I have a Titan. I believe it has 6gb - but don't quote me. Terrible blurries and stutters.

 

Really ? That would certainly be annoying. so far, in both sim, I have very smooth framerate. I run close to 30fps in both. I would say that for obviously reason, X-plane seem to take more advantage of my PC (I5 4670k + 8GB RAM + R290x 4GB).  I really like the Mesh V3. I only need to get a decent 3rd plane that would really increase my time spent on X-plane. 

 

I've been critical but I am warming up to x-plane. I got my controller figured out but I am still like P3D too much right now to make a permanent switch to X-plane 10. I got too many addons  that I cannot live without but  i've been browsing addons for x-plane for a few weeks and I might get a few. 

Really ? That would certainly be annoying. so far, in both sim, I have very smooth framerate. I run close to 30fps in both. I would say that for obviously reason, X-plane seem to take more advantage of my PC (I5 4670k + 8GB RAM + R290x 4GB). I really like the Mesh V3. I only need to get a decent 3rd plane that would really increase my time spent on X-plane.

 

I've been critical but I am warming up to x-plane. I got my controller figured out but I am still like P3D too much right now to make a permanent switch to X-plane 10. I got too many addons that I cannot live without but i've been browsing addons for x-plane for a few weeks and I might get a few.

I run 3 x 23 inch wide screens. I think that might be part of the problem in P3D. If I run one screen the problem goes away but so does the immersion.

 

Also I just find X Plane has a much better feeling of flight - I am flying in a Tomahawk regularly and sometimes a Cherokee in real life and although the Carenado's are not study sims they perform very closely to the real thing in X Plane and have a feel that just is not mirrored in P3D. I also use TIR and I have 660Gb of add ons in X Plane. It just runs so sweetly. It also gives a much better depth of field/3D visual to me.

 

Anyway - it's personal preference at the end of the day.

 

Cheers

Peter.

Maybe you can suggest me a few addons that could enhance my experience.

Sure. PM me as we are off topic now. I can respond tomorrow in detail.

 

Cheers

Peter.

This is way beyond me technically (but then most things are in the digital world!) but if the reason that X Plane has a steady, non blurry detail, with terrain and objects pretty much visible as far as the eye can see (at lowish altitudes) I cannot for the life of me see any advantage in changing. I have given up on P3D v2 as I cannot live with the texture of a mountain side coming into focus bit by bit (even when up close) like pieces of a jigsaw being added.

 

I assume this is as a result of loading textures on the fly - if not then as I say I am useless at this stuff - if it is as a result of the on-the fly-load then please Andras/Austin/Ben don't change anything. Blurries are the biggest immersion killer, followed closely by stutters, followed closely by OOMs. X Plane has none of these..but for me P3D has all of them (although the OOM thing has reduced significantly) and my system is no slouch.

 

In X Plane I can fly at 450knts at 100 ft altitdude with pretty high settings across San Francisco with no blurries, stutters or OOMs. Not what flight sims are for I know but heck it is such fun. Can't have the same fun in the other options. (I do use it properly as well though for re-running my real life flight training and practising up and coming real world exercises - so I can behave when needed).

 

So please - if it would mean losing that sharpness of detail and fluidity- don't change a thing!

 

cheers

Peter

 

Well yes, these are other downsides of having an on-the-fly approach ... thanks for listing them (didn't think of all of them) ...

 

But let me put it this way: we (me and the guys at laminar) would definitely not introduce a new tech which would mean a step back ... So, should Laminar at any time (again: these are only my thoughts at all - there are absolutely no official plans in this direction at the moment), go down the on-the-fly approach then it would need to be at least as good as the current "pre-gen" approach ... And as technology has advanced a lot, it is indeed possible, that this could happen one day.

 

 

I am not experiencing blurry texture at all in P3D or X-plane. How much memory do you have on your videocard ?

 

2GB, but I think it's more to do with the slower HDD. Although X-Plane takes ages to load on this computer, there are no blurries. So I'd rather it loaded the entire area first 

2GB, but I think it's more to do with the slower HDD. Although X-Plane takes ages to load on this computer, there are no blurries. So I'd rather it loaded the entire area first

Hmmm - I had P3D on an SSD

So I guess SSD doesn't make much difference then. I always thought it was my slow drive causing the blurries, but I've also seen supposedly fast computers on YouTube videos showing the same problems. With a fully loaded FSX with lots of photoscenery, etc.. it took 5 mins to start up, X-Plane can take up to 20 mins (With photoscenery and World2XPlane), but once it's up, it runs great and there are no blurries, even when flying fast.

So I guess SSD doesn't make much difference then. I always thought it was my slow drive causing the blurries, but I've also seen supposedly fast computers on YouTube videos showing the same problems. With a fully loaded FSX with lots of photoscenery, etc.. it took 5 mins to start up, X-Plane can take up to 20 mins (With photoscenery and World2XPlane), but once it's up, it runs great and there are no blurries, even when flying fast.

There is a current thread which I commented on and got a shirty response from WarpD (Ed of Mindstar) who started going on about how X Plane uses fog to stop the blurries and keep the frame rate up. Andras if you have the time and inclination and this is incorrect please put him right as it would be mis-information.

 

The video at the start of the thread is a classic blurries video - probably at its best from about 1:30 - this is what we must avoid in X Plane IMO.

 

Tony - BTW my X Plane is on SSD and it is taking about 2 mins or less to load

up with pretty high rendering settings.

 

Here is the link to the thread:

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/459802-need-help-with-blurry-distant-mountainrock-textures-highres-textures-are-only-loaded-below-aircraft/?p=3154208

 

cheers

Peter

There is a current thread which I commented on and got a shirty response from WarpD (Ed of Mindstar) who started going on about how X Plane uses fog to stop the blurries and keep the frame rate up. Andras if you have the time and inclination and this is incorrect please put him right as it would be mis-information.

 

Well ... I usually do not really enjoy this type of discussion (as they easily escalate into flame wars ... which I do not like), but then I remembered a very interesting article on simflight.de (I participated in it), where they compared many many FSX landclass products (with screenshots) AND we finally added (I did them) screenshots with almost exactly the same perspective, showing XP10 with HD Mesh Scenery v2 (at that time it was v2). The result was quite surprising (especially for the MSFS users) ... and it also shows that there is no more fog anymore (at least not more than you ask for via weather settings)  ...

 

So, I added this to that thread here:

• http://forum.avsim.net/topic/459802-need-help-with-blurry-distant-mountainrock-textures-highres-textures-are-only-loaded-below-aircraft/?p=3156377

I really hope, it does not incite flaming ...

 

And for those, who are not interested in the above thread, here is the direct link to the big simflight.de comparison (no, you don't need to read  B)  ... just scroll down ... usually the last pic in each set is from XP10):

• http://www.simflight.de/2014/09/14/der-grosse-vergleich-mit-welchen-landklassen-und-texturen-sieht-deutschland-besten-aus/

Good stuff Andras - I too am not into the flame war but misinformation has to be put right. You handled it very fairly.Thank you for your insight yet again. 

 

cheers

Peter

I use both FSX and X-Plane 9/10.

 

Until very recently, one of the least realistic features of FSX was the inability to display fog or mist down in valleys.  The line of demarcation between the cloud/fog and adjacent scenery hillsides in FSX was sharp and very unrealistic.  This has finally been "fixed" to some extent with the new soft clouds add-on. 

 

I haven't used FS9 in quite a while now, but from memory, the "fog" was a device used with marginal systems to avoid having to display distant detail.  Faster computers enabled more scenery draw distance and hence reduced the "fog." 

 

In XP-10, with a fast computer (or not), fog is a function of weather, not of computer speed and capacity.

 

Thanks for the screenshot, Andras!  Good post.

Added some UHD Winter (using Winter_Package) previews to the screenshot album:

https://picasaweb.google.com/101666907909842492197/PREVIEWUHDMeshSceneryV3?authuser=0&feat=directlink

 

Examples:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bloody hell that's a classic.

 

Which area is that ?

I'm guessing it's Switzerland, as the Matterhorn is instantly recognisable http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matterhorn :smile: