Sign in to follow this  
Sesquashtoo

Since installing P3D v3.2.3, only the best-of-the-best!

Recommended Posts

...well guys 'n gals, all I can say, is that from the first couple of .cfg tweaks, needed to bring up my FPS from stock running, it has been nothing but a most satisfying user experience, I have ever had with any MS-based flight sim.  The short text...is that even with loading the base sim up with everything 3rdP that I own....P3D v3.2.3 has been nothing short of amazing.  Smooth animation, right down to 11 FPS. Yep...no typo...11 FPS, when ASN is giving me solid to-the-horizon multi-layer action.  That is the only time I drop below a base of 18 FPS.  

 

I have the sim cranked wide open, in all  Scenery sliders, with water set to High, not Ultra.  Special effects are also cranked full on.

 

Traffic at 50 percent

0 G.A.

Boats at 12

 

Right now below, I am heading to the active at Myrtle Beach, for a Dawn departure, under ASN.

 

The experience has been nothing short of critique-free. No issues. No negatives...only high positives.  For any FSX'er that thinks there is 'nothing to see' beyond even FSX DX10.  May I be so bold, as to say you are most seriously in error.

 

I have always maintained that P3D was merely FSX, cleaned up...before the v3.x series.  That opinion is no longer held.....

 

Lockheed Martin's P3D v3.x...stands on its own two feet....and rock solid.

 

Cheers,

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Untitled.png
 
 
2016_5_12_5_53_24_868.png
 
 
2016_5_12_6_8_0_775.png
 
On my way to Charleston, S.C....a 'la P3D v3.2.3.   Fine wine...smooth, with a great finish!
 
2016_5_12_6_11_8_437.png
 
2016_5_12_6_11_45_288.png
 
2016_5_12_6_11_53_563.png
 
2016_5_12_6_15_1_247.png
 
 
 
 

Share this post


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

Might make a little observation.  I know how much you love GA aircraft and that is fine, but with your ongoing discussion about settings and fps, you have to take into consideration that if you fly a more complex aircraft, these high settings vs. fps will change a lot.  Sure, it's great flying GA aircraft with the settings set high and it stands to reason you would get higher fps (although that point is moot with v3), but try sitting in a PMDG aircraft or equivalent and let us know if you get the same fps...sorry, performance as before with GA aircraft.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post

Might make a little observation.  I know how much you love GA aircraft and that is fine, but with your ongoing discussion about settings and fps, you have to take into consideration that if you fly a more complex aircraft, these high settings vs. fps will change a lot.  Sure, it's great flying GA aircraft with the settings set high and it stands to reason you would get higher fps (although that point is moot with v3), but try sitting in a PMDG aircraft or equivalent and let us know if you get the same fps...sorry, performance as before with GA aircraft.

No doubt...but if one sees what I can get...and at my settings...they DO have the choice to try out G.A. at those settings and see for themselves how great P3D 3.2.3 can put out the sim as it was designed to do.  Running the sim at restricted settings, only gives the user the choice over higher FPS at the cost of loss of features rendered. 

 

I guess that anyone that is operating a study-class cockpit, and will eventually be operating their flight deck in the FL's. really doesn't need any true graphic or auto-gen to be replicated, for at FL280 or higher...there is nothing to see, anyways.  

 

My examples, yes..mostly, represent WHAT can be seen, and rendered, at 5,500 feet or lower, and still have good animation and control., with scenery generation as max as the engine can display.

 

My posts truly, have never been attempted to cater to high altitude, study-class cockpit operators, or have they been represented that way, Yash. That's why I always give screen shots, to show at what user-base, I am posting to.

 

My posts always, are visually geared to the G.A. flyer...and as to what can be achieved visually, within that genre of flight operations.

 

Tubers, have other meets-needs, requirements;  mainly, high FPS, at the cost of superior graphic rendering.  I know that... :)

Share this post


Link to post

Try panning at 18 fps or using track ir. I guarantee it's not smooth.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

Try panning at 18 fps or using track ir. I guarantee it's not smooth.

Glen, I am mostly, lol..outside the cockpit..and pan all the time...and yes...no jerk...smooth animation.  That's what makes this version rock.  Also, I might add that scenery is flying off the H.D. at 10,000 RPM..( W.D. Velociraptors) .and I think that might also have a lot to do with it.

 

I do not own or have used at any time, Track IR.  All my shots are without that in play.

 

Hardware config's...do affect the final outcome,as we have all seen time and time, again.

 

Here is basically my standard M.O.  I love to see the virtual world, and not be restricted by the cabin windows...once I am either in stable free flight, or have set up an autopilot maintenance, I go to Outside Spot View (not locked) and enjoy the flight path...all with many 360 rubber-neck panning episodes:

 

2016_5_12_6_18_6_522.png
 
2016_5_12_6_52_39_257.png
 
2016_5_12_6_59_20_29.png
 
2016_5_12_7_0_9_682.png
 
2016_5_12_7_1_21_983.png
 
2016_5_12_7_1_32_664.png
 
2016_5_12_7_2_7_730.png
 
2016_5_12_7_3_1_147.png
 
2016_5_12_7_3_2_550.png
 
2016_5_12_7_16_0_339.png
 
2016_5_12_7_17_34_46.png
 
2016_5_12_7_18_17_825.png
 
 

 

Cheers,

 

Mitch

Share this post


Link to post

hey Mitch, I keep seeing this plane of yours, Carenado Cessna 172 float version? As for your flying style, with GA, it's mine too currently given how little time that I have.  RealAir and the Mustang (well also the KingAirs) are what I am using.  Not sure whether I will ever go back to tube.

Share this post


Link to post

hey Mitch, I keep seeing this plane of yours, Carenado Cessna 172 float version? As for your flying style, with GA, it's mine too currently given how little time that I have.  RealAir and the Mustang (well also the KingAirs) are what I am using.  Not sure whether I will ever go back to tube.

Vu, hello...it's the Carenado Cessna StationAir 6.  You get both amphib and wheeled versions for the same price. On the Amphib, the landing gear retracts into or extends out, from the pontoon bodies.

 

I just love this plane. Old school cockpit, not tricked out...but man-o-man...does it fly so well.  I have really gotten great at proper trim-out with this plane..and can usually maintain a 1 or 2 drop or ascent in feet per minute, or even none at all..., of my target cruise altitude. It does have auto-pilot, but is an older version of that technology.  

 

With this plane, I can land, or take off anywhere I choose...great climb...great sound, can handle six virtual passengers...and a great value for what this plane can cover...

 

When I want to emulate a commercial flight within either P3D or FSX, I just use the FSX 737-800 model..and it gets me where I need to go.

 

For study level...and I have 'em...I use exclusively FS9..especially now with Sascha's great EVO2015/16 world textures and seasons.

 

Cheers!

 

Mitch

Share this post


Link to post

All I can say is either my eyes are very sensitive to it or your 18 fps is very different from my 18 fps

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I love it too Mitch, but when I get to 11 fps, my head begins wobble back and forth in time with the screen.

 

Bob

Share this post


Link to post

 

 


Tubers, have other meets-needs, requirements;  mainly, high FPS, at the cost of superior graphic rendering.  I know that... :)

That is not necessarily the case.  If you have been using P3D v3 long enough, fps are almost a moot point.  Smooth and stable is where it's at.  Yes, it is great that for GA flying, you can achieve the high fps as long as you can maintain smooth and stable too.  At lower altitudes, the rendering is a little more intense as I have seen quite a lot flying GA.

 

Anyways, i wasn't criticizing, just putting the whole "other aircraft and performance" option out there.


All I can say is either my eyes are very sensitive to it or your 18 fps is very different from my 18 fps

Hard to strengthen that claim without video.  If you are purposely looking for lag, then perhaps there would be differences, but for me personally, I concentrate on flying. :)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Glen, 

 

All I can say is either my eyes are very sensitive to it or your 18 fps is very different from my 18 fps

It must truly be a very large part, what system components, our sims are sitting within.  

 

My eyes, are still in the 20/20 range...and as crazy and unbelieveable as when typed...P3D v3.2.3 has given me smoothness down to 11 FPS, with heavy action by ASN.  No earlier version of P3D, or ANY version of FSX (including DX10 mode) can I say, the same for.

 

P3D v3.2.3 has been the best performing MS-based flight sim, I have ever had the enjoyment to press the start button on....11 and higher FPS....with the above maxed out graphics settings----------->ALL GOOD!  :hi:

Share this post


Link to post

I'd have to argue this, because when you break down what fps is, it's frames per second, and at 11fps, I couldn't really see how that would be smooth.  I guess Mitch has better eyes than all of us.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I love it too Mitch, but when I get to 11 fps, my head begins wobble back and forth in time with the screen.

 

Bob

LOLOLOLOLOL!

 

Hi Bob!

 

I can ONLY state 11 FPS as flyable...in this version...anything else...was a 'time to go to the desktop', LOL! :smile:  :smile:  :smile:

 

Cheers,

 

Mitch

Share this post


Link to post

I'd have to argue this, because when you break down what fps is, it's frames per second, and at 11fps, I couldn't really see how that would be smooth.  I guess Mitch has better eyes than all of us.

Hi Yash,  it was only with this version that I got smooth animation with the FPS to the 11's.  Honestly, I had never seen this before..and it was this fact, that had me start raving about P3D v3.2.x in the first place.  I mean..what's not to love...max the sucker out...and who cares any longer about FPS performance!  WOW.... :)

18 FPS without clouds?

Wishes...

I don't quite follow what you mean?

 

In many of my shots, there are three layers of clouds...and with my above settings, still banging out 22-27 FPS.  Around Charleston on this flight, I went to 14 for a second or two...but (hush, hush...that was with Traffic set to 100 percent...so I could see lots of military action...)

 

Mitch

Share this post


Link to post

That is not necessarily the case.  If you have been using P3D v3 long enough, fps are almost a moot point.  Smooth and stable is where it's at.  Yes, it is great that for GA flying, you can achieve the high fps as long as you can maintain smooth and stable too.  At lower altitudes, the rendering is a little more intense as I have seen quite a lot flying GA.

 

Anyways, i wasn't criticizing, just putting the whole "other aircraft and performance" option out there.

 

Hard to strengthen that claim without video.  If you are purposely looking for lag, then perhaps there would be differences, but for me personally, I concentrate on flying. :)

Control input and output are the single most important thing to me in a simulator. I don't need an fps counter to tell me when it's starting to lag but I can tell you now, anything below 27-28 fps and I can instantly see it in the rendering on screen. No need to look at the counter, I can see whilst I am flying. In fact I can feel it in terms of how the controls and the aircraft react, especially on finals.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I know I still have to post my screenshots of last night's 3 hour flight from YBAS to YMML, it was a pretty cloudless flight until I hit southern Australia and then I was hit with huge thunderstorms.  The bases looked to be at around FL20, climbing up beyond FL350.  It wasn't the prettiest of approaches, but then again it was in terms of great weather immersion.  Overall, it was a smooth flight but I never bothered to check frames and don't need to any longer.  I don't know what black voodoo magic LM poured in to P3D v3 but I personally can attest to having smooth flights, no matter where I go now and that's with running 4096 textures, traffic, weather, the whole kit and kaboodle!


Control input and output are the single most important thing to me in a simulator. I don't need an fps counter to tell me when it's starting to lag but I can tell you now, anything below 27-28 fps and I can instantly see it in the rendering on screen. No need to look at the counter, I can see whilst I am flying. In fact I can feel it in terms of how the controls and the aircraft react, especially on finals.

I understand what you are saying but your previous statement sounded like you needed proof of the frames Mitch was getting.  It is obvious as the day is long that control inputs can definitely help recognize lower frame output.

Share this post


Link to post

I know I still have to post my screenshots of last night's 3 hour flight from YBAS to YMML, it was a pretty cloudless flight until I hit southern Australia and then I was hit with huge thunderstorms.  The bases looked to be at around FL20, climbing up beyond FL350.  It wasn't the prettiest of approaches, but then again it was in terms of great weather immersion.  Overall, it was a smooth flight but I never bothered to check frames and don't need to any longer.  I don't know what black voodoo magic LM poured in to P3D v3 but I personally can attest to having smooth flights, no matter where I go now and that's with running 4096 textures, traffic, weather, the whole kit and kaboodle!

I understand what you are saying but your previous statement sounded like you needed proof of the frames Mitch was getting.  It is obvious as the day is long that control inputs can definitely help recognize lower frame output.

This has been my experience as well, no matter the location, no matter the atmospherics in play.  11 FPS..if so at any time...no matter, and no longer.

 

I sometimes now still show a few shots with the FPS meter running, just so the viewer can look at the graphic content, or sky-content, and get a bearing.  For myself..I now fly with it off. I only keep the X/Y coordinates bar lit up.  Today, this morning around Myrtle Beach KMYR, it was a real lightning show...and oh...I saw the lightning bursts, light up the surface of the ocean...below the clouds...I think a first for me.  If this was also available in FSX...I can't remember ever seeing that special effect.  With the cloud reflections on...as well as shadows...it was total Immersive City.

Share this post


Link to post

Nice to hear you are having a great time simming, Sesquashtoo.  Too many "Downer Debbies" here.  Let them keep complaining while you're busy flyin'!  :smile:

Share this post


Link to post

Nice to hear you are having a great time simming, Sesquashtoo.  Too many "Downer Debbies" here.  Let them keep complaining while you're busy flyin'!  :smile:

Hey Clutch,

 

I do feel so badly, when I see those "I'm using P3D v3.2.x, and have terrible blurry textures", or the like. I personally know how clear it can be...and it isn't even dependent on FPS read-outs.  I just hope those users, can get it sorted out, and enjoy the sim for what it can be....and that  is; great, simply a great flight simulation experience!

 

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post

Don't get the purpose of those continuous threads about your performance, Mitch. If you are happy with your setup, your settings and the FPS you get, that is perfectly fine but honestly, for all others, there is no benefit of those threads at all. There are people with similar rigs, they will get the similar performance using those settings and there are people with less capable rigs and they will not get similar performance. Nothing new there. Besides that, I have to agree to some criticism here: in most of your shots you show the outside view with hardly any clouds and traffic, yet your FPS counter shows 22FPS. Really nothing spectacular about this on an objective basis. Show us your FPS once really overcast situation with two, three or even four layers of clouds, inside the VC of a more complex aircraft on a bigger airport, then we could discuss about settings. I mean, honestly, in this situation here:

 

 

 


2016_5_12_6_11_45_288.png

 

I would not get only 22FPS, but a solid 30 (also capped mine at 31 FPS) and probably more than 50 or 60FPS when running unlimited. And this with almost the same settings, simply autogen slightly reduced (which does not bother me, as P3D has anyway a generally higher autogen density compared to FSX).

 

In the end, yes, I absoultely agree with you: P3Dv3.2 offers the best performance ever on my rig as well even with dramatically increased visual appearance compared to FSX before. However, also in P3Dv3.2 you can easily dump your FPS in regions where flying is barely acceptable (my personal cutoff is about 15-18FPS, everything below is inacceptable for me and far away from smooth), but certainly not with the scenarios you show here. So, I really do not get the point of this thread, sorry...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

If I injected a little reality into the mix, it was only to expand the conversation and discuss details.  I had no intention of being, what Clutch would call, a "debbie downer".

 

I've been to enough forum threads where people would jump up and down when they got over 30fps, claimed it was smooth flying and all the while they were putt putting around in the Piper Cub.  Next thing you know, they try their hand at flying a tube, and complain and whine about the 10 fps they are getting and think they need a tweak.

 

These simulators are actually designed to be tinkered with, despite the current words around the campfire.  Sure, I will admit to falling for "expert" opinion about what is needed and what isn't but after a while, it got so contradictory and I decided to experiment and found it to be easier than I thought.  If I changed something, I either had a backup at the ready or with a couple of keystrokes, comment out a line.  I will also admit that I found it to be more time consuming setting up a sim than it was to actually fly, but that was before the recent incarnation of P3D.  Yes, I have had my fair share of FSX time and the reason I fell for P3D (and hard nowadays), is that I found, for me, that not having any tweaks in my cfg, and just sticking to native settings adjustments, I no longer have a reason to gripe and complain.  I now have the time I have always wanted to concentrate on flying...and a little bit of admiring the scenery along the way too.


Don't get the purpose of those continuous threads about your performance, Mitch. If you are happy with your setup, your settings and the FPS you get, that is perfectly fine but honestly, for all others, there is no benefit of those threads at all. There are people with similar rigs, they will get the similar performance using those settings and there are people with less capable rigs and they will not get similar performance. Nothing new there. Besides that, I have to agree to some criticism here: in most of your shots you show the outside view with hardly any clouds and traffic, yet your FPS counter shows 22FPS. Really nothing spectacular about this on an objective basis. Show us your FPS once really overcast situation with two, three or even four layers of clouds, inside the VC of a more complex aircraft on a bigger airport, then we could discuss about settings. I mean, honestly, in this situation here:

 

 

 

 

I would not get only 22FPS, but a solid 30 (also capped mine at 31 FPS) and probably more than 50 or 60FPS when running unlimited. And this with almost the same settings, simply autogen slightly reduced (which does not bother me, as P3D has anyway a generally higher autogen density compared to FSX).

 

In the end, yes, I absoultely agree with you: P3Dv3.2 offers the best performance ever on my rig as well even with dramatically increased visual appearance compared to FSX before. However, also in P3Dv3.2 you can easily dump your FPS in regions where flying is barely acceptable (my personal cutoff is about 15-18FPS, everything below is inacceptable for me and far away from smooth), but certainly not with the scenarios you show here. So, I really do not get the point of this thread, sorry...

Hmmm, I am trying to figure out why you contributed a post here to question the validity of Mitch's post?  What I get from his threads is that he is proving to people that the other side of the fence really is greener.  To be sarcastic, he's not drinking the Kool-Aid. :)

 

Maybe, and this might be a stretch, his thread is misplaced and could serve better in the AVSIM Screenshots Fourm, and I could agree to that, but it isn't my thread and if a mod comes along and moves it, then it is what it is.

 

I see no real reason why you needed to make the statements you did, if only to get a rise out of people and quite possibly the OP.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Well, while you try to figure out why I decided to comment on this thread, I now try to figure out why you commented on my comment :wink:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'm a pretty quick learner.  If you felt it necessary to disrupt a rather productive thread then that's your choice, and since we're on the subject of insulting one's intelligence, maybe you can step away from your computer, go take a walk, get some fresh air and marvel at the beauty of the world before you decide to continue to try and ruins someone else's day.

 

I know a troll when I see one and right now, you are getting awfully close.

Share this post


Link to post

AnkH...actually, the purpose of my thread, or threads of this nature from myself..is to show those new to P3D, that there is great performance in using such.

 

Also, I have many, many shots of very intense cloud-play, in or out of the cockpit..with rates (at my sim settings) from 22-32.9 FPS.  They are there, you only have to search them out in historic posts.

 

This thread...is I guess, nothing other than a typed, sheer joy from just coming off another amazing P3D v3.2.x flight...and wishing to share the event, with encouragement to those not quite having it tuned to give them their  'P3D moment in the sun'... :).

 

Here are the visuals...here are my settings...and even at 11 or 14 FPS...it is a fabulous experience.

 

Mitch


I'm a pretty quick learner.  If you felt it necessary to disrupt a rather productive thread then that's your choice, and since we're on the subject of insulting one's intelligence, maybe you can step away from your computer, go take a walk, get some fresh air and marvel at the beauty of the world before you decide to continue to try and ruins someone else's day.

 

I know a troll when I see one and right now, you are getting awfully close.

Yash...I understood his questioning of why I continue to post 'this type of thread'.  I take no offense, at all.  I responded with why I do...and it is always to give encouragement, to those (with visuals...and FPS shown) that they can get the same thing happening on their monitor...perhaps a tweak here and there...perhaps a change-up of tech inside their cases...whatever...but it can be a very satisfying sim experience when happening...

 

See you back in Aussie Land...just about to pour myself another coffee..and 'Aussie Up'... :)  Mostly likely an exploration around Alice Springs. If you see my plane on the tarmac...Avatar over...and I'll buy you a Foster's....or three...

 

Mitch

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this