FSX SE seems to be optimized regarding better framerates too. Even Pete Dowson has confirmed this.

And it still is more cpu bound than gpu bound.

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/458336-further-fsx-and-fsxse-benchmark-test/#entry3140926

 

Like I wrote above : perhaps there is still headroom for making P3D less VAS hungry and also a little better on fps.

 

 

Like I wrote above : perhaps there is still headroom for making P3D less VAS hungry and also a little better on fps.

 

I'm pretty sure we will see improvements next year. P3D 2.5 will be released early next year. Let's wait and see what LM comes up with. For sure this is going to be more progress than compiling old code with a new compiler...

I hope so. I really have to turn down a lot of eyecandy to keep P3D running without getting an OOM.

 

 

For sure this is going to be more progress than compiling old code with a new compiler...

 

What progress is it going to be?

You got 2 choices

 

what I do

 

1. Complex addon a/c with lower graphic sliders

2. Simple addon a/c with higher graphic sliders.

 

Trying GA default fsx/p3d  a/c with high sliders was impressive.

previously most  my flights were complex heavy iron with lower sliders.

 

GA is only really worth it with high sliders, so I try to avoid fps/Vas eating

GA addon. Need good scenery if flying flow.

 

 

Also trying a feature on process laso that allows you to set watchdog on a task. In p3d/fsx case I set a rule to trim VAS every 60 secs when it exceeds 3Gb, limit is 4Gb.

 

Results aren't impressive so far, in fact not convinced its working, but needs further testing as I am currently focused on completing p3dv2.4 install.

You got 2 choices

 

what I do

 

1. Complex addon a/c with lower graphic sliders

2. Simple addon a/c with higher graphic sliders.

 

Here's a twist on your theme which I do:

 

1.  Complex tubeliner aircraft out of complex 3PD terminals:   FTX Global only

2.  Complex smaller aircraft out of anywhere:  FTX regionals

 

I run all terrain sliders including LOD & tessellation full right.  In fact, graphics sliders have almost no impact on performance, which I assume has to do w/ the fact I am more CPU bound than GPU bound, perhaps.  Autogen & vegetation are at one click left of maximum.  Shadow quality is high.  Cloud shadowing on if clouds aren't overly dense as there is still an inordinate performance impact sometimes w/ cloud shadowing.  I have water quality always maxed, w/ bathymetry deselected.  Cloud textures are 2048 out to 100 miles, medium density.  Global textures 2048.  Runways 4096.  Perhaps I've learned to pick my scenarios carefully.  I'd like to pick up the CS777 depending on how hard it is on performance.  I'm spoiled w/ the fabulous performance:complexity ratio of the CoolSky Super MD80.   It behaves pretty much like default planes yet has a very decent level of complexity.  It saves a bit on lower resolution textures I assume, but even so looks quite nice:

 

 

 

Looks great Noel !

It all boils down to one's computer and addons. These discussions keep going in circles.

 

 

but I haven't hit OOMs on 4+ hour flights in P3D 2.4

May I ask with which aircraft  model did you use for this? And I assume you use ORBX regions?

 

 

I'm spoiled w/ the fabulous performance:complexity ratio of the CoolSky Super MD80.

Hmm, I did not know that CoolSky MD-80 Pro supports P3Dv2?  

 

 

Hmm, I did not know that CoolSky MD-80 Pro supports P3Dv2?  

 

It installs and works using Estonia Migration Tool.  Of note, the graphic for the flight path does not display but LNAV functions fine.