It's good enough if 3.0 goes with DX12

[Pe11e 812]

Why another thread about P3D3.0? DX12 is probably a step forward, but some people doesn't understand that even with DX10/DX11 performance can be amazing, if the engine is OPTIMIZED. Ideal example is GTA V, just look the amount of detail rendered when flying, mind bending. There is NO NEED to go for DX12 when LM didn't used 50% of DX11 capabilities. P3D uses the same engine as FSX, of course modified. Just look how much it takes for LM to get rid of OOM problems for example. I strongly believe that if LM will optimize current  engine to its maximum capabilities, you should see 50% better fps, at least. Until then there is no need for DX12.

[Guest]

I've not said nor thought such a thing. LM will make a decision regarding these points and either implement all or some according to their own purposes.

Somehow I doubt they will check FS forums for guidance on the matter...

Sorry, I guess I misunderstood your post. But yes, as I also said I also doubt LM looks at us home simmers when it comes to things like this.

 

Ideal example is GTA V, just look the amount of detail rendered when flying, mind bending.

Ideal example but obviously no comparison. You can't compare a game which has a very, very, VERY small and limited 'world' with a sim that offers you the entire globe. Totally and utterly incomparable. You can't expect P3D to ever give us similar graphics and performance. Impossible. To get that done you need a totally new engine. And a few terabyte of hard disk space. Amongst others.

[jcomm 5,939]

No one knows this yet but the expectation is we will have to buy again. But maybe LM has a surprise for us all. But if they do I would expect a surprise for the pro license owners, not the academic people who already got the sim at a very small price. If you already received a 75% discount, you shouldn't moan about having to buy again. Take note there also hasn't been an announcement about pricing. Things might as well be totally different this time.

 

Thx Jeroen.

[TheFlightSimGuy 514]

This thread is literally crazy. 

[Pe11e 812]

Ideal example but obviously no comparison. You can't compare a game which has a very, very, VERY small and limited 'world' with a sim that offers you the entire globe. Totally and utterly incomparable. You can't expect P3D to ever give us similar graphics and performance. Impossible. To get that done you need a totally new engine. And a few terabyte of hard disk space. Amongst others.

 

I compared two DX11 engines, both works with heavy LOD algorithm, so it doesn't matter if it's a 20x20km map or a whole planet. Of course we can't have that amount of details due to development time and disk space (except for airports) but you can say freely that with significantly less amount of detail in GTA V engine you should see a significant raise of already amazing FPS. Just sayin' how much room LM have to optimized the current obsolete engine.

[wyzx01 0]

Commercial organsisions aren't going to adopt Windows 10 just because Microsoft offers a new update to consumers.

 

What really matters are the applications that these company's run - financial, engineering, etc - not the operatingsystem. Companies are not going to risk their businesses by relying on a an unproven combination of operating system and applications because enthusiasts in these forums say so. My medium-sized company has 10,000 Windows licences. Updated the operating system would not involve the cost of Microsoft icences from but for the applicatio, not the mention the training cost.  Changing an operating system in an expensive undertaking  and is one of the last things we wanted to spend  money on.

 

There's no extra cost if you wanna upgrade to Win10, unless your licenses are Pro ones, all other licenses are free of charge to upgrade to Win10. No more cost in licenses, and the system is quite stable. Most applications you' re using today can run under Win10, less issues than the time when Win8 came out. I just can't understand why users and companies refuse Win10.

[TheFlightSimGuy 514]

There's no extra cost if you wanna upgrade to Win10, unless your licenses are Pro ones, all other licenses are free of charge to upgrade to Win10. No more cost in licenses, and the system is quite stable. Most applications you' re using today can run under Win10, less issues than the time when Win8 came out. I just can't understand why users and companies refuse Win10.

 

Simple, most companies dont like being "testers". Stability, scalability, and compliance are the core to any large company's plan for an OS deployment. Windows 10 would require a massive technology migration when most of the major companies in the US just transferred to Windows 7. When you are deploying a OS to hundreds of thousands of employees, cost of deployment and support readiness is no easy task. 

[wyzx01 0]

Why another thread about P3D3.0? DX12 is probably a step forward, but some people doesn't understand that even with DX10/DX11 performance can be amazing, if the engine is OPTIMIZED. Ideal example is GTA V, just look the amount of detail rendered when flying, mind bending. There is NO NEED to go for DX12 when LM didn't used 50% of DX11 capabilities. P3D uses the same engine as FSX, of course modified. Just look how much it takes for LM to get rid of OOM problems for example. I strongly believe that if LM will optimize current  engine to its maximum capabilities, you should see 50% better fps, at least. Until then there is no need for DX12.

 

Good thinking, either DX11 or DX12, we are talking about more performance, and we really eager of performance.

[WarpD 824]

I just can't understand why users and companies refuse Win10.

There are lots of security and privacy issues with Win10. While you might not care, most businesses don't want Microsoft recording everything going on.

[TheFlightSimGuy 514]

There are lots of security and privacy issues with Win10. While you might not care, most businesses don't want Microsoft recording everything going on.

 

Most consumer level OS features that would pertain to information sharing and privacy are erased from the custom enterprise specific versions of Windows that large companies use anyway. So Cortana and all the cloud features we get as consumers are gone by the time they are deployed to enterprise customers. 

[WarpD 824]

How odd... everything I read on the web regarding enterprise version states none of that gets removed.

[alpha12125 213]

There's no extra cost if you wanna upgrade to Win10, unless your licenses are Pro ones, all other licenses are free of charge to upgrade to Win10. No more cost in licenses, and the system is quite stable. Most applications you' re using today can run under Win10, less issues than the time when Win8 came out. I just can't understand why users and companies refuse Win10.

 

This whole post shows that you are a private user that never had any contact with any sort of corporate IT on a professional level. First of all, companies dont change if there is no obvious benefit. This means some specacular new feature that increases productivity by 100% (never happens)  or Microsoft says the OS is EOL and kicks it out of support (this happens often) and then you change. Also for cost reasons you usually dont want to switch the OS without upgrading the hardware with it. The last switch i was part of was XP to Win7. And just to give you an idea what an OS switch means on a corporate level:

 

In total the project took two years, this is from the first start to the last OS switch ( allthough there are probaly more than a few remaints i really dont want to know about), In total there were around 100-150.000 PC's updated or replaced when the hardware was too old.  the first 6 months was just compability testing for drivers and different builds of hardware we already use. Then you check the software that is custommade for you, then you organize the distribution in diffrent countries (you dont believe the fun you can have with kryllic or other asian fonts and what it does for you), you break your head over some exotic hardware combinations that are needed in produciton environment (try finding a w7 driver for a colour analysis software with hardware scanner that costs 200k) and maybe then you will get a slight grasp on why OS upgrades are something that is never done lightly.  Win7 will go EOL on the 14. Jan 2020.  Before 2018 we will not see any big move to win 10 (or successor) on any bigger corporate level. That is a reality.  Oh and it went into the double digit millions as far as costs, so it is not for free .

 

 

I compared two DX11 engines, both works with heavy LOD algorithm, so it doesn't matter if it's a 20x20km map or a whole planet. Of course we can't have that amount of details due to development time and disk space (except for airports) but you can say freely that with significantly less amount of detail in GTA V engine you should see a significant raise of already amazing FPS. Just sayin' how much room LM have to optimized the current obsolete engine.

 

I think as soon as someone mentiones GTA V as comparison you know they are really starting to dream. First of all, GTA 5 was developed by Rockstar North, they have 360+ employees all working for 3 years on that game, it cost 137 Million Dollars to develop.  Now even if LM hired the complete ACES Team, that at their height was afaik 50-60 man strong (in reality i think its more 10-30 people working on P3D allthough i do not know), they are just a fraction of their capabilty. Secondly the 20x20k square is a highly optimised world made by one developer, not 100s of thirdparty developers each with different presets, Secondly the flightmodel, something which takes a big chunk of processing power is very simplified in GTA V and simulated in P3D or X-Plane.

 

Also just to give you an comparison. In X-Plane 10.4 you can see up to 100nm+ on the extended visibility that is 5 times more than the whole map of GTA 5. If GTA 5 would provide the same visibility as Flightsims it would come to a stumbeling crash.  Visitiblity is what kills performance.

[Bobsk8 12,732]

There's no extra cost if you wanna upgrade to Win10, unless your licenses are Pro ones, all other licenses are free of charge to upgrade to Win10. No more cost in licenses, and the system is quite stable. Most applications you' re using today can run under Win10, less issues than the time when Win8 came out. I just can't understand why users and companies refuse Win10.

 

Because people see no panic to jump to an OS that isn't even in it's final stage, big update is already scheduled for sometime in October. There also doesn't seem to be any increase in performance other than one would normally get from a clean install of  any OS, and there have been problems causing people to roll back to 7 or 8 and even to have to wipe drive and reinstall their former OS.  My Windows 7 is perfectly stable, never crashes, and I get good performance, and until it breaks, I am not fixing it. BTW, only about 5% of windows users have installed 10. 

How odd... everything I read on the web regarding enterprise version states none of that gets removed.

 

Wishful thinking, perhaps.  :wink:

[alpha12125 213]

Wishful thinking, perhaps.  :wink:

 

Tbh on a corporate level these things are nowadays of almost no concern, because the days of unrestricted user acess to the internet are long over.  Almost all network traffic is regulated on a lower level and one of the first things corporates shut down is porn sites, social media sites and software that thinks it is E.T. and wants to phone home

[Christopher Low 5,354]

 

My Windows 7 is perfectly stable, never crashes, and I get good performance, and until it breaks, I am not fixing it.

 

That makes perfect sense to me. Why anyone would want to rush out and upgrade their Windows 7 systems to Windows 10 when they have no idea of the potential consequences is baffling to me. Some software is simple to reinstall if things go wrong. A flight simulator with hundreds of complex addons is not one of them.