just sended feedback to NVIDIA, maybe if all simmers could do this Daily . Or maybe Avsim could make a sticky for this .

I am also one of those that doesn't install any bloatware that doesn't help performance. I only install NV drivers, no PhysX, no GF Experience, etc.

 

BUT as you said - they are using GF Experience to quantify which title to work on next.

 

Tough call

I think you are wrong about GeForce Experience. Updating drivers has never been so easy. We are informed as soon as a new driver is available, we have the option to perform a clean install AND we can select what to install. Even the virtually brain dead can update successfully and without anxiety. In addition, I believe there is automatic detection of Notebooks but I always pop over to NVIDIA to confirm that a new driver is Indeed Notebook ready:

 

http://www.nvidia.co.uk/Download/index.aspx?lang=en-uk

 

It is completely hassle-free and certainly doesn't affect system performance one jot.

 

Mike

I'm quite sure Nvidia actually knows how many users of PreparD there are - especially compared those of  other games - and will make up its own mind. Flooding Nvidia site with  spurious daily posts won't help.

I'm quite sure Nvidia actually knows how many users of PreparD there are - especially compared those of other games - and will make up its own mind. Flooding Nvidia site with spurious daily posts won't help.

Maybe not, but experience has demonstrated very clearly that quiet reasoned persuasion has had no effect. Perhaps now we need to start making a noise which will only be silenced by NVIDIA's cooperation in this matter. After all that has been said, I would hate to think that NVIDIA are laughing at our expense. I think we should now seriously consider becoming that intolerable itch under their skin and if they want it to go away then they know what they need to do.

 

I don't buy into this numbers nonsense. Prepar3D now qualifies as a VERY significant product deserving of NVIDIA's attention. Their excuses to date are unconvincing and suggest to me that there may be more to this than meets the eye. Another poster has suggested that perhaps the creation of an SLI profile for Prepar3D is proving too difficult, much more so than your average RPG/shooter/goat simulator, etc. This may be correct. Without really knowing what is actually involved, we applaud them for creating, with apparent ease, multiple profiles for these other titles . NVIDIA, of course, will deny it, or simply remain silent which seems to be standard practice these days when an organisation has been found wanting. Okay, let them prove us wrong!

 

As a business NVIDIA are extremely successful. There is only one significant competitor in the market. Accordingly! they can certainly afford to show us a bit more respect and agree to allocate some of their huge resources to the creation of an SLI Profile for Prepar3D.

 

Use GeForce Experience to point NVIDIA to this and similar threads. No point reinventing the wheel. Everything that needs to be said is being voiced here. Perhaps then they will begin to sense the immense passion felt for Prepar3D.

 

Oh, and one other thing: How many Gamers out there have pockets deep enough to invest in SLI? The costs are not insignificant. Are there any published figures? The results may be surprising as the relative percentages could be similar when compared with Prepar3D. This could shed a different light on NVIDIA's assertions that decisions to implement SLI are driven by the popularity of a title. Yes, the actual physical numbers will likely be greater, probably much greater, but then does NVIDIA really want to be known as the company that panders exclusively to the gaming world important though that may be? Perhaps therein lies the problem; Prepar3D, unlike FSX and FS2004 is not a 'Game' and the latter titles do have SLI profiles.

 

Mike

just sended feedback to NVIDIA, maybe if all simmers could do this Daily . Or maybe Avsim could make a sticky for this .

 

Let's go : http://forum.avsim.net/topic/455404-prepar3d-sli-support-i-have-a-dream-let-our-voice-be-heard/

Prepar3D now qualifies as a VERY significant product deserving of NVIDIA's attention.

 

Then you can tell us how many copies of Prepar3D have been sold - compared with other games? also, shouting won't alter the facts.

Then you can tell us how many copies of Prepar3D have been sold - compared with other games? also, shouting won't alter the facts.

Hi Gerry,

 

I have no idea, nor do I see it as being relevant. Equally, I have no clue as to the number of Prepar3D licence holders who are running with an SLI configuration. Can I ask, do you have an SLI setup? Would you like to see NVIDIA produce a profile for Prepar3D? Let's all try to get on the same page and find a way to encourage NVIDIA to do what is needed. There does seem to be an upwelling of interest in this topic - we should be doing all we can to turn this to our advantage...while we can.

 

I think we are singing in the wind by expecting the Prepar3D Developers to apply further pressure on our behalf. I'm guessing their parent company's policy is tying their hands in this respect. However, we are not bound by such policies and I believe we have every right to expect NVIDIA to give this matter their urgent attention.

 

Also, I make no apologies for shouting as I do consider Prepar3D to be a very significant product in the history of simulation software and flight simulation in particular. If NVIDIA fail to recognise that fact by continuing to deny licence holders the much needed SLI optimisations, only they can provide, then this failure will come to be regarded as a grave misjudgement and will never be forgotten... or forgiven. Too strong? Maybe, but reflects quite accurately the way I feel.

 

Follow Vincent's lead, explained helpfully at:

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/455404-prepar3d-sli-support-i-have-a-dream-let-our-voice-be-heard/

 

Regards,

Mike

I have no idea, nor do I see it as being relevant. Equally, I have no clue as to the number of Prepar3D licence holders who are running with an SLI configuration.

 

Then you really have no idea if "Prepar3D now qualifies as a VERY significant product deserving of NVIDIA's attention."  Surely fthe act that Nividia doesn't offer SLI suggests that it isn't a very significant product in Nvidia's terms - regardless in all the huffing and puffing in these forums.  Nvidia will do what it wants.

In a sense, if your games don't take advantage of PhysX and you don't need the marginally useful convenience of GeForce Experience (which is adware) then why bother with all that? It's not as much of an intrusion as the bloatware on smartphones, but it's still largely unneeded.

 

https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/532913/sli/geforce-sli-technology-an-introductory-guide/

 

This guide to SLI technology is worth reading, especially the section on scaling. Basically, the present nVidia profile for P3d yields about a 25 to 30% improvement for dual SLI. That was my experience, but others here have seen either a bit better performance or even no improvement.

 

My guess is that the lack of a new profile is not anything to do with either LM's or Nvidia's priorities, but rather that the present P3d code base just doesn't lend itself to much better scaling. I have faith that at some point, the two companies will find the "sweet spot" in scaling, although it still may not be that great.

Then you really have no idea if "Prepar3D now qualifies as a VERY significant product deserving of NVIDIA's attention."  Surely fthe act that Nividia doesn't offer SLI suggests that it isn't a very significant product in Nvidia's terms - regardless in all the huffing and puffing in these forums.  Nvidia will do what it wants.

 

Pretty much have to concur. It explains why War Thunder got SLI long ago. The size of the market is a huge determinant, and the simple fact, is that civilian flight simming is barely a drop in the bucket comparatively.

Then you really have no idea if "Prepar3D now qualifies as a VERY significant product deserving of NVIDIA's attention." Surely fthe act that Nividia doesn't offer SLI suggests that it isn't a very significant product in Nvidia's terms - regardless in all the huffing and puffing in these forums. Nvidia will do what it wants.

Hi Gerry, HiFlyer

 

It really depends on how you are defining 'significant'. In terms of end user numbers then clearly Prepar3D does not qualify and is never likely to. However, in terms of its importance in the world of simulations there can be very few peers and so qualifies for that recognition. That is the basis of my argument which many here are still chosing to ignore. All this negativity is unlikely to push this forward anytime soon and will only encourage NVIDIA to hold to their position.

 

If you have an SLI setup now (Gerry, you haven't yet confirmed this to be the case) or would like to purchase a second card with that objective in mind, then we need to do some pushing. Doing nothing will achieve nothing.

 

Perhaps, after all, we will be shocked and surprised to find that SLI will become a reality with Prepar3D v2.5. Certainly LM have been very quiet on the subject for some time now. And, let's remember they did lead us all to believe that SLI was on the horizon several versions ago so they may still feel a sense of obligation to fulfil that promise.

 

Meantime:

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/455404-prepar3d-sli-support-i-have-a-dream-let-our-voice-be-heard/

 

Regards,

Mike

 

 

Perhaps Prepar3d isn't popular enough?

 

Nor FSX, nor XP10 ... but add your voice to nVidia feedback, it can't hurt.

 

Goat Simulator and the fans and reviewers of the product are claiming "it's a open world, you can do anything" ... gee, isn't that what Flight Simulation is only it does really cover the globe and Goat Simulator does not.  

 

But I think you'll find the problem to the smaller FS market share in the US is related to these results: http://nypost.com/2013/10/08/us-adults-are-dumber-than-the-average-human/ a sad reminder of the reality of US education ... US entertainment software market share is simply reflecting this rather sad reality.  There is a fairly large International presence in the Flight Simulation market.

 

To summarize, in Europe and other parts of the world they have a higher educated interest in more complex software like flight simulators, in the US there is more interest in trying to kill a goat.

 

Perhaps the International P3D users can chime in on nVidia feedback?

 

GDP (PPP) per capita incomes across the globe, top 10:

 

Qatar $102,211

Luxembourg $79,785

Singapore $60,410

Norway $55,009

Brunei $54,389

Hong Kong: $51,494

United States: $49,922

United Arab Emirates: $49,012

Switzerland: $45,418

Canada: $42,734

 

Cheers Rob.

 

EDIT: as far as LM working with nVidia ... there were very specific adjustments made to P3D so as to be "SLI friendly", so yes the ball is in nVidia's court.

But I think you'll find the problem to the smaller FS market share in the US is related to these results: 

 

To summarize, in Europe and other parts of the world they have a higher educated interest in more complex software like flight simulators, in the US there is more interest in trying to kill a goat.

 

Its the age old "They is 2 dumm to realize how awesome the things I am interested in are." argument.  I've never subscribed to it. I'm more convinced by an article I read some time ago about the increasing niche-dom of sims:

 

The author writes:

 

When Falcon 3.0. was released, I spent endless hours, upgrading my system, wading through the thick manual, and actually became pretty good at it. But after that, I drifted away from flight sims. The genre was getting too complex. I’d return to them occasionally, loving a few games (European Air War comes to mind). But as simulation developers pursued realism above pure game play, the genre faded away. You still see a few action flight games, but the hyper-realistic flight sim has become very much a niche market.

 

Something similar has also happened to war games on the PC. War games were one of the first games developed for early personal computers. Translating complex paper rules to the computer made a lot of the tedious bookkeeping easy. But as PCs became more sophisticated, war games once again became complex. For every accessible title like Panzer General, there were several complex games, epitomized by Gary Grigsby’s War in the Pacific. The Grognard effect struck again.

 

For those of you who don’t know, grognard is derived from the French word for “grumbler.” In the war games world, grognard can be either a compliment (for an experienced, veteran gamer) or a pejorative (remember: “grumbler”). On the pejorative side, grognards tend to complain about lack of realism and, perhaps worse, realistic minutiae.

 

The problem is that focusing on grognards can kill a genre. Board war games in the classical sense have become a tiny fraction of the overall board gaming market. As the European style of board games took off, the old style Avalon Hill games have become a tiny niche.

 

The same thing essentially happened to the flight sim market. As the veteran flight simmers clamored for more realism, the developers delivered that realism—and the genre became stale and dry. Because of that, existing developers have carved out a small niche, but one that’s not growing with the industry.

 

 

 

Until the genre becomes more inviting and open to a wider variety of people, those people will continue to stay away, leaving the genre "pure" but deserted comparatively.

 

And as long as that remains the case, other titles (including Goat simulators) will continue to attract more attention and resources from those other than true believers, and will wait in line behind many others for attention by companies like Nvidia.

To me, anything on my system that is UNNECESSARY to it's operation is bloatware. GFE is a background process that monitors your system and uses that information for many things.

 

As a sim community we have spent years searching for the best FPS, smoothness, etc and one of the first tasks is always to disable any unnecessary bg processes. GFE is one of those.

 

Just like the backup monitors, etc - I update and backup my system once a month - after that I disable all unnecessary processes.

 

Vic

It is completely hassle-free and certainly doesn't affect system performance one jot.

ANYTHING that runs as a bg process affects system performance. There is NOTHING that GFE does that I cannot do manually. I do not want any program doing auto updates on my system. NV themselves have come up with a few drivers over the years that ate some video cards.

IMHO, GFE is adware, bloatware and will have an effect on performance just as ANY running bg process will.

AND it is unnecessary.

Vic

 

 

Nor FSX, nor XP10 ...

 

Well yes, i think we can all agree that they are now niche products and not "a VERY significant product deserving of NVIDIA's attention."   It's self-evident that Prepar3D isn't deserving of Nvidia's attention.

 

Nvidia are a commecial company and will put its development work into those area which gives it the best return. That's presumably why Goat Simulator has SLI and PhysX while Prepar3d doesn't?