P3D V3.x worth the upgrade cost/hassle from 2.x?

[Noel 4,494]

Here's the deal. There are no VAS savings. What changed? It's ability to DUMP VAS.

 

I never said anything about VAS savings.  I asked how much VAS management improved as a consensus opinion or even one opinion to quantify this.   I fly all over places with dense scenery w/o OOM problems.   So that is virtually meaningless to me.  That massive laundry list of changes is about 90% bug fixes, crash--I don't experience crashes!  Avatar, an enhanced GUI, DRM, no improvement in how the platform performs poorly when high quality AA like 4XSGAA is applied in cloudy skies, these things all point to marginal value for me.  Glad you're happy but I don't see it and the laundry list confirms that.   Be useful to hear consensus opinions about how much VAS MANAGEMENT has improved--that might make the $200 charge worth it for me.

[dgraham1284 92]

While I have no intention of talking licensing... The academic version is fine. But I'll say this. You have like 60 days or something to get a full refund. Also remember, cloud shadows didn't come till 2.2... Again. Watch that first video. And the 10,000 other ones on YouTube.

Today, one of my make flights since v3 debude, was between Flightbeam's KDEN and fsdreamteam's KLAS with UT2 and Orbx global vector and southern California. I landed with 500mb free vas. How's that for VAS dumping? No reloads.

[Noel 4,494]

I"ve been using 2.3 w/ cloud shadows for a long time now and it's a nice feature.

 

I've changed my mind a bit on this because even if 64 bit comes out in the next year or what have you it may be a while before it is supported well by 3rd party content providers, so sounds like 3.x will be the best offering for at least a couple of years, hence the upgrade cost I can justify.   About the time 64-bit P3D is well supported it will be time for a system rebuild, I hope.  I hope if and when P3D goes 64 there are other changes for example strong DirectX 12 support which could hold a little promise for better performance.  Improvements in single core performance have been pretty marginal for many years now which is why my SB-E chip continues to be sufficient.

 

The VAS dumping approach was always in my mind--i.e., what took LM so long to improve on that.  Glad they have that was the low hanging fruit.  It seems in some ways truly it was essentially another bug fix of sorts, i.e. was poorly addressed when it could have been a long time ago.  Tell me, can you see anything different in how the sim generates scenery, for example looking rearward things get fuzzier quicker?  I can imagine that might come into play w/ VAS dumping.

 

Sounds like 3.2 might be worth jumping in at--thanks for your replies.

[swiesma 625]

  I fly all over places with dense scenery w/o OOM problems.   

 

Install FTX Global + Vector + OpenLC and Aerosoft Heathrow... and take off to the east in the PMDG 777... and tell me again about "w/o OOM problems" :-)

 

-> instant OOM in V2.x

[Noel 4,494]

Install FTX Global + Vector + OpenLC and Aerosoft Heathrow... and take off to the east in the PMDG 777... and tell me again about "w/o OOM problems" :-)

 

-> instant OOM in V2.x

Sure, but I'm not using PMDG 777 in those types of environments, and you're right, for that reason.  Was just trying to get a sense of HOW MUCH it has been improved in a less than subjective way.

 

I concluded it makes sense to upgrade now because even if 64 bit arrives within a year or so it will be much longer presumably before content arrives from 3PD's, so version 3x appears to be useable for at least 2y, hence I'm ok w/ the cost.

[ryanbatc 12,835]

400-800 MB less VAS in use depending on the addon

[Noel 4,494]

400-800 MB less VAS in use depending on the addon

Thank you Ryan, it sounds like from what you mention here it's maybe a loose 20-25% improvement in what that allows one to do.  Perhaps a better metric would be the number of minutes you can fly thru a particular route before an OOM occurs, and this suggests even w/ this improvement though things are markedly improved this issue is nowhere near solved such that in the end you will need to plan routes as I do now to try to avoid OOMs.  64 bit sounds like what everyone ultimately is waiting for, so no news there..

A few more questions if you will.   I went ahead and bought version 3.  

1. If I install the version 3 installer versions of ORBX FTX regional sceneries I have, is there likely to be a problem when 3.2 comes out, i.e. will a patched 3.1 to 3.2 create problems w/ installed regional sceneries so that I should wait to install those til 3.2 comes out, or no?  
2. I have used FSGenesis mesh from way back installed using EMT into P3D v2.x, which I understand exists and works w/ P3D version 3.  Do we know what kind of impact mesh has on both frame rate performance and VAS usage, and is there better mesh product to be used now if the impact on performance isn't significant?  Presumably FTX regions have their own higher resolution mesh so that the only need for a mesh product is for when only Global is use, i.e. not an FTX region.

Thanks in advance

[sascha 314]

 

 

Please vote if you have found the additional $200 and time and loss of some add-on compatibility (perhaps) worth it for you overall--you'd do it again.

 

Do you have to buy each release anew?

[Noel 4,494]

Do you have to buy each release anew?

You have to buy again when you go from version 2.x to version 3.x.  There is no cost for incremental versions within version 2 or 3.   The $200 ($199) was for the professional license, though apparently lots of people buy academic versions when they may not technically qualify, or so that is my sense.

[jkeye 152]

  I went ahead and bought version 3.  

[

Thanks in advance

Hope you enjoy the benefits!

Jay

[Noel 4,494]

It's setup and running.  W/O using REX textures, but with using FTX Global, it seems like frame rate performance might be a little lower than 2.3.  Just guessing, but I have everything setup quite close to previously including graphics driver/settings.  Just wondering, I could be wrong.

[ryanbatc 12,835]

In my non scientific fps testing scenarios from v2.5 to v3.1 I literally had no fps change... 160 to 160 (vsync off obviously)

[swiesma 625]

In my non scientific fps testing scenarios from v2.5 to v3.1 I literally had no fps change... 160 to 160 (vsync off obviously)

 

160 FPS????

Are you flying at 800x600? :-D

[jkeye 152]

It's setup and running.  W/O using REX textures, but with using FTX Global, it seems like frame rate performance might be a little lower than 2.3.  Just guessing, but I have everything setup quite close to previously including graphics driver/settings.  Just wondering, I could be wrong.

I don't think fps tell the whole story.

I don't use them at all-less stutters,less VAS usage,fewer OOMS are what do it for me.Have a look at Nick N's tuning guide.I think those tweaks work really well for me.

Jay

[Noel 4,494]

 

 

I don't think fps tell the whole story.

 

True, they never have.  Most experienced simmers understand all of this but that being said there has always been a point at which when frame rate drops under a certain threshold, and depending on the source of reduced frame rate, other variables affecting 'performance' start to manifest more.  At the very least, when frame rate approaches 16 -18 or so you the most 'smoothness' you can get is a steady and perceivable loss of fluidity.  Might be 15 for one person, 18 for another, 20 for another, etc.   So far as I say, seems like version 3 might be a little lower on frame rate, similar on freedom from stuttering, emphasis on 'little'.  Too early to say as I just now got my REX license and FSUIPC reactivated so we can now better compare apples to apples version 3.