia get their priority.  I have no idea how many P3D V2.x licenses have been sold but I'm guessing it's less than FSX at 280,000.

 

SLI driver support priority is very much in our hands (the community) ... and hence why it would appear to me our odds of getting Multi-GPU support will probably come from DX12 where the developers have more control over multi-GPU processing (less reliance on nVidia) -- which will happen first??  Who knows.

 

The last I heard from LM about driver/SLI support for P3D V2.x is that the ball is in nVidia's court.  Many of us did voice our requests on nVidia forums but with the exception of nVidia acknowledging a bug fix in the drivers for P3D there has been no response or any other type of acknowledgement from nVidia.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[carlito777 725]

LM can only go so far with nVidia, they have no power to MAKE nVidia do anything nor bump their requests up in priority.

 

I think this is not entirely true. Lockheed Martin is a defense and aerospace company with $50 billion in sales. They could have nVidia for breakfast if they wanted to. The question really is what is LM's priority. I'm sure that if they really really wanted support from nVidia they would certainly get it. The question is if P3D is high enough on the priority list within LM or not. Maybe they are just fine with the way a stock P3D runs and don't see much need for SLI. Maybe it's just us "training" pilots who want SLI so badly because we keep adding all those complex add-ons which bring P3D down to it's knees. I don't know. I just have a hard time to believe that only the number of copies sold is what drives nVidias' priority list. LM has so much power that if they wanted, they would get the priority needed.

[William J.S.S 173]

Not everyone bows down to other companies. I am sure that LM hold as much watch with Nvidia as an actual glass of water. It all comes down to one company, do what makes it money, and gives it support. I am sorry, and while I love this hobby, we have nothing of the like of some of these other games. Call of Duty 4 still has more active users than P3D has now I would guess.

 

Popularity is what it comes down to...sorry, and huge titles using Nvidia tech.....it is all in the marketing. LM has none for our side of this sim, and what LM uses the majority of their P3D tech for, is not us, that are more worried about looks, than function.

[Cruachan 705]

The impression we were given by LM several versions ago was that SLI was not far off from becoming a reality in P3D. So far, it hasn't happened and all we are hearing is "the ball is in their (NVIDIA's) court".

 

There must have been some reason why LM were optimistic that this would happen sooner rather than later. The fact that it hasn't leads one to suspect NVIDIA have renaged on an assurance given by an employee in a moment of indiscretion. NVIDIA are holding all the cards and we just don't figure in their corporate master plan of priorities. I suspect any more pressure brought to bear will be counter-productive and will only encourage greater resistance from yet another company that has become far too powerful.

 

We've been let down and powerless to do anything about it. It ain't nice, but we have to acknowledge that this is simply another example of the harsh realities of modern business practice.

 

Mike

[airlinejets 709]

The fact that it hasn't leads one to suspect NVIDIA have renaged on an assurance given by an employee in a moment of indiscretion.

 

 

Mike, nVidia is just following their business model which is to cater to game developers. Game developers who sell millions of copies of their games. It's not all doom and gloom. We stand to benefit with every driver update, like everyone else.

 

Both of these companies have a very different clientele.

[gfd 15]

Both of these companies have a very different clientele.

 

You are right Michel. The two companies walk different routes. The amount of revenue that P3D generates for LM is minuscule. I wonder if eventually, the software will ride on top of LM manufactured hardware, accompanied by LM designed training programs? Perhaps I am really out of touch and it already does.

 

If an SLI profile for P3D was a high priority for LM, somebody high up at Lockheed would contact somebody high up at Nvidia. They would agree that it was going to get done and then instruct their prople to make it so.

 

If Nvidia gets around to it...cool. Otherwise, I suppose Rob Ainscough's suggestion that it may have to wait for DX12, is probably on the money. I am assuming he is saying that DX12 will allow developers to more easily create a profile. If not, Rob, please accept my apologies.

 

But don't blame Nvidia. I would be willing to bet that we collectively spend as much money on our hobby as those using games that sell in the hundreds of thousands. That doesn't matter. If game A sells 500000 and P3D sells 10000, Nvidia sees 500000 potential video cards. That's a no brainer for the good folks at NV.

 

Please forgive the long post. Just venting.

[Cruachan 705]

Defending NVIDIA's position is hardly going to get us where we need to be. Let me continue playing the devil's advocate a little longer; perhaps there is another explanation.

 

When you see the large number of existing titles with SLI profiles I do wonder just how difficult it is to create an SLI profile specifically for each game. Perhaps there are similarities shared by many titles making it possible to employ a generic core profile to which optimisations are introduced to ensure best compatibility.

 

Prepar3D is a complex simulation. That much we know. Is it possible that NVIDIA have already tried and failed or, at least, have found that the unique nature of the graphic rendering routines has imposed significant obstacles making the creation of such a profile a real challenge? "The ball is in their court". We await the verdict.

 

Mike

[Guest]

 

 

I am assuming he is saying that DX12 will allow developers to more easily create a profile. If not, Rob, please accept my apologies.

 

No, the API provides more control/access to GPUs (if they exist on the client computer) ... nVidia profiles would most likely still exist but they would be "perhaps" a level removed in their implementations of SLI.

 

 

 

Is it possible that NVIDIA have already tried and failed or, at least, have found that the unique nature of the graphic rendering routines has imposed significant obstacles making the creation of such a profile a real challenge?

 

Are you planting an idea, or do you have real information?  Like I said, last I heard was the SLI ball was in nVidia's hands.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[vgbaron 3,731]

Gee, it sure sounds good. The Prez of LM calls the Prez of Nvidia and says - give us a profile or else!!

 

Yeah sure! The ONLY thing that will motivate NV is CONSUMER DEMAND - and we AND LM do not have that yet. I am sure the Wes and the team would LOVE to have a SLI profile but the only priority that matters is NV. When it is profitable for them to spend the man hours to develop a P3D profile, then we will get one.

 

But the speculation does make for humorous reading! 

 

Vic
 

[carlito777 725]

Yeah sure! The ONLY thing that will motivate NV is CONSUMER DEMAND

 

But the speculation does make for humorous reading!

 

Vic

 

LOL. What is really funny is how most of you guys believe in textbook economics. The real world is much different. Especially if defense matters are involved. Believe me, if LM would really want the profile they would get it. And if really nobody influential at LM decides to "remind" NVIDIA of the right priorities, then we will never get that profile.