Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
LecLightning56

Disappointed with Frame Rates

Recommended Posts

I have done a back-to-back comparison of the iFly 737-800 in both FSX and Prepar3D v2.4, with the same add-ons (ORBX), at the same airfield (Barkston Heath AB in the UK) and I must confess I am very disappointed with the frame rates in P3D. Whereas I can achieve approximately 38-40 FPS in FSX, I am only really getting half of this at 18FPS in P3D. This to me is almost a show-stopper for serious use of P3D with my current rig. I understand that FSX is predominantly CPU-based whereas P3D does allegedly make more use of GPU. Even turning the sliders down in P3D (as some have suggested) seems to have little effect in improving the situation.

 

I am using a GTX 970 graphics card which I would have thought would be more than adequate, short of major expenditure otherwise. My CPU is a little dated (an i7 875K with boost to 3.6 GHz), but the exercise with FSX suggests that the CPU is certainly up to it where CPU-dependency is concerned.

 

Is this typical of other peoples experiences of P3D, or are you faring better in this respect? The impression is that for serious P3D applications, a particularly capable rig is required with a CPU far in excess of my own perhaps meagre 3.6 GHz, despite the fact that P3D makes better use of the GPU. If this is the case then not all of us are prepared to venture into such expenditure merely for the sake of comparatively inexpensive flight simulation software. It is perhaps a pity that, in achieving what they have with P3D, Lockheed Martin has apparently sacrificed so much in the process, with what is essentially an improved version of FSX (and I cannot deny that they have progressed things very significantly), albeit for academic and professional use.

 

Your thoughts and suggestions here would be most welcome, and I most certainly do not want to ditch P3D completely at this stage on account of its poor performance relative to FSX, in terms of FPS.

 

 

 

Paul Hermon

Share this post


Link to post

Hi there,

 

I used to have performance issues as well and it took quite a while to collect and try the various tweaks that are supposed to improve performance. In the end it boiled down to this:

- Reduce textures to 1024 resolution - reduces blurries and possibly the risk of OOM

- Reduce cloud shadows to 10km

- Turn off all car and ship traffic  > this does not increase the framerates terribly much, but it does help to make P3D run considerably smoother

- Tweaks in P3D.cfg: Add FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.01 as suggested here; and TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=160 (details here)  > these tweaks can increase performance considerably

 

Of course tweaking is very individual so your results may vary greatly! But with the above tweaks I am able to run P3D on high or even very high settings on my so-so hardware (i5-750 3.4 GHz, GTX770) without any performance issues, even in large airports. I don't have the iFly but with your hardware it should definetly be possble to get P3D to run at least as smooth as FSX.

 

Cheers,

Steve

Share this post


Link to post

But most of all, try using

 

[bufferPools]

UsePools=0

RejectThreshold=131072

 

....in your FSX.CFG.    I think this could yield great benefits on your system because it passes more processing from the CPU to the GPU, and you have a considerably beefier GPU than you have CPU.

Share this post


Link to post

I tried the iFly NGX for P3D and had the same results. Even at cruise altitude I was lucky to get 25FPS. I7 2600K@4.6, GTX770. I returned it for a refund. The only other aircraft that rivaled it for poor performance is the CS777.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Your thoughts and suggestions here would be most welcome, and I most certainly do not want to ditch P3D completely at this stage on account of its poor performance relative to FSX, in terms of FPS.

 

Paul Hermon

 

Don't think it's P3D as we looked at this in the past. I ran a few tests as did others and got the same results like something is limiting the frames to 20 in P3D from select FSX port overs.

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/439558-ifly-737-for-prepar3d-v22/?p=3060591

 

IFLY VER 3.2.1

PMDG 737 1.0

 

P3D 2.3

 

FSX

      IFLY        49+/- FPS

      PMDG     45+/-FPS

      Phenom  52+/- FPS

 

P3D

      IFLY         23+/- FPS

      PMDG     25+/- FPS

      Phenom   53+/- FPS

Share this post


Link to post

Vincent,

               I think this is part of the problem with this aircraft. It's a straight port over from FSX with no optimization for P3D. Then they charge $79 to boot. 

Share this post


Link to post

I have tried the various tweaks as suggested but there is no significant improvement. I am beginning to think that a lack of optimisation for P3D may be, in part, the issue with a number of products which are themselves marketed as P3D versions but may possibly be, as Mike W has put it, straight ports over from FSX.

 

Whether or not we shall see any upheavals of certain products to improve their performance in P3D remains to be seen, but I suspect for a lot of us we may have to continue to use FSX to enjoy something better than a slide show.

 

Thanks for all your inputs thus far. 

Share this post


Link to post

Thank goodness I'm not alone. My dated 2500K at 4 ghz (OC is dying week by week used to be at 4.4 ghz) just does not cut it. I'm suprised to hear it's not great with a gtx 970 either. My plan was to upgrade in hopes to increase fps. Previous versions sure seemed to ear up more GPU but 2.4 seems to have gone back to cpu usage focus. Maybe it's just my thoughts though.

 

I agree on about half the fps - I really have gone back to FSX and am considering the GTN 750 for FSX now...

Share this post


Link to post

There should be a balance between the power of CPU and GPU. It doens't work to pair an old CPU with a powerful GPU or vice versa.

 

The comparision FSX/P3D v2 should be on the first hand with the same standard aircraft. On the second hand one can do it with a non standard airplane which has a well done version for P3D v2 too.

 

To do only one flight here and another one there is also a non professionall method and doesn't say anything.

Spirit

Share this post


Link to post

 

 


its poor performance relative to FSX, in terms of FPS.

 

Paul many people new to P3D concentrate on fps as this was uppermost in their mind when using FSX.  Many P3D users turn off the fps counter and instead concentrate on the smoothness and enhanced reality of the sim.  Try that for a while.   <_<

 

I grant you anything under 20fps is noticeable however.  :(

Share this post


Link to post

 

 


I grant you anything under 20fps is noticeable however.

 

But a constant 20+ can be like silk!

Share this post


Link to post

 

 


But a constant 20+ can be like silk!

 

It wasn't for me. For what they were charging, they could have put some effort into it and reworked it for P3D. The saving grace is Flight1's refund policy.

Share this post


Link to post

It wasn't for me. For what they were charging, they could have put some effort into it and reworked it for P3D. The saving grace is Flight1's refund policy.

Then you didn't have a CONSTANT 20+. 

 

I've had flights where it was 60, 35, 65, 30, etc etc. - THAT is stutters.

 

If you can get your system set up so that whatever you cap your FPS at is CONSTANT - you are good to go, be it 20 or 40.

 

I'm playing around wit settings a bit now so I have mine capped at 33 - most of the time it's fine but there are situations when it starts fluctuating and I am not getting the smooth operation I do at 20.

 

Vic

Share this post


Link to post

I am running it unlimited fps and it is a great surprice without stutter.reałly smooth on my system.In the Carenado default i am at 50-60 fps most of the time in ORBX FTX NZSI region. Flytampa EKCH about 40-45fps. Cant really complain with that.

 

Michael Moe with old 344.11 drivers

Share this post


Link to post

What helped most for me was setting FPS to unlimited.

A lot depends on your system and the areas you fly. Unlimited works fine for me but it has a side effect that my GPS screen takes longer to redraw. I have my settings maxed so I am right on the edge - both my GPU's generally run close to 90%. 

P3D is still enough like FSX so that the system will TRY to achieve your settings at the cost of other functions like texture loading, etc. So, for me, running at a smooth 20 or 30 lets my system pump data to the GPU's more efficiently.

 

Some have said that a good rule of thumb is to set unlimited if your fly tubes at high altitude - you don't see the detail at FL30 and to set a limit if you go low and slow.

 

Vic

Share this post


Link to post

A lot depends on your system and the areas you fly. Unlimited works fine for me but it has a side effect that my GPS screen takes longer to redraw. I have my settings maxed so I am right on the edge - both my GPU's generally run close to 90%. 

P3D is still enough like FSX so that the system will TRY to achieve your settings at the cost of other functions like texture loading, etc. So, for me, running at a smooth 20 or 30 lets my system pump data to the GPU's more efficiently.

 

Some have said that a good rule of thumb is to set unlimited if your fly tubes at high altitude - you don't see the detail at FL30 and to set a limit if you go low and slow.

 

Vic

Well, TBH this is exactly the kind of "FSX nonsense" I hoped P3D would fix.

Share this post


Link to post

FYI, the FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.01 tweak allows to use the internal frame rate limiter without the usual loss of performance; or in other words you get the same performance as with "unlimited" but you can still limit the framerate to 30 or whatever your preference is. This makes for a much smoother experience than having the setting at "unlimited" and framerates that jump from 60 to 20 and back all the time. Works perfectly well for me, anyway.

Share this post


Link to post

FYI, the FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.01 tweak allows to use the internal frame rate limiter without the usual loss of performance; or in other words you get the same performance as with "unlimited" but you can still limit the framerate to 30 or whatever your preference is. This makes for a much smoother experience than having the setting at "unlimited" and framerates that jump from 60 to 20 and back all the time. Works perfectly well for me, anyway.

Agree. I'm using FFTF=0.01 plus 30fps lock and the results are quite smooth. With this tweak I can pretty much stick with nearly everything maxed (except for traffic and terrain shadow). In extremely autogen-heavy urban areas P3D still suffers low fps, but the rest of my flights are really nice with these high settings.

Share this post


Link to post

FYI, the FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.01 tweak allows to use the internal frame rate limiter without the usual loss of performance; or in other words you get the same performance as with "unlimited" but you can still limit the framerate to 30 or whatever your preference is. This makes for a much smoother experience than having the setting at "unlimited" and framerates that jump from 60 to 20 and back all the time. Works perfectly well for me, anyway.

Will try that as well. I went back to FFTF=0.33 as i found some blurry with unlimited and FTX NZSI. but your found is worth a try. Also my Mountains in FTX does not like terrain shadows. Textures gets corrupted.

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, I'm not much of a frame-counter myself, I rather judge the sim in how smooth it performs and how it responds -performance-wise- with add-ons installed and atm P3Dv2.4 is shelved. It's just a stuttery mess for me, and flying FSX -with just the basic tweaks- right after a session of P3Dv2 is just no contest at all. FSX is -comparatively- much smoother and less stuttery than P3Dv2. The magic FSX tweak for me (I have an i7 4770 cpu) is just affinitymask=14, put that line in the config and it's just pure smoothness. I've tried all sorts of af values in P3Dv2 but nothing comes close and the textures are slow to load in and usually blurry, in FSX they are razor sharp and load much quicker. It's just so sad, it looks great in pause mode but flying is not fun when you know FSX is so much better. Even P3Dv2 native add-ons aren't much of a help. I'm not a whiner or FSX ######, just a dissapointed -although optimistic- flightsimmer. I still have my academic license and I will try it out again after future updates.

Share this post


Link to post

Kind of happy to hear that, since I am flying FSX DX9,  with AM=14, Vsynch at 1/2 refreshrate, fps locked at 30, on a 4770K@4.0 + GTX770, and quite like the smooth performance and lack of stutters.

 

Guess I will stay put for a while longer.. :wub:

Share this post


Link to post

 FSX is -comparatively- much smoother and less stuttery than P3Dv2.

 

It's funny how (mostly) identical software can work so differently on different machines. I was nearly at the same point some time ago - after updating P3D to 2.4 it was a stuttering, blurry mess for me, very nearly unflyable. I actually bought FSX-SE, installed it and the most essential addons (FTX Global, UTX etc) and was perfectly ready to go back to FSX. As an afterthought I tried some tweaks in P3D which initially only made things worse. But at some point I got lucky and apparently found the magic formula to get P3D working on my system - suddenly it's running wonderfully smooth (considerably more so than FSXSE, even with higher graphics settings) and no more blurries either. I still can hardly believe how well it works now.

 

But, anyway, the important thing is that there is no point in using a software that doesn't run right on one's system. If someone has FSX set up properly and is happy with the results, there's really no need to switch to P3D. Many of us, I think, spend too much time trying to tweak and improve things and not enough time flying anyway (and that includes myself). Instead of complaining and arguing about which simulator is the best one, I think we should be glad that there are several very good choices out there to choose from - and that includes not only FSX and P3D but also X-Plane, DCS, FlightGear and probably some more.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
×
×
  • Create New...