New York City X V2 Scenery by Drzewiecki Design FSX and P3D

[carlito777 712]

The effect of 20%/20% AI traffic may have been around 150 MB included in that figure.

 

Is this Prepar3d v3 with no AI traffic manager? 20% AI in P3Dv3 can be a killer. In an area like NY this can easily mean in excess of 300 AI aircraft. This would be an easy explanation for the poor performance and high VAS. Just a thought...

[Guest]

Made a quick video here: http://www.avsim.com/topic/479269-dd-new-york-v2-in-a-pmdg-737-and-a-r66-in-4k/

 

I was very impressed with the efficiency and even the FPS considering the level of detail and area.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[carlito777 712]

Made a quick video here: http://www.avsim.com/topic/479269-dd-new-york-v2-in-a-pmdg-737-and-a-r66-in-4k/

 

I was very impressed with the efficiency and even the FPS considering the level of detail and area.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

Nice video. But it actually shows more what a killer PC you have than if DD New York is really usable on a "normal" system. Would love to see that fly-by of Manhattan in the NGX on a 4-core Haswell/Skylake overclocked + GTX780 or 970. That is more the type of significant benchmark. Nevertheless, thanks for posting! At least it shows that it is a very nice and usable scenery if you throw enough hardware at it. That didn't even help with v1 of the scenery as far as I understand. So definitely an improvement...

 

PS: If I decide to buy the scenery, I will give some information on performance on a more "normal" system... ;-)

[Michael Moe 493]

Nice video. But it actually shows more what a killer PC you have than if DD New York is really usable on a "normal" system. Would love to see that fly-by of Manhattan in the NGX on a 4-core Haswell/Skylake overclocked + GTX780 or 970. That is more the type of significant benchmark. Nevertheless, thanks for posting! At least it shows that it is a very nice and usable scenery if you throw enough hardware at it. That didn't even help with v1 of the scenery as far as I understand. So definitely an improvement...

 

PS: If I decide to buy the scenery, I will give some information on performance on a more "normal" system... ;-)

 

 

I had between 20-25fps flying by Manhattan everything maxed out on a GTX970 in the NGX .24-32fps at 5000feet. Mostly around 22fps at 2000feet but i took a screenshot thats actual at 25.8fps so it is really nice even at 2000 feet with the NGX (I7-4770K@4,7)

 

This test was also with FS Dreamteam KJFK installed

 

PS!

 

I am at work now but i did not post any screens yesterday because i would not ruin the experince for new users but i can put them up later if you want

 

Michael Moe

[carlito777 712]

I had between 20-25fps flying by Manhattan everything maxed out on a GTX970 in the NGX .24-32fps at 5000feet. Mostly around 22fps at 2000feet but i took a screenshot thats actual at 25.8fps so it is really nice even at 2000 feet with the NGX (I7-4770K@4,7)

 

This test was also with FS Dreamteam KJFK installed

 

PS!

 

I am at work now but i did not post any screens yesterday because i would not ruin the experince for new users but i can put them up later if you want

 

Michael Moe

 

Sounds promising. What worries me though is the fact that Oliver gets much worse performance... I know, it all depends on settings. And probably his 20% AI kills his frames. In the end, every system is different and the only way to find out is to try it on your own system. So maybe I just take the plunge and buy it... Let's see...

[Dougal 165]

By today's standards, I have a below par system, especially my video card (changing that tomorrow).  It brings my system well into single figure FPS:-(  It is though, STUNNINGLY good looking!

[Guest]

I don't know what "normal" is for a flight simulator PC(s), but based on reports from others with different systems they seem to suggest better performance and less VAS usage with NY V2.

 

Surprised no one commented on the GPU VRAM usage ... 5.1 GB (12:52 min mark) ... that's a new record high VRAM usage for me.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[carlito777 712]

I don't know what "normal" is for a flight simulator PC(s), but based on reports from others with different systems they seem to suggest better performance and less VAS usage with NY V2.

 

My comment was not meant negative in any way. It's just that your system (which I would love to own myself) is so much above average that I have to take your performance reports with a bit of caution. My system (4770K@4.6Ghz + GTX780) is much weaker and I'm running the sim in NVidia Surround on three monitors. That usually means much worse performance than what you are getting... ;-)

 

And congrats on the VRAM usage... ;-) Seems as if it is good to have a graphics card with at least 6 Gb of VRAM these days...

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

Is this Prepar3d v3 with no AI traffic manager? 20% AI in P3Dv3 can be a killer. In an area like NY this can easily mean in excess of 300 AI aircraft. This would be an easy explanation for the poor performance and high VAS. Just a thought...

 

 

It's FSX-MS without an AI traffic manager. Did another test today with low-res textures and moderate graphics settings in the NGX:

• The fps killer still is the AI traffic. With AI traffic at 20%/20% frame rates fluctuated below 20 fps. Without AI traffic a steady 30 fps at the internal limit.
• VAS impact of the AI traffic seems a bit higher than I estimated yesterday: Could be some 220 MB.
• Was able to land the NGX at KLGA04 with just under 3.6 GB VAS (that was with AI traffic at 20/20). Reduced AI traffic could "buy" me some weather, addon airports, FS2Crew, flight time etc. with still some VAS margin left.

So flights in the NGX can be enjoyable in this scenery, even more so with the AS A32x which has a lower VAS footprint.

Have I mentioned already that the buildings and their rooftops are stunning, even with low-res textures and reduced graphics settings?

[carlito777 712]

It's FSX-MS without an AI traffic manager. Did another test today with low-res textures and moderate graphics settings in the NGX:

• The fps killer still is the AI traffic. With AI traffic at 20%/20% frame rates fluctuated below 20 fps. Without AI traffic a steady 30 fps at the internal limit.
• VAS impact of the AI traffic seems a bit higher than I estimated yesterday: Could be some 220 MB.
• Was able to land the NGX at KLGA04 with just under 3.6 GB VAS (that was with AI traffic at 20/20). Reduced AI traffic could "buy" me some weather, addon airports, FS2Crew, flight time etc. with still some VAS margin left.

So flights in the NGX can be enjoyable in this scenery, even more so with the AS A32x which has a lower VAS footprint.

Have I mentioned already that the buildings and their rooftops are stunning, even with low-res textures and reduced graphics settings?

 

Thanks for the heads-up, Oliver! As Michael and Rob are on Prepar3d v3, I guess this again proves that P3D is much better in VAS management. And most likely performance. So taking all information together, it seems as if I really have to buy it... ;-)

[Guest]

And congrats on the VRAM usage... ;-) Seems as if it is good to have a graphics card with at least 6 Gb of VRAM these days...

 

I have a 970 with 4GB VRAM running 4K res also in my other PC and it does seem to suffer with NY V2 at these settings.  So if this is the VRAM test spot, then so far it's the record holder for VRAM usage (5.1GB) on my main FS system ... so yes 6GB VRAM recommended here ... still not sure what to do with the other 6.9 GB free in the X?.

 

I believe I paid $10 or was it 10 Euro for the upgrade from v1.x.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[Pugilist2 878]

I purchased it from the Simmarket sale for 50% off $17.11 which runs until 12/6/15.  It really is great scenery.

[HamSammich 17]

>>This test was also with FS Dreamteam KJFK installed<<

 

Michael,

 

Did you by chance notice whether the animated lead-in lights for the Canarsie approach are preserved?

 

Best,

 

Marshall

 

[Michael Moe 493]

 

>>This test was also with FS Dreamteam KJFK installed<<

 

Michael,

 

Did you by chance notice whether the animated lead-in lights for the Canarsie approach are preserved?

 

Best,

 

Marshall

 

 

 

Nope but will test it again today with the Real Air Duke V2 and the NGX this time in SLI.

 

Rob: Q Videoram used: It doesnt seem to effect the GPU usage in % ? I never saw above 60% on my GTX970 maxed out (not all shadows though)

 

Michael Moe

[Guest]

Rob: Q Videoram used: It doesnt seem to effect the GPU usage in % ? I never saw above 60% on my GTX970 maxed out (not all shadows though)

 

Do you have Caching enabled in NCP?  I'm thinking maybe textures are just being cached in VRAM, hence the 5.1GB usage.

 

Cheers, Rob.