you must not have sliders all the way to the right  try that and get back to me.  Do this for me,  take off from LGA in the default f22 and fly towards mahattan and newark.If you can get a smooth stutter free 30 fps or more please send me a video of it and tell me what your settings are because I would say that in any big city , not just NYC you will run into a major slowdown. 

Hi OP,

 

 

I recently rejoined the flight sim world and selected P3D with LOTS of ORBX scenery, REX textures and AS16 and some payware planes. I also built the best possible PC that I could afford and spec (see some of the specs in my signature line) and I have no problems whatsoever with stutters in dense areas and one of the lucky ones that is not having a VAS problem. Many times I am literally blown away with how stunningly it all looks at 4K resolution and most often getting the full 60fps at 4K resolution that my monitor is capable of (60Hz HDMI port).

 

I have purchased XPlane10 in anticipation of 11 being released soon (free upgrade) and plan on flying both to compare and appreciate the differences. I have a lot of money invested in my P3D platform so won't be in any hurry to purchase add-ons for XPlane11 unless I'm confident it can deliver the same visual and immersive experience I have with P3D and also waiting  to see what LM do with a possible P3D V4 release in the future. 

 

Xplane is very good value for what you receive out of the box and provided I don't go crazy with the add-ons (and give my poor wallet some breathing space) I can see myself happily using both for a long time to come.

 

p.s. One thing I found that improved my performance was to leave the frame rate unlimited despite many things I have read to the contrary. This has gained me up to 10fps without any stutters in some very dense areas. This is definitely working for me but as they say YMMV.

Belynz on twitch first look of x plane 11 beta

 

https://www.twitch.tv/belynz

another video, Graphics look really  nice but dear god the sounds are terrible. the screeching tires, omg its so shockingly unrealistic. 

https://www.twitch.tv/belynz/v/102903651

Belynz on twitch first look of x plane 11 beta

 

https://www.twitch.tv/belynz

another video, Graphics look really  nice but dear god the sounds are terrible. the screeching tires, omg its so shockingly unrealistic. 

https://www.twitch.tv/belynz/v/102903651

Agreed on the sounds but that can be replaced or deleted as in xp10, but graphics looks very nice and fps is smooth.

My opinion and my two penneth alone.

 

My experience with X Plane 10.5.

 

Negatives;

 

Do it yourself add on scenery. (Finding it then learning how to install it) Resulting in poor looking scenery that did not look like 64 bit and spending more time looking for it than flying! That was probably my fault because I failed to find and understand how install it properly.

Lack of aircraft with systems.

GUI not very friendly. Switch assignment a game in itself?

Weather depiction.

Unimpressive frame rates, not stutter free.

No seasonal ground textures.

No AI Traffic.

An early work in progress. Probably better in 2-3 years.

 

Positives;

64 bit, no OOM's.

 

 

My experience with P3dv3.0/P3dv3.4

 

Negatives;

 

Push the sliders to the right and expect OOM's. So its very much 32 bit, which has now been pushed to its 4Gb VAS limits.

Every upgrade 3.0/3.1/3.2/3.3/3.4 causes add on developers work to push out patches and problems for customers, as the previously working programs stop working.

 

Positives;

 

Orbx Scenery. (Supported the latest P3dv3.4 upgrade within hours)

REX Texture Direct/Soft Clouds.(auto updated)

FSGRW.(auto updated)

GSX.(easy updates)

Add on aircraft with systems. PMDG/FS Labs/Aerosoft..etc...etc. et.al.

UT2 (upgrade with help of Avsims Poppet)

Poppet's Avsim guides...Perfect!!

Install it and forget the Tweak treadmill, leave the cfg alone, it works out of the box.

P3dv3.4 with the latest Nvidia drivers, delivers superb graphics, interesting extra features, e.g. ability to display Airways, Airspaces, VORs, intersections, graphically in space. A superb feature for Student Pilots and retired types wanting to keep their eye in.

Smooth enough render to suspend disbelief!

A professional rapid upgrade path that is surely heading towards 64 bit?

 

These are my opinions, from a sim flyer since Flight on C64..

 

Cheers

 

David

Dont understand as to why develepers such as orbx asn etc ect do not also support xplane

 

If they did ide probably would consider using xplane

Dont understand as to why develepers such as orbx asn etc ect do not also support xplane

 

If they did ide probably would consider using xplane

 

It's very easy, if you are a developer and in a business to make a profit, what you are going to focus your time and energy on , a product with a very small market share or one of the big players like FSX and P3D ?  Not rocket science. 

It's now even a broader issue than market size. Developers like ORBX know more than we do about the actual status of new offerings from DTG and LM. Just like the user base, the addon developers are waiting to see what happens in the next 6 months.

What would worry me most when changing a platform is that you basically have to start with zero knowledge about the sim, the files, their structure etc. I use P3D and know 'a bit' if there is a problem with an addon and how to solve it. This knowledge stems from many years of experience with FSX and P3D.

 

With XP I would have to start as a newbie, although there are some kind of similarities between the platforms. At the end such a change would require a substantial amount of time to spend if the sim and the addons are not perfectly 'running out of the box'.

Cargostorm, on 24 Nov 2016 - 7:55 PM, said:

What would worry me most when changing a platform is that you basically have to start with zero knowledge about the sim, the files, their structure etc. I use P3D and know 'a bit' if there is a problem with an addon and how to solve it. This knowledge stems from many years of experience with FSX and P3D.

 

With XP I would have to start as a newbie, although there are some kind of similarities between the platforms. At the end such a change would require a substantial amount of time to spend if the sim and the addons are not perfectly 'running out of the box'.

I do understand your concern because you're in your comfort zone. But as an FSX, P3dv3 and XP10 user i could say XP files structure is easy to manipulate and any problem which crashes the sim is usually reported immediately to the log which is located in the main folder of xp10. Also facebook groups such as the below are providing immediate assistance to questions answered by fellow simmers using the same platform:

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/XPlaneNG/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/XPDedicated/

I don't get it, folks!

For me it's P3D (FSX) AND XPX, on the same machine!

Both platforms have their strengths and their weaker points.

For me personally, as a flight simulator (which should, in my opinion, simulate flight in the first place ;-) ), XPX is the better sim. The a/c react more realistically to the environment, such as wind, temperature, icing conditions, etc.

Installing scenery and a/c into XPX is very easy, mostly no installers needed, no registry hassle, just drag and drop files.

Personally, I don't care about AI traffic, or seasonal textures. One can make XPX's visuals absolutely stunning, without the need of spending a fortune, and without too much tweaking.

The resulting sensation of flight, and the depth of scenery is second to none for a civilian flight sim, in my opinion.

But I've already spent a fortune on FSX/P3D addons, and with a/c addons like the FSL Airbus, A2A stuff and PMDG, this platform is very good for recreating real world procedures in every detail.

I wouldn't want to miss either one, but I'm a bit biased towards XPX.

I don't get it, folks!

For me it's P3D (FSX) AND XPX, on the same machine!

Both platforms have their strengths and their weaker points.

For me personally, as a flight simulator (which should, in my opinion, simulate flight in the first place ;-) ), XPX is the better sim. The a/c react more realistically to the environment, such as wind, temperature, icing conditions, etc.

Installing scenery and a/c into XPX is very easy, mostly no installers needed, no registry hassle, just drag and drop files.

Personally, I don't care about AI traffic, or seasonal textures. One can make XPX's visuals absolutely stunning, without the need of depending a fortune, and without too much tweaking.

The resulting sensation of flight, and the depth of scenery is second to none for a civilian flight sim, in my opinion.

But I've already spent a fortune on FSX/P3D addons, and with a/c addons like the FSL Airbus, A2A stuff and PMDG, this platform is very good for recreating real world procedures in every detail.

I wouldn't want to miss either one, but I'm a bit biased towards XPX.

 

I totally disagree about realistic flight in XP. Never flew a 172 that flew like the 172's I tried in X plane. Fly into a small airport with a 4,00o foot runway and see a 747 parked at the ramp. realism, more like science fiction. The day that XP comes out with aircraft like A2A with accusim, I might consider trying it again, although I always wind up quickly disappointed with just about everything except the night lighting, but then I rarely fly at night both in real life and on my sim. BTW, I have never had a "registry hassle", but then I have only been simming for a bit less than 30 years. 

I don't get it, folks!

For me it's P3D (FSX) AND XPX, on the same machine!

Both platforms have their strengths and their weaker points.

For me personally, as a flight simulator (which should, in my opinion, simulate flight in the first place ;-) ), XPX is the better sim. The a/c react more realistically to the environment, such as wind, temperature, icing conditions, etc.

Installing scenery and a/c into XPX is very easy, mostly no installers needed, no registry hassle, just drag and drop files.

Personally, I don't care about AI traffic, or seasonal textures. One can make XPX's visuals absolutely stunning, without the need of depending a fortune, and without too much tweaking.

The resulting sensation of flight, and the depth of scenery is second to none for a civilian flight sim, in my opinion.

But I've already spent a fortune on FSX/P3D addons, and with a/c addons like the FSL Airbus, A2A stuff and PMDG, this platform is very good for recreating real world procedures in every detail.

I wouldn't want to miss either one, but I'm a bit biased towards XPX.

 

I totally agree. And yes, there is potential in XP that FSX / P3D can't offer while keeping the same core FDM, and weather system ( even if in some aspects it still does some things better than XP... )...

 

Let's see what LR brings us along the X-Plane 11 cycle.

I totally disagree about realistic flight in XP. Never flew a 172 that flew like the 172's I tried in X plane. Fly into a small airport with a 4,00o foot runway and see a 747 parked at the ramp. realism, more like science fiction. The day that XP comes out with aircraft like A2A with accusim, I might consider trying it again, although I always wind up quickly disappointed with just about everything except the night lighting, but then I rarely fly at night both in real life and on my sim. BTW, I have never had a "registry hassle", but then I have only been simming for a bit less than 30 years.

 

See, that's why I wrote IN MY OPINION.

The Airfoillabs C172 is very good in XPX, as is the vFlyte Air PA28.

I have disabled the whole AI thing in XPX, it's not really worth anything, in my opinion. But as I stated above, personally I don't care too much about it.

My opinion and my two penneth alone.

 

My experience with X Plane 10.5.

 

Negatives;

 

Do it yourself add on scenery. (Finding it then learning how to install it) Resulting in poor looking scenery that did not look like 64 bit and spending more time looking for it than flying! That was probably my fault because I failed to find and understand how install it properly.

Lack of aircraft with systems.

GUI not very friendly. Switch assignment a game in itself?

Weather depiction.

Unimpressive frame rates, not stutter free.

No seasonal ground textures.

No AI Traffic.

An early work in progress. Probably better in 2-3 years.

 

Positives;

64 bit, no OOM's.

 

 

My experience with P3dv3.0/P3dv3.4

 

Negatives;

 

Push the sliders to the right and expect OOM's. So its very much 32 bit, which has now been pushed to its 4Gb VAS limits.

Every upgrade 3.0/3.1/3.2/3.3/3.4 causes add on developers work to push out patches and problems for customers, as the previously working programs stop working.

 

Positives;

 

Orbx Scenery. (Supported the latest P3dv3.4 upgrade within hours)

REX Texture Direct/Soft Clouds.(auto updated)

FSGRW.(auto updated)

GSX.(easy updates)

Add on aircraft with systems. PMDG/FS Labs/Aerosoft..etc...etc. et.al.

UT2 (upgrade with help of Avsims Poppet)

Poppet's Avsim guides...Perfect!!

Install it and forget the Tweak treadmill, leave the cfg alone, it works out of the box.

P3dv3.4 with the latest Nvidia drivers, delivers superb graphics, interesting extra features, e.g. ability to display Airways, Airspaces, VORs, intersections, graphically in space. A superb feature for Student Pilots and retired types wanting to keep their eye in.

Smooth enough render to suspend disbelief!

A professional rapid upgrade path that is surely heading towards 64 bit?

 

These are my opinions, from a sim flyer since Flight on C64..

 

Cheers

 

David

 

Interesting comparison. The only positive you found in XP was 64-bit....ok lol. Every con you mentioned can be fixed by add ons (which is basically ever pro you listed for P3D). FPS issue can be fixed by turning down some settings, you seem to be pushing your rig a bit too much.