Sign in to follow this  
gpf3m

ORBX SOCAL

Recommended Posts

Very disapointed with this title.  I have tried all sorts of settings to get smooth performance with ok frame rates; to include no autogen.  The results are the same.  Poor frame rates and no smooth movement.  The only way I can improve it is to remove it from my computer or fly where there is only desert. 

 

i7 4820K OC 4.5ghz

24gig ram

1 T SSD

GTX 980 TI

Prepar3d V3.1

WIN 10

4K monitor

 

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Really too bad to hear, GPF. I just flew from Monterey (KMRY) to Santa Barbara (KSBA) and had zero problems - average frame rate of 23.8 versus my target of 24.0. My rig is a bit dated relative to yours, 3770K with GTX780, P3D 3.0.

 

In fact, I am hugely impressed - the amount of GA traffic in the skies is phenomenal, on the order of PNW with the Orbx GA AI package installed. Perhaps you were not aware of all of the traffic in the skies with you?

 

The Orbx boys did a great job with KSBA - very detailed, Object Flow people running around, the only thing missing is Commercial Aircraft, ala KMRY. 

Share this post


Link to post

Really too bad to hear, GPF. I just flew from Monterey (KMRY) to Santa Barbara (KSBA) and had zero problems - average frame rate of 23.8 versus my target of 24.0. My rig is a bit dated relative to yours, 3770K with GTX780, P3D 3.0.

 

In fact, I am hugely impressed - the amount of GA traffic in the skies is phenomenal, on the order of PNW with the Orbx GA AI package installed. Perhaps you were not aware of all of the traffic in the skies with you?

 

The Orbx boys did a great job with KSBA - very detailed, Object Flow people running around, the only thing missing is Commercial Aircraft, ala KMRY.

 

Well it's all subjective right? I assume the flight you mentioned was done in a GA aircraft, no? Then to me getting 23-24 fps on a 3770K with a GTX 780 is a joke. I get 50-60 fps on a 4770K/780 in other FTX regions. Norcal was already a performance hog but this one seems to be even worse (and unuseable for any kind of tube-flying). The Orbx guys are great artists but they have no clue about performance optimization. Too bad...

 

EDIT: Just saw that you lock your frames at 24. However, a lot of people report frames in the low 20s with GA aircraft on powerful systems. Totally unacceptable...

Share this post


Link to post

Bought today, and am impressed. Flew from KMRY to KSBA and then on to KSAN. FPS reduced around LA and less so around San Diego, as expected. Performance elsewhere was good. This is a dense, detailed scenery, especially in the urban areas. I expect the autogen and object placement around LA is more dense than any other autogen/landclass based scenery product on the market. Not sure I fully understand the complaints about performance. Performance is going to be affected with so much scenery detail to process.

Share this post


Link to post

Via FTX Central, try turning OFF SD Docks and Windmill farms.  There is A LOT custom autogen buildings here so you might want to drop the building Autogen slider down a notch or two.

 

Some other items to turn down if FPS is still a problem:

1.  Water = Medium

2.  SimObject shadows = OFF

3.  Dynamic Reflections = OFF

4.  Building shadows = OFF

 

I do agree, this region is very "intense" in some areas (kinda depends which direction you're facing).  But LA is a mass of building sprawl across a large area, it's more intense than DD NY as DD NY looks to be using single texture sets across multiple building objects where-as Orbx uses a different approach.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Share this post


Link to post

We now have Orbx regions all along the US/Canada West coast. We need more quality Orbx airports in this large multi-region area of the type and quality in N. California. There is especially a big gap in Oregon. Leaving KFOT and heading north, the next Orbx airport is KHQM,

Share this post


Link to post

I seem to have a massive problem with the SCA scenery. I have all of the west coast ORBX regions; until now, I had only flown in the PNW region, which was great.

 

However, when I fly in and around LA, the coast is very bad. The coastline itself is OK, but a couple of hundred feet beyond the beach, land starts again for as far as I can see. There are even some buildings on this fake land. I don't yet know if this the cause, but I have FTX Central 2 set to Enable "hybrid mode".

 

I found the inland portion of SCA to be very beautiful. I have the Terrain, Scenery Objects and Special Effects detail all set to max. But for some region, the Pacific Ocean is missing.

 

Frans

Share this post


Link to post

Did you install the latest Orbx Libraries (151213) after installing Socal?

 

Greg

Share this post


Link to post

I do have the latest library. I'm sure though that it was installed prior to NA SCA's installation. Should I re-install the library?

 

Frans

Share this post


Link to post

Yep, re-installing the 151213 library does the trick! Thank you, very much.

 

Frans

Share this post


Link to post

Extremely differing opinions on this product. I was about to hit the "buy" button but now I am a bit put off. This is one of my favourite parts of the US so I'd love to fly there but my now dated 4790/970/16 rig might not perform as desired. Looking for some vids from people without a recent high end system.

Share this post


Link to post

SoCal has been a mixed bag for me but overall leaning toward the positive side.

 

On the "cons":

1) color correction of photoscenery is not correct for this area

2) VERY high density autogen (this, as Rob points out, is more of a feature but you still have to deal with it)

3) some areas in land class depiction rather than photoscenery look unnatural to me

 

On the "pros"

1) REALLY NICE upgrade to all the default airports, including the military airfields. Many have photobase

2) It looks like San Diego :-)

3) the Orbx config tools have a large number of possible combinations to try for performance

 

Overall happy with the purchase but hoping for a service pack with better color correction.

Share this post


Link to post

. Looking for some vids from people without a recent high end system.

 

here's one from my system which is 4 years old and pretty low end. i7-930 at 3.6ghz, gtx650ti (1gig) and 18g ram, win764bit

 

i use fairly low settings...sparse autogen with fancy planes like the 737 or q400... it's flyable, looks pretty nice, definitely slowish in the dense areas but not much different at san diego than it is in seattle or in the bay area (and the non-urban areas perform a bit better for sure)... you can see some blurries on the approach in san deigo for sure and the fps here are not helped by the heavy clouds over KSAN today ..blame el nino.. anyway your system is way better than mine so you could probably acheive similar smoothness with better visuals or better smoothness too. also keep in mind that i lose about 5fps if i am recording video.

 

 

cheers

-andy crosby

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks a lot for your input. I may reconsider buying it :-)

Share this post


Link to post

I gave up on FTX Socal...too much of a performance hit. I have a decent computer, but with SCA I suffer from stutters and framerate drops which I personally do not accept, since I use FTX as a training platform with Pilotedge. So, I reverted back to FTX Global and UTX 2.1 USA - with sliders almost on all max. and no framerate hit at all. Of course I miss the nice textures and photo scenery from SCA, but you cannot have it all, unfortunately.

I think the major performance drop comes from the upgraded airports in LA and San Diego region - there are simply too many of them. I even deinstalled the free NA airport package from ORBX and upgrade the airports which i normally use myself with IS3 - just put some static aircrafts here and there, some vehicles and people...voilá. 

 

It is also possible to deactivate the upgraded airports in FTX Socal I think, this should help if you have performance hits.

Share this post


Link to post

As I expected I bought SoCal. I like ORBX and Carenado, which tells something about my preferences for the hard core simmers :-)

I am not so much disturbed by low fps, actually I think it is ok for the complexity of the scenery. However, I think I have some elevation issues. Something just doesn't look right I think, and I know that part of the world a little. What do you fellow simmers think?

I ran the Vector tool and also tried disabling Vector. Other sceneries for the area are off.

2016-1-14_2-16-45-903.png

Share this post


Link to post

do you use a 3rd mesh?

I have the FreeMesh USA but it is not active in my scenery.cfg. I will post another screenshot with exact coordinates and maybe someone can show how this looks in comparison on his machine.

Share this post


Link to post

Orbx regions come with their own built in mesh which will override any 3rd party mesh.  (As long as the region entry is above the 3rd party mesh in the scenery library.)

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry Greg, thats incorrect. In case of mesh ist the one with the highest resolution taking priority, indepencent of its position in the scenery libary. There a few (rare) cases where Pilot's Ultimate Mesh interferes with Holger Mesh because of its higher resolution (e.g. in Pago Pago land).

 

Kind regards, Michael

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

This is between Newport and Laguna Beach, at N33 35.76 W117 49.01, ALT 2124ft, HDG 197

 

The first is how it looks in Prepar3D and the second is the 3D Google image. Do you think that there is an issue with elevations/mesh in my sim or does it look right for you?

 

Thanks!

 

2016-1-14_13-44-55-329.jpg

 

 

 

 

Screenshot2016-01-1413.52.59.jpg


And here is a bigger one from the first location. It looks very wrong to me.

 

2016-1-14_14-36-10-277.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

Man I was so excited for this product, do you think Orbx intended it to cause such a performance hit? Or was this product designed for only low and slow flyers?

 

Sure I understand the scenery is best enjoyed flying around slow and VFR, but I do think it should be more balanced, especially if you try flying the PMDG 777 in or out of Socal. 

 

Maybe they plan to optimize it down the road? Or have they hit a wall so to speak and they optimized as far as it could go?

 

I have a strong system i7 6700K 4.80Ghz, 16GB DDR4 3200Mhz, EVGA 980Ti, Samsung 850 500Gb SSD. 

 

I get 30FPS pinned (unlimited set) in the 777 on the ground at KLAX in VC. I would be sad to see it drop to like 15fps which some people say have happened. 

Share this post


Link to post

Well, I can tell you right off the bat that any elevation issues are independent of FreeMeshX, since the USA portion has yet to be released. FMX NA only contains Greenland and Canada. The USA is its own separate thing because of the differences (resolution, size) in datasets.

 

The elevation you see is all ORBX.

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks Daniel, you are right. I tested the same position with all ORBX off, then adding Global, Vector and then SoCal, the latter also without Vector. These hills always look the same from this height with ORBX on. They start looking fine from about 4-5000 feet. Maybe it's not possible to give them a better 3D look although I find that the hills of the Samoa scenery from them look better IMO.

Share this post


Link to post

I am not certain about this, but I believe what you are seeing is the combination of "place high density urban photo real texture" on the "terrain at coordinates x/y". The urban texture is somewhat generic, so you will have that shopping mall/office building wrapped around a hill, houses and roads that are abruptly cut in half/terminated, or someone with their backyard in a ravine.

 

I have seen this is in all Orbx regions, and it is a good example of "don't look too closely". The Mega Scenery guys (which is photo real specific to all x/y coordinates) like to use this argument against Orbx, but Mega Scenery lacks auto gen that give a 3D appearance, IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post

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