Sign in to follow this  
alexczarn

Sydney by FlyTampa

Recommended Posts

Two years waiting, it's finally here, and I am impressed.

15fps at high settings albeit minus AI traffic, since I am yet to install that on my new install. That could take a while.

 

8l4zVWt.jpg

 

b5WYeE1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

It looks amazing!

So far no "show-stopping" reports to be found or reported in regrds to performance or OOM's, or, in other words:

This great looking Sydney scenery by FT wil be next on my "to buy list"!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a bit hard to comment about his FPS without knowing any of his settings. Im keenly waiting for some feedback as that is my new policy, no more impulse buying=less tears

 

Its very odd but there doesn't seem to be a lot of discussion on this release

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With my system, 2600k@4.6, GTX770 4GB,8GB ram, I get about 18-20fps on 34L with the PMDG NGX. 28% AI with My Traffic X. As I near the terminals on takeoff, the frames drop to about 14-15. My settings in P3D are just to the right of midway, so it's not over the top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15fps with NO Ai? I'd get a refund. Disgraceful.

Yeah, I'm not so sure I am ready to jump on this one with performance claims like that. That's one of the issues with some developers that are still using the older, traditional style of scenery design when they try to build huge hubs like YSSY. Had FSDT or Flightbeam taken this one on, using their design techniques, the performance reports would probably be more encouraging.

 

In this case I am glad I wasn't one of the hundreds or thousands of people who was waiting on this airport. I rarely fly to Australia so it won't really pain me to not purchase this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15fps with NO Ai? I'd get a refund. Disgraceful.

 

I do have a fairly modest system, 2.7gHz i5, 2GB 820M, 8GB RAM, Windows 8.1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do have a fairly modest system, 2.7gHz i5, 2GB 820M, 8GB RAM, Windows 8.1

Well that explains your FPS a little bit then. Didn't now your system was that "modest". Would be interested to hear how it runs at 4ghz with a better GPU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that explains your FPS a little bit then. Didn't now your system was that "modest". Would be interested to hear how it runs at 4ghz with a better GPU.

 

An easy 30fps (locked) on a 4+ghz system, plus minimal VAS effect.. (and I run ASN, and very high FSX settings)

 

2015-5-24_9-44-34-285_zpsubiyl2mv.jpg

 

The scenery is amazing!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15fps with NO Ai? I'd get a refund. Disgraceful.

 

Some  users don't bother looking  at the fps  counter, so unless your a fp watcher,  and  since the op  hasn't  complained  about it  suggest he is happy  only  seems  that your not happy with his  fps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An easy 30fps (locked) on a 4+ghz system, plus minimal VAS effect.. (and I run ASN, and very high FSX settings)

 

2015-5-24_9-44-34-285_zpsubiyl2mv.jpg

 

The scenery is amazing!!

Thanks Flukey, that sounds a little more encouraging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some users don't bother looking at the fps counter, so unless your a fp watcher, and since the op hasn't complained about it suggest he is happy only seems that your not happy with his fps

True, which is why I said I'd get a refund and not the op. Add in Ai and a complex add on and things look shaky. I notice - conviently - Flukey hasn't added ai either to his screens.

 

I dont use Ai as I only fly online these days that's why I didn't have any....

 

Plus I was just showing cmpbellsjc that Sydney the scenery from Flytampa was not an issue when it comes to FPS....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I'm not so sure I am ready to jump on this one with performance claims like that. That's one of the issues with some developers that are still using the older, traditional style of scenery design when they try to build huge hubs like YSSY. Had FSDT or Flightbeam taken this one on, using their design techniques, the performance reports would probably be more encouraging.

 

In this case I am glad I wasn't one of the hundreds or thousands of people who was waiting on this airport. I rarely fly to Australia so it won't really pain me to not purchase this one.

 

[...] That's one of the issues with some developers that are still using the older, traditional style of scenery design [...]

 

Depending on each individual system there certainly are differences in regards to performance, but it is certainly wrong stating that FlyTampa uses an "older ... style of scenery design" - Fly Tampa certainly does not do this and without a doubt definitely belong to some of the best scenery designers out there.

It is just a simply fact however that FSX/P3D, both have their limits in regards to settings, hence performance on each simmer's PC.

I - and i am sure all of us - wished that was different, but i the end that's the limits of our virtual flightsimming environment which we have to live with.

And when keeping that in mind i am very much impressed by this latest offering from FlyTampa as it it offers a good compromise between indivdual settings and performance.

 

Certainly going to be heading to Sydney now as son as possible!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love Fly Tampa Sydney its been a long time coming.  Also another Long time coming is this news American Airlines to start flying Into Sydney from LAX daily starting December 17 using the 777-300ER

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but it is certainly wrong stating that FlyTampa uses an "older ... style of scenery design" - Fly Tampa certainly does not do this and without a doubt definitely belong to some of the best scenery designers out there.

 

Ok, state to us how they are using other methods of scenery design besides the good old .bgl sytle that calls regular models and textures. Are they using shaders to render the ground textures via an external module like FSDT and/or Flight beam does or the same old style that they've used in their other sceneries?

 

I own almost all the FlyTampa airports except Toronto and YSSY, but all the other airports are done the same, traditional way.

 

So, what new techniques are they using that I am not aware of since you seem qualified to know?

 

I'd have to agree with cmpbellsjc that FSDT and Flightbeam are the only ones using alternative methods of scenery design and render, this the reason they can build large hubs that perform so well, where as the same hubs built the traditional way would probably much worse performing.

 

Btw, I do agree that FT is a great developer and make high quality products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I did a flight into FT Sydney yesterday with the QW 757. Approx 110 AI in the area and ASN providing the weather (ovc at 4000). I never saw less than 20fps, mostly 24-30 and the vas remaining was only once below 1gb while on final inside the FAF. Using the resized textures provided by FT, the airport still looks fantastic. With ORBX FTX AU as well, it was a beautiful flight, no complaints from me.

 

Running a 2500K at 4.7 and GTX970.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My first impression is very positive. Using P3Dv2 got 20FPS on the runway in PMDG 737. Scenery max setting, auto gen normal. Running a 3770K with GTX970. Running FTX australia, global, vector, active sky and Ultimate Traffic 2. Not even tried the low-res pack yet. The frame rate compares well to other airports on my machine when running with UT2.

 

VAS decreases most looking towards Sydney center, but very impressed how well VAS is released after clearing the airport. This is often the biggest problem with other scenery but works very well here. Still had enough VAS on arrival at Cairns to use GSX to deboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Ok, state to us how they are using other methods of scenery design besides the good old .bgl sytle that calls regular models and textures

 

That might be a point - however:

What matters is the relation between performance and quality and IMHO FT offers a very high level in this regards by using available techniques in a very progressive and up-to-date way - hope this sounds more accurate now.

 

And again:

FSX/P3D ask for a lot of compromise - even when using FSDT or Flightbeam sceneries and the Couatl "modul" this does not change.

However, i really like their (and many others) sceneries very much as well - no doubt here at all, so please no missunderstanding here.

But what matters is how a scenery performs on the end user's PC and what is offered qualitywise. And that's where i get back to the beginning somehow:

FT may not use te absolute latest available techniques in scenery design but they certainly use what is a vailable in a progresivie, optimized and up to date way.

YSSY is another proof for that IMHO - no more, but also and certainly no less either.

Happy flyings and landings!

:smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this