Hi Together, 

 

i hope this is the right forum for my question. 

 

I have the following system: 

 

5820K @ 4,8 Ghz without HT 

16 GB DD4 2400 Mhz CL12 RAM 

GTX970 G1 Gamer ( soon SLI) with one Asus 24" 120 Mhz Monitor

GTX750Ti for the Second Asus 24" Monitor for EFB, ASN ....

Only P3d Installed on a 250 GB Samsung 840 Evo SSD 

 

 

Now my question i found that i get nearly the same frames with my CPU set to Stock Speed ( 3,6 Ghz) as with 4,7 Ghz ? 

 

I can see that the CPU has "time" left so the most of the time the cores are between 40-70 %  sometimes with spikes to 90 % only the Main Tread is at 100% most of the time. 

 

The GPU is mostly between 44 to 70 % Load. 

 

But even then i only get about 20 - 29 Fps with Microstutters. 

 

P3D V2.5 Settings: 

 

GRAPHICS:

 

Vsync: On with Tripple Buffering 

Framerate : Unlimited 

FXAA: Off

MSAA: 8 Samples 

Antistropic : 16x 

Texture Resultion : High 2048x2048 

 

Tesellation Enabled 

 

SCENERY: 

 

detail radius: High 

Tesselation Factor: High 

Mesh resolution: 5 m 

Texture res: 15 cm 

Land Detail textures : checked 

 

Object: 

 

Scenery complexity : Extremly Dense 

Autogen vegetation: Very Dense 

Autogen Building dens: Very Dense 

 

Water and Bathymetry
 

Water Detail: High 

Reflections: User Vehicle 

Every other thing unchecked 

 

Special Effects: 

 

Detail: High 

Distance : High 

 

LIGHTNING: 

 

Landing lights : checked

Lens flare : cheked 

HDR Lightning: uncheked 

 

Shadows: 

 

Quality : Medium

Terrain receive shadows: checked 

Terrain shadow cast dis: 0 m 

Cloud shadow cast dist: 30 m 

Object Shadwo Cast: 6 m 

 

Objects: 

 

Internal Vehicle : Cast and Receive 

External Vehicle : Cast and Receive 

Sim Objects: Cast

Buildings: Cast and Receive 

 

Weather: 

 

Draw distance: 90 mi ( ASN Default) 

Thermal: natural

Volumetric fog: checked 

 

Cloud Detail:

Detailed Clouds

Coverage: medium 

 

Aviation Traffic: 

 

OFF 

Only Low Airport Vehicle density 

 

Aircraft labels: 

 

off 

 

Land and Sea Traffic: 

 

Road : 0 %

Ships: 20 %

Leisure Boats: 20 %

 

 

 

To get rid of the "Tearing and Shimmering" i had to set 8 X SSGS in NVI Inspector

 

 

Thank you for your input.

 

brgds 

 

I don't think you are gpu limited, as such that you do not have enough horsepower. I do think that you are bottle necked by the fact that your cpu has 28 pcie lanes. (vs 40 lanes) Your 2nd gpu is being limited to run at x8, vs x16.  If you do go sli, your 2nd gpu will still be limited to x8.

  To try to improve smoothness, turn of vsync and triple buffering. As well, the 8x sgssaa in inspector, as well as the simobjects, and buildings, cast and receive shadows, are frame killers.

 

regards, Jazz

The CPU core that is running at 100% is the one providing the fps.. the other cores only do texture loading.

 

So having your other CPU cores running light does not indicate that your GPU is the bottleneck.

thanks for all the information. 

 

i will try your recommendations.

 

i thought to upgrade to a 5960X but in this case it will make no sense because then the additional cores will also not have enough to do because the limiting factor seems to be still the CPU  

 

thank you

The code is not executing quickly enough. We all talk about the CPU and GPU cycles, and the CPU is only using 1/2 it's potential and the GPU is still not working full time.

 

So what about code efficiency? I know there is crappy code just like there is crappy hardware.

 

Code had to be much tighter when memory was expensive. Code got bloated when memory became so cheap it could almost be given away.

 

Just a thought.

 

Bob

GPU usage isn't as simple as reading a number. The GPU is very complex with many different types of execution resources - Applications stress different parts of the GPU/video card differently and very few use all the execution resources fully at the same time. Those utilities use pretty simple methods to arrive at some kind of percentage that doesn't really tell you anything.

 

You could do a bit of experimenting to find out where the bottleneck lies. For example, try turning down that anti-aliasing. SSGS is extremely demanding and worked fine in an old sim like FSX, but might cause problems in P3D v2. Another GPU-intensive feature is the real-time shadows - try turning them off. Same with tessellation. If your FPS improve, you're likely GPU-limited. Then try the reverse - Crank up all the features that are known to be GPU-intensive and turn down features that are known to be CPU-intensive, such as Autogen, Scenery Complexity and AI traffic. If your FPS improve, you're likely CPU-bound.

From what I recall from the original release of P3dv2, the pop free autogen was done with tessellation, by the gpu. Disabling tess. puts the autogen back on the cpu, and would be a backwards step. From your existing settings, reducing the autogen buildings to normal or dense, will help your performance. As for the first cpu core being worked harder than the rest, think of it as the shop foreman. It keeps everything else organized and running. Not necessarily smoothly, but still running.

 

  Cheers, Jazz

331BK as suggested by Jazzfan in his first reply ... turn OFF vSync.  You may notice microstutters have been reduced somewhat. Monitors are normally running at 60Hz refresh these days (unless equipped with G-Sync or FreeSync) and your frames are nowhere near that.  Doubtful even locking at half refresh rate in NI will help either. 

 

Some members have recommended running at 'unlimited' frames where Fiber Frame Time Fraction has been added to the cfg. 

 

Using a GTX 970 myself and I can assure you it won't run out of puff in P3D, even with 'only' 3.5Gb.

If your FPS improve, you're likely GPU-limited.

 

And also you may be GPU limited transiently and dependent on exactly the realtime scenario, so that you're going in and out of GPU limiting.

Thank you verry much. 

 

I will test this. 

 

Interesting thing is when i revert the p3d settings i get about 30 FPS or easy 20 FPS Locked with 1 % Variance. 

 

But i will test both with NV Inspector Default Settings and also with P3D Default and Maxed out. 

 

brgds

The code is not executing quickly enough. We all talk about the CPU and GPU cycles, and the CPU is only using 1/2 it's potential and the GPU is still not working full time.

 

So what about code efficiency? I know there is crappy code just like there is crappy hardware.

 

Code had to be much tighter when memory was expensive. Code got bloated when memory became so cheap it could almost be given away.

 

Just a thought.

 

Bob

I am resting assured LM has exploited this tactic just about as good as it can at this point, i.e. optimizing coding efficiency.   They bought an old simulator engine and they are doing what they can, which has been a lot thus far.  That being said there are other simulator engines that may be ultimately prove much more capable over P3D's engine, w/ coding efficiency 'optimized' as much as it can be, for example Outerra's.  I say 'may be' because after what I've seen in the demo one is tempted to assume this is the case.   They don't yet have the fully featured product so at this point it's hard to be certain on this, though the concept seems really solid.  Rob A, from my understanding, says there are fundamental issues that demand synchronization tasks and this in some way obviates better use of multi-core/HT.   I still am with the sentiment that it's a bit disheartening to see one of my virtual cores pegged at 100%, and the other 11 coasting along somewhere between 0 and 100% w/ an average in a typical flight of around 30-40%.  My guess is a new simulator engine or a revised P3D will eventually get to this untapped power sitting on the sidelines--same same for the GPU which in my machine runs typically around 30-50% as I have version 2.3 configured for most flights.

I am resting assured LM has exploited this tactic just about as good as it can at this point, i.e. optimizing coding efficiency.   They bought an old simulator engine and they are doing what they can, which has been a lot thus far.  That being said there are other simulator engines that may be ultimately prove much more capable over P3D's engine, w/ coding efficiency 'optimized' as much as it can be, for example Outerra's.  I say 'may be' because after what I've seen in the demo one is tempted to assume this is the case.   They don't yet have the fully featured product so at this point it's hard to be certain on this, though the concept seems really solid.  Rob A, from my understanding, says there are fundamental issues that demand synchronization tasks and this in some way obviates better use of multi-core/HT.   I still am with the sentiment that it's a bit disheartening to see one of my virtual cores pegged at 100%, and the other 11 coasting along somewhere between 0 and 100% w/ an average in a typical flight of around 30-40%.  My guess is a new simulator engine or a revised P3D will eventually get to this untapped power sitting on the sidelines--same same for the GPU which in my machine runs typically around 30-50% as I have version 2.3 configured for most flights.

 

That was part of what I was saying but was not clear. Sorry about that. Yes, they did inherit some inefficiencies for course, and I would assume it will be an ongoing issue. Whether ongoing also means "pressing issue" depends on many factors. My son worked for Lockheed for many years, and it is a good company, and they do, let me repeat, they do plan and integrate "engineering" processes for everything they do. It is something that is part of the culture. So, I am sure the improvements will continue to flow but not fast enough for some, I am sure.

 

Bob

Hey Together,

 

it seems that my problem was the combination of "Airport" and City  

 

I tested all the times at Flightbeam KSFO with FTX Global, Vector , and FTX Northern California with the PMDG 777 as it is the most demanding plane i know.

 

By "Mistake" i switched to some small airport on the Philippines (RPUH) and there i have with the same settings nearly 50 FPS.  

 

Then i tried to switch to LOWW ( Flytampa Vienna Addon Airport) and also there i got 35 - 40 FPS. 

 

And i had all the time 8x SSGS. 

 

Verry interesting.

Your system is not GPU limited if it's not pegging 100% GPU usage.  Note that 8x MSAA (vs. 8x CSAA) and 8x SSGS is super stressing on the GPU; flying with these setting in cloudy weather will crush your GPU's performance.  It's sad to read that P3D needs such AA levels to look good, I was hoping this situation would improve.

hmm i`m thinking to get a 5960x i have an offer for a pretested one which can make 4,5 Ghz with HT on with a Vcore of 1,27 V. 

 

But as far is a could read till know a 5960x will only help with loading not with frames, correct ? 

 

brgds