Should I buy P3D?

[Tatave 57]

Hi all, 

 

I'm currently one of those users sitting on the fence for P3D. I'd just like to ask a quick question to P3D users that came from FSX: Was it worth it? 

 

I'm mostly considering transferring to P3D because of the continuing support for the platform and the advantages with high-end add-ons such as PMDG. 

 

Also, is performance much better than FSX, FPS wise? 

 

Thank you in advance. 

[Mickeyj 35]

Hi there,

 

for me it was worth it. It is more stable than FSX and tweaking is history. OOMs still occur if you overstress the sim in terms of high settings as it is still a 32bit app. I own the NGX for P3D2 and it is still a frame hungry beast. Not flying it though. HQ mega hubs + traffic perform nearly the same like in FSX. 

 

I fly mostly orbx country with GAT or helicopters as well as naval jet fighter ops. If you want to check out how the sim performs klick on my youtube channel. All vids recorded in real time. System specs in the channel info.

[Demious 23]

For me, FSX was spending more time to keep everything working properly than I was actually flying and when I made the change to P3D, that was completely turned around and that was in v1.4 days. I'm running 2.5 now and I hardly ever have any trouble.

 

I've got a new system for P3D, so I cant really compare FPS to what I remember from my FSX days, but for me FPS is very nice, 20+ in most demanding situations, and I'm running 2 instances of a complete VC with outside view, One as my main cockpit and outside view and one for a VC panel view, so I actually get half the FPS I would get when running a single monitor.

 

Being honest, I do notice that 2.5 is a little less easy on VAS than I saw with 2.4, but with the constant development, I'm sure this will improve.

 

I'm very happy with P3D and I would surely recommend it.

[zmak 331]

I'm mostly considering transferring to P3D because of the advantages with high-end add-ons such as PMDG

 

What would they be?

[Nyxx 6,993]

Short answer YES

 

Performance is different but so is the sim,  In FSX at the same airport with just about the same setting in FSX i have 80 fps with the PMDG NG within P3D  52. I run locked at 30 and have no problems. 52 is a lot of head room but add ASN/MyT6 and an airport like EGLL on a stand looking EAST I still get 30 fps just. So as long as you have a good PC its a no brainier. P3D all day long now we have PMDG.

[addman 33]

I get high frames in P3Dv2 but motion is very jerky and stuttery even if I limit frames, use V-sync etc. Doesn't matter where I fly, it still "rubberbands" on me. LOD isn't as sharp as I would like even if I increase it. Clouds are an absolute framerate killer, especially when passing through some of them. Water is very nice, especially with REX 4.

 

So I'm actually still using FSX:SE as my primary flight simulator and it will be so for a time I reckon. I'm not going to make this a sim vs sim thing but I have to say, it is true, FSX:SE is the smoothest experience you'll have in a flightsim atm. I can run SSAA without any major performance penalty WITH maximum cloud coverage using ASN. If I would do the same in P3Dv2 it would absolutely tank my PC and that's not even with cloud shadows, autogen shadows turned on. This is where it matters to me, I don't really need cloud shadows but I do need realistic and thick cloud cover when and where it is supposed to be and this is what it comes down to. If you don't mind scaling back a lot of settings then P3Dv2 MAY be something for you but on the other hand, what's the point if you can't have dense autogen and it still isn't performing well? In the end, you'll have something that looks marginally better (except for AA) than FSX but performs worse.

 

I do find myself occasionally coming back to P3Dv2 to see where it's at and enjoy the eye-candy for a bit but FSX is still my main workhorse. Bottomline, you have a beefy rig? try it out! if not, the might as well stick with FSX for the time being because you won't get much out of it, especially not performance-wise. Also, I have a lot of FSX stuff that I refuse to "re-buy" so there's that too.

 

P.S I recommend you try out the "Professional Developer License"  $9.95 per month thing, that way you can try it out for a month to see if it's for you instead of splashing out $59.99+ right away.

[curbz 22]

Yes, it was worth it. The two major plus points for me...

 

• Autogen popping - drove me crazy in FSX as it ruined the immersion, hardly see it in P3D
• I use the HDR lighting which is more realistic (to my eyes)

Shadows are cool  - especially cloud shadows. Sitting on a runway waiting to take-off and seeing a cloud shadow approaching you whilst stationary looks incredibly realistic.

 

On the downside the anti-aliasing is not as good as in FSX - I see more shimmering - and the lack of full screen exclusive mode which means that adaptive and 1/2 refresh rate vsync is not available, causing minor stutters as frame rates rise and fall below 30fps (I run unlimited frames as the performance is better on my system). I lower the refresh rate of my display to 30Hz to prevent this and the experience is amazingly smooth, much improved over my FSX experience.

 

If DTG implemented smooth fading or transitions for autogen to prevent the popping I would certainly have another look though.

[Christopher Low 5,341]

 

Water is very nice, especially with REX 4

 

I personally think that water is one of the worst aspects of P3D. I can't get it to look convincing at all, and that's with REX Essentials SP3 (which is supposed to have solved the problem of static looking textures). In fact, FSX water in DX9 mode (REX Sparkling texture set) was light years ahead of both FSX in DX10 mode on my old i5 2500k powered PC, and P3D on my current i5 4690k system.

[addman 33]

I personally think that water is one of the worst aspects of P3D. I can't get it to look convincing at all, and that's with REX Essentials SP3 (which is supposed to have solved the problem of static looking textures). In fact, FSX water in DX9 mode was light years ahead of both FSX in DX10 mode and P3D (I used the Sparkling texture set with REX).

 

I find that aesthetically, FSX can have nicer water and I agree, REX Sparkling is the very best. However, I think with REX 4, bright textures and cinematic animation set, it looks more convincing. It's hard to explain, I appreciate both but they are very different in how they display water.

[Nyxx 6,993]

 FSX:SE is the smoothest experience you'll have in a flightsim atm

It might be for you.  "you'll"........ not for all no.

I run max cloud cover and don't have any problems when going though clouds.

 

Seems P3D is running poorly for you and I do agree if you don't have a good PC then perhaps P3D is not the best one to choose. 

 

EDIT:

Just seen the OP PC. 

• Processor Speed
  2.80GHz

 

Looks very low to run any fly sim well  :(

[Tatave 57]

Thanks to all of you for your replies! Looks like I'll be a P3D customer very soon. 

 

 

 

P.S I recommend you try out the "Professional Developer License"  $9.95 per month thing, that way you can try it out for a month to see if it's for you instead of splashing out $59.99+ right away.

 

Good idea- thanks! 

 

 

 

What would they be?

 

Basically, I just like the visual advantages as well as a smoother, more stable platform to run on. 

[addman 33]

It might be for you.  "you'll"........ not for all no.

I run max cloud cover and don't have any problems when going though clouds.

 

Seems P3D is running poorly for you and I do agree if you don't have a good PC then perhaps P3D is not the best one to choose. 

 

EDIT:

Just seen the OP PC. 

• Processor Speed
  2.80GHz

 

Looks very low to run any fly sim well  :(

 

I have a good PC, it's just that P3Dv2 will require a BEAST PC to enjoy what new bells and whistles it comes with in my own experience.

My specs are as follows, and I consider them to be well above average in everything except P3Dv2:

 

i7 4770 non-K

8GB DDR3 G.Skill Ripjaws 1600MHz

Asus AMD R9 280 3GB DDR5

Kingston 240GB SSD

Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit SP1

 

But as you said each to his own, there is no definitive answer to this type of question. What I wrote is just my experience. That's why I recommend trying the monthly thing first.

[Novation 534]

I find that aesthetically, FSX can have nicer water and I agree, REX Sparkling is the very best. However, I think with REX 4, bright textures and cinematic animation set, it looks more convincing. It's hard to explain, I appreciate both but they are very different in how they display water.

 

It was the thing that bothered me most with P3D but with some of the REX4 animations I am as happy as ever I was with FSX. White Caps animation look great to me in Prepar3d and is my current favourite.

 

I still run FSX (Steam Ed) along side P3Dand still use it a fair bit, but the overall experiance is so much better in P3D with the extra visual bells and whistles. FSX seems a little dull by comparison, with its only advantage being smoothness with 1/2 vsync. Just give it a try and get a full refund (60days) if you can't get on with it.

[Christopher Low 5,341]

 

It was the thing that bothered me most with P3D but with some of the REX4 animations I am as happy as ever I was with FSX. White Caps animation look great to me in Prepar3d and is my current favourite.

 

I would love to see that in action, because my P3D water is duller than a particularly dull thing in Dullsville.

[Tatave 57]

EDIT:

Just seen the OP PC. 

Processor Speed

2.80GHz

 

 

It is below average, but I manage a solid 20 FPS with PMDG add-ons at ORBX airports. I'd like to overclock it one of these days.