i only saw one core using 100%however the core changes while i switch between 1364 or 2730.

 

That means it is working. P3D still puts most of the work on one core, and then distributes some of the terrain processing on the other cores.  When you go from 1364 (5 cores) to 2730 (6-cores), the heavy load just moves from core to another, and then distributes the rest of the terrain processing onto the other five cores.

That means it is working. P3D still puts most of the work on one core, and then distributes some of the terrain processing on the other cores.  When you go from 1364 (5 cores) to 2730 (6-cores), the heavy load just moves from core to another, and then distributes the rest of the terrain processing onto the other five cores.

ok,then it's my mistake.i thought changing affinity mask will distribute the workload evenly on all cores.

Interesting read but for my system I find less is more:

 

No Hyperthreading

No Affinity Mask

FPS unlimited

No FFTF 0.01

 

When I set those above I really see no difference.  I haven't even used NI for the past two versions.

ok,then it's my mistake.i thought changing affinity mask will distribute the workload evenly on all cores.

 

Unfortunately that can only be done by internal code changes.

Interesting read but for my system I find less is more:

 

No Hyperthreading

No Affinity Mask

FPS unlimited

No FFTF 0.01

 

When I set those above I really see no difference.  I haven't even used NI for the past two versions.

That's exactly what I use for regular flying. It's pretty well working w.r.t. to fps, fluidity, and textures, at least for my somewhat dated system.

 

And I tried several AM/HT settings, as I never wanted to believe what I see. I also had FFTF=0.01 for a while in 2.4, 2.5 , but got blurries unter certain conditions. Removed now in 3.0.

 

Supposedly we'll hardly get a consensus here. Different systems plus settings just give different results. I am afraid, it's just that. Despite you can certainly make things worse by, e.g., an inappropriate AM setting.

 

Kind regrda, Michael

pmb, if you run FFTF=0.1 or 0.01 then better to lock your FPS. Running unlimited FPS with FFTF=0.01 is prone to have blurries and loss of autogen. Lock your FPS to a reasonable value will eliminate that.

 

To my understanding, the whole point of running FFTF=0.01 is to enable FPS lock with minimal loss of FPS, plus, as Daniel showed, with reduced microstuttering.

pmb, if you run FFTF=0.1 or 0.01 then better to lock your FPS. Running unlimited FPS with FFTF=0.01 is prone to have blurries and loss of autogen. Lock your FPS to a reasonable value will eliminate that.

This is correct. When I once used FFTF=0.01 I had frames locked to 20 or 24 fps. I still got blurries (albeit no missing autogen) in some places, though.

 

Kind regards. Michael

I have found that the less is more approach to be the best for my system as well.

 

I have even found that the TextureMaxLoad=30 & TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=160 mentioned by the OP in his opening post resulted in slower texture loading!

 

That being said, I still recommend people try the various tweaks being bandied about in this thread as you just might find the ideal combination resulting in your own personal P3DV3 nirvana.

I have a question. Is there a benefit to having an i7 instead of an i5? It seems that P3D mostly runs on one core and if that is the case, what would an i7 provide that an i5 would not. I ask this because I see many people indicating that they have i7 cpu's. Just curious. Thanks.

as you just might find the ideal combination resulting in your own personal P3DV3 nirvana.

Hm, well... I don't think I will ever find that. For the first time in a long long time I played a few new games and how they perform makes even P3D v3 look like... well, not that good. No matter how much money you throw at P3D (or FSX) it will always be a compromise with stutters here and there, obvious loading mesh and textures, vector data colliding with textures, low fps in certain areas, etc. Don't get me wrong, the overal experience is or can be great and very immersive but compared to modern games P3D looks like... well, it will never be nirvana. I know you can't compare a worldwide flight sim with any other game but after playing new games for the first time in a while you just notice P3D is lacking in a lot of areas...

Hm, well... I don't think I will ever find that. For the first time in a long long time I played a few new games and how they perform makes even P3D v3 look like... well, not that good. No matter how much money you throw at P3D (or FSX) it will always be a compromise with stutters here and there, obvious loading mesh and textures, vector data colliding with textures, low fps in certain areas, etc. Don't get me wrong, the overal experience is or can be great and very immersive but compared to modern games P3D looks like... well, it will never be nirvana. I know you can't compare a worldwide flight sim with any other game but after playing new games for the first time in a while you just notice P3D is lacking in a lot of areas...

Sad but true

I agree. P3d is just a patchwork mess of old and new code. It's unfortunate that Laminar Research doesn't have the resources to make XP10 truly competitive with FSX and P3D, because at least XP10 isn't saddled with all legacy headaches.

I can only assume that what Dovetail is going to put on the table next year is going to be a new global sim?  But will it truly be 'new' or will it, again, just be FSX code with an extreme makeover?

It's already been stated in a joint DT/MS press release it will be "Microsoft flight technology" based. I'm not even convinced the makeover will be extreme, but we'll see.

 

Kind regards, Michael

I can only assume that what Dovetail is going to put on the table next year is going to be a new global sim?  But will it truly be 'new' or will it, again, just be FSX code with an extreme makeover?

 

If they plan to release something next year, it is very unrealistic to expect that the outcome of only a year or two of development is an entirely new simulator. It will most likely be something based heavily on FSX. I won't even expect it to be FSX with a new and much more modern graphics engin. It is now a couple of years ago that Dovetail announced that Train Simulator would be upgraded to Unreal Engine 4, and it is still using the old engine.