Sign in to follow this  
be77solo

XP10 Performance issue, i7-6700K vs. my SurfaceBook tablet

Recommended Posts

Greetings all,

 

After giving the XP11 Beta a try (and buying it to support future development) it inspired me to try out the final version of XP10 while waiting.  I have actively used P3D this past year so wasn't up to date on where XP10 ended up.

 

So, fresh install of XP10, got it up and running all stock on my desktop machine (i7-6700K @ 4.6ghz water-cooled /16GB Ram /AMD Devil water-cooled 390X 8GB VRAM), and was pleased with updates but disappointed in performance overall.  I also installed it on my portable travel/work machine, a Microsoft Surface Book laptop/tablet hybrid (magnitudes slower than my desktop ha).  It's the mobile 15W i7/ 16GB RAM/ Nvidia 940M 1GB VRAM version.

 

My results were unexpected to say the least, with the Surface Book being quite a bit faster than my gaming desktop which is great at everything else I've tried since building it this Spring.  Every other game it's the exact opposite, with much higher settings and FPS on my desktop of course, and I'm just happy if the Surface loads and runs them decent at much lower settings when I travel.  So, now trying to figure out why my desktop is running both the XP10 final version and the XP11 beta so poorly.  Here, for example are my results in XP10 comparing the two devices side by side:

 

I used the presets in XP10 and restarted sim between each setting change.  Stock C172 at Seattle, all stock scenery etc, fresh install on both machines, minimal background programs on either, both fresh restart of windows 10.  I used 1920x1200 as a baseline resolution for each, as they have two very different screens.  This was upon loading, panning around the aircraft both inside and out, and then setting view back to the same spot. 

 

Minimum Preset: Desktop: f-act 67.76/sec, f-sim 59.25/sec, frame 0.015, cpu 0.011, gpu 0.006

                            Surface: f-act 101.90/sec, f-sim 105.4/sec, frame 0.010, cpu 0.013, gpu 0.010

 

Low Preset: Desktop: f-act 54.56/sec, f-sim 65.80/sec, frame 0.018, cpu 0.015, gpu 0.009

                    Surface: f-act 71.31/sec, f-sim 68.90/sec, frame 0.014, cpu 0.014, gpu 0.014

 

Medium Preset: Desktop: f-act 32.38/sec, f-sim 32.97/sec, frame 0.031, cpu 0.027, gpu 0.021

                          Surface: f-act 40.70/sec, f-sim 42.45/sec, frame 0.025, cpu 0.022, gpu 0.023

 

This remains the same when flying around in other planes and scenery.  I typically can't get more than 25-28 fps when flying the Carenado B58 with REP for example on my desktop, regardless of settings which was my first clue I have an issue.  Would love any insight from those more familiar with X-Plane in general.  The XP11 beta runs comparably worse as well compared to the FPS others are reporting.  Best I can tell, my desktop is running just fine, all benchmarks are right where they should be, temps etc are fine and I monitor regularly.  Prepar3d 3.4 runs fantastic with all the Orbx scenery using 3440x1440 resolution.  Battlefield 1, Titanfall 2, insert any other game here too perform as expected.

 

And, because a pic is way more fun than all those numbers ha:

 

20161212_144542.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Are you on the latest AMD drivers. AMD isn't known for their stellar OGL support. Still those numbers seem off. ARe you sure everything is ramping up to it's rated speed while in XP? CPU and GPU?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same here 25 to 30 fps in XP11 but butter smooth weird - its lie the fps counter is not working properly or something 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you on the latest AMD drivers. AMD isn't known for their stellar OGL support. Still those numbers seem off. ARe you sure everything is ramping up to it's rated speed while in XP? CPU and GPU?

 

Driver wise using the latest 16.12.1, and everything else is running great.  Even reran a bunch of benchmarks to make sure.

 

CPU runs 4600mhz, GPU at 1100 MHz, both where they should be according to HWInfo64.

Same here 25 to 30 fps in XP11 but butter smooth weird - its lie the fps counter is not working properly or something 

 

This is XP10 though, and the sim is noticeably slow when panning etc.

 

The fact my 3 lbs tablet is running XP10 better was my big clue lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is XP10 though, and the sim is noticeably slow when panning etc.

 

The fact my 3 lbs tablet is running XP10 better was my big clue lol.

 

Yes that does not sound right - no experience with amd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tried another setup between my two computers.  I deleted the X-Plane Screen Res.prf on both devices and went through the intro 747 flight in both, circling Seattle. 

 

Two observations: First, I'm quite impressed with how enjoyable XP10 runs on my SurfaceBook, shocked actually ha.  Second, there is something SERIOUSLY holding back my desktop for whatever reason, as in this intro flight I get similar to worse performance than a hybrid tablet running a 1GB lower end mobile GPU and low voltage dual core CPU.  If this was my only experience with XP10, I'd have deleted it immediately for terrible optimization on such powerful hardware.  So, curious what others are seeing.

 

I've used XP10 on other computers over the years, but this is the first time installing in on this desktop.  I struggle to believe that AMD OpenGL performance is the only culprit (and after researching a bit more this afternoon, AMD supposedly isn't much slower and sometimes faster in OpenGL), as nothing else has run into this issue, but no idea what else to think at this point.  The new Doom for example was OpenGL, I bought it at launch, and it ran great. There must be something not set right somewhere? 

 

Or, maybe I'm just crazy ha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you frames steady or are they jumping around?

 

They are steady.  Not locked like with V-Sync steady (which is off by the way on both machines), but within the normal ups and downs of any sim I've played.  IE, if I'm looking straight down or up it'll be a bit different than when I have the full scene in view, but no crazy swings, no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.  I struggle to believe that AMD OpenGL performance is the only culprit (and after researching a bit more this afternoon, AMD supposedly isn't much slower and sometimes faster in OpenGL), as nothing else has run into this issue, but no idea what else to think at this point.

That´s a known issue. On some computers with an AMD graphics card it runs significantly worse, than on others. But at the moment they haven´t found the difference, thac causes this problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be interesting to see what doing a simple graphic card swap would do with the situation. 

 

I have zero experience with AMD gpu's and their driver settings. Does AMD have a control panel similar to Nvidia? and is there some AA or other setting in the control panel that could be the culprit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That´s a known issue. On some computers with an AMD graphics card it runs significantly worse, than on others. But at the moment they haven´t found the difference, thac causes this problem.

 

Is this documented or discussed in detail somewhere that you have read?  I've searched all over the place, and maybe just haven't found the right pages, but can't find anything that explains this. 

 

I can buy a new graphics card, but if this is a known problem I'd sure like to read about it somewhere from the developers.  X-Plane (both 10 and 11) is the only software I've run into that has this issue.

 

I went with the AMD 390X 8GB when I built my machine earlier this year because it was noticeably faster than a Nvidia 970, right around a 980, for a good bit less.  With Pascal on the horizon, I didn't want to spend big bucks on a years old GPU ha.

Would be interesting to see what doing a simple graphic card swap would do with the situation. 

 

I have zero experience with AMD gpu's and their driver settings. Does AMD have a control panel similar to Nvidia? and is there some AA or other setting in the control panel that could be the culprit?

 

They do have a control panel, and I have it all setup to use application settings, so it's not throwing in any extreme wrenches.

 

I've used both AMD and Nvidia over the years, been happy with both.  This one has me stumped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this documented or discussed in detail somewhere that you have read?  I've searched all over the place, and maybe just haven't found the right pages, but can't find anything that explains this.

Not really in detail. It was mentioned and confirmed in

http://developer.x-plane.com/2016/11/physically-based-rendering-is-always-on/

 

and there was some talk about in

 

http://developer.x-plane.com/2016/12/some-bugs-were-working-on-for-public-beta-2/

 

but nothing significant.

 

But it would be a lie if I would say: It´s a surprise. They were necer known for their exceptionell software support, especially their OpenGL drivers. And since they concentrated more and more on Mantle and Vulcan...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really in detail. It was mentioned and confirmed in

http://developer.x-plane.com/2016/11/physically-based-rendering-is-always-on/

 

and there was some talk about in

 

http://developer.x-plane.com/2016/12/some-bugs-were-working-on-for-public-beta-2/

 

but nothing significant.

 

But it would be a lie if I would say: It´s a surprise. They were necer known for their exceptionell software support, especially their OpenGL drivers. And since they concentrated more and more on Mantle and Vulcan...

 

Interesting, thanks for passing along.  I read through both and did see the couple of comments at the bottom where Ben mentioned an unknown performance problem with AMD cards in the XP11 Betas.  This is on XP11 however, is this too the same for XP10 where I'm having my problems?  I'll try and figure out how to reach out to Ben.

 

Seems if AMD cards weren't compatible with XP10 it would be much more known.  I run P3D, FSX:SE, DCS World, IL-2 Sturmovik COD/BOS, and just about every normal game out there (don't tell the wife but Steam library is up to 704, not to mention Origin, GOG etc).  None others have issues.

 

It's quite the bug when essentially a hybrid tablet with low voltage mobile cpu/gpu that gets ~2000 in 3DMark11 outperforms a custom built desktop that gets ~20,000 in 3DMark11...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It certainly seems the case that AMD cards don't perform as well as their similar specced NVidia cards on X-Plane. This seems to be the case for at least the XP10 run. About 3 years ago, I had two computers, one had a more powerful and newer AMD card with 2GB of RAM, and the other was an NVidia 650m with half the RAM. Even though the AMD computer was better specced, the NVidia system would get the better performance. There of course could have been many other factors involved, but it's one reason I will now only use NVidia card  as they have the better performance with OpenGL applications (Plus better support in applications like Blender).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be very helpful to borrow an Nvidia card to make the comparison. With that CPU and RAM I'd expect triple FPS than what you showed in XP10.

 

And man, 704 steam entries...wow, I must point that out to my wife when she run mad for the new yoke  :dance:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​Thanks everyone for the feedback!  I was hoping there was a trick I was missing.  Disappointing, as I've been totally happy with the AMD card on everything else, but as it stands at least on my machine, X-Plane 10/11 is broken.  Plus I just like trying to support the underdog. :hi:  

 

Would be very helpful to borrow an Nvidia card to make the comparison. With that CPU and RAM I'd expect triple FPS than what you showed in XP10.

 

And man, 704 steam entries...wow, I must point that out to my wife when she run mad for the new yoke  :dance:

 

Ha, well, in my defense that is 13 years of Steam sales and bundles, but yeah it's grown to a silly level over the past decade. Shhhh

 

Do wish I had a Nvidia card laying around to try out, would be a great test, but no such luck.

 

Well, guess it's back to P3D for now it seems, but I do think I'll keep XP10 installed on the Surface for road warrior fun on business trips.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​Thanks everyone for the feedback!  I was hoping there was a trick I was missing.  Disappointing, as I've been totally happy with the AMD card on everything else, but as it stands at least on my machine, X-Plane 10/11 is broken.  Plus I just like trying to support the underdog. :hi:  

Well, Laminar won´t change anything in the X-Plane 10 code. While they plan to add a Vulcan implementation to X-Plane 11 in the long run, they don´t really expect, that this code will be a breakthrough for AMD. They have the same problem as most other developers, that don´t work on AAA titles. They won´t write different code for every different card. Thats the idea behind Direct X 12 and Vulcan. AMD wants to simply produce the card. Let the game developpers write their own drivers. The total opposite to OpenGL: Describe what you want to do, the driver will do the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Laminar won´t change anything in the X-Plane 10 code. While they plan to add a Vulcan implementation to X-Plane 11 in the long run, they don´t really expect, that this code will be a breakthrough for AMD. They have the same problem as most other developers, that don´t work on AAA titles. They won´t write different code for every different card. Thats the idea behind Direct X 12 and Vulcan. AMD wants to simply produce the card. Let the game developpers write their own drivers. The total opposite to OpenGL: Describe what you want to do, the driver will do the rest.

 

I understand what you are saying, but I just don't see it in reality.  I understand updated drivers "optimize" performance in AAA games, meaning a little boost in performance, but this is a different story.  I've shown that a 1GB tablet with a slow mobile GPU runs their software better than a full fledged desktop with the latest Intel CPU and a comparable GPU in every other application to a Nvidia 980.  Laminar simply has broken support for AMD cards for whatever reason.  Other OpenGL stuff works just fine, and better on AMD hardware in some cases, a bit slower in others, but it's always similar.  In X-Plane, it's not even in the same universe.

 

But, hey, at least Austin is excited about static tire dynamics, which are absolutely crucial when trying to fly a plane lol.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, hey, at least Austin is excited about static tire dynamics, which are absolutely crucial when trying to fly a plane lol.... 

 

Indeed they are crucial when trying to fly a plane, because the current tire model does not allow realistic crosswind landings, and hopefully this will be improved ASAP.

 

Improving the tire model and improving performance on AMD cards are not related, so I don't see what is your point. Austin's task is to work on the flight model, while Ben's task is to work on the rendering engine (and scenery etc.). It's not that if Austin stops working on the flight model, he could magically work on the rendering engine and improve it. Different tasks for different people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed they are crucial when trying to fly a plane, because the current tire model does not allow realistic crosswind landings, and hopefully this will be improved ASAP.

 

Improving the tire model and improving performance on AMD cards are not related, so I don't see what is your point. Austin's task is to work on the flight model, while Ben's task is to work on the rendering engine (and scenery etc.). It's not that if Austin stops working on the flight model, he could magically work on the rendering engine and improve it. Different tasks for different people.

 

Lol, meant as much as a joke as anything, but no, based on Austin's post, I don't see his static tire model having any effect on the broken crosswind landing situation?  How could it, he's talking about modeling a "weld" that holds the tire in place when stopped, zero movement.  A crosswind landing doesn't fit this scenario, does it?  And, as he already stated, current tire models are "good enough for a racing sim".  They just don't seem good enough for a flight sim ha.

 

But, that's off topic.  It's just frustrating that the head coder is so easily distracted on getting a nose strut to compress and uncompress properly, when the game is literally broken for those of use with AMD cards.

 

I promise not to bring back up the tire model post.  I did however report bugs, posted on the X-Plane Q&A support sight, and sent a long detailed email to Laminar with my findings.

 

If by chance I ever hear anything back other that simply "buy an Nvidia card" I'll report back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But, that's off topic.  It's just frustrating that the head coder is so easily distracted on getting a nose strut to compress and uncompress properly, when the game is literally broken for those of use with AMD cards.

Head Coder? Austin? Sorry, I think you miss the point. The basic flight model is his child, so it is his job to improve and fix it, since he is also the boss. But I think the title head coder is more the job of Ben. He is also responsible that other developers can break out of the basic flight model if they want to.

 

The big problem with any problem with AMD graphics cards: In most cases you won´t find anyone at AMD that might help you or at least add a presumed correction into their drivers. Everybody that uses OpenGL has probelems with AMD, while DirectX only works on Windows. One of the major reasons why OpenGL puts everything on the shoulders of the drivers, so if a producer doesn´t put so much manpower into his drivers...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Head Coder? Austin? Sorry, I think you miss the point. The basic flight model is his child, so it is his job to improve and fix it, since he is also the boss. But I think the title head coder is more the job of Ben. He is also responsible that other developers can break out of the basic flight model if they want to.

 

The big problem with any problem with AMD graphics cards: In most cases you won´t find anyone at AMD that might help you or at least add a presumed correction into their drivers. Everybody that uses OpenGL has probelems with AMD, while DirectX only works on Windows. One of the major reasons why OpenGL puts everything on the shoulders of the drivers, so if a producer doesn´t put so much manpower into his drivers...

 

OK, owner, coder, cheerleader etc, whatever you want to call Austin, X-Plane is the only sim or game I own that doesn't work properly on my video card.  P3D is gorgeous and smooth fully modded, as is DCS World with all the modules, Il2 COD/BOS, Aerofly, FSX, FSX:SE, ProjectCars, Forza, Doom (which also runs on OpenGL) and every other modern day game.  But sure, it's not a problem with X-plane.  Many of these are also multiplatform as well.

 

Not trying to derail this thread, as I know others do share this problem based on a couple days of research, just not many on avsim who all buy the same hardware (stick with Nvidia!!!).  I will report back when I hear back from Laminar.

 

Thanks again all for the help and links!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

P3D is gorgeous and smooth fully modded, as is DCS World with all the modules, Il2 COD/BOS, Aerofly, FSX, FSX:SE, ProjectCars, Forza, Doom (which also runs on OpenGL) and every other modern day game.  But sure, it's not a problem with X-plane.

 

Whenever a new GPU driver version is released, the release notes always list several performance improvements and resolved issues for various software/games.

 

e.g. http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/AMDCatalyst15-7WINReleaseNotes.aspx :

 

"Up to 10% in Tomb Raider on AMD Radeon™ R7 and AMD Radeon™ R9 200 series and up *"

 

another example, http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/AMDCatalyst14-9WINReleaseNotes.aspx :

 

"Murdered Soul Suspect

AMD Radeon R9 290X (2560x1440, 4x MSAA, 16x AF) – improves up to 50%"

 

"Assassin's Creed IV

Improves CrossFire scaling (3840x2160 High Settings) up to 93%"

 

And tens of other games are listed there, with the expected improvements.

 

So yes, it's possible that it's not a problem with X-Plane, but with the AMD drivers themselves. Of course this does not exclude the possibility that in the future, X-Plane could offer performance improvements for this issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Whenever a new GPU driver version is released, the release notes always list several performance improvements and resolved issues for various software/games.

 

e.g. http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/AMDCatalyst15-7WINReleaseNotes.aspx :

 

"Up to 10% in Tomb Raider on AMD Radeon™ R7 and AMD Radeon™ R9 200 series and up *"

 

another example, http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/AMDCatalyst14-9WINReleaseNotes.aspx :

 

"Murdered Soul Suspect

AMD Radeon R9 290X (2560x1440, 4x MSAA, 16x AF) – improves up to 50%"

 

"Assassin's Creed IV

Improves CrossFire scaling (3840x2160 High Settings) up to 93%"

 

And tens of other games are listed there, with the expected improvements.

 

So yes, it's possible that it's not a problem with X-Plane, but with the AMD drivers themselves. Of course this does not exclude the possibility that in the future, X-Plane could offer performance improvements for this issue.

 

I 100% understand what you are saying, but the problem is AMD users aren't losing 10% due to driver optimizations improvements from Nvidia; for apparently the past year or two it's over 100% lower performance. This isn't a matter of optimizing high settings or crossfire (sli) as you shared, but basic we are stuck at under 30fps with low settings on high end machines. Even Ben, which Longranger says is the rendering guru of X-Plane doesn't know why.  If you read the links he posted, Ben is open in his comments that there is a weird bug in X-Plane that crushes performance on some machines with AMD gpus.  He has no idea why, and that bothers me that that's just acceptable.  My only point was that I'd like to see this be a priority.  It seems it currently is not.  Hence, I've decided to be the the squeaky wheel to Laminar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed they are crucial when trying to fly a plane, because the current tire model does not allow realistic crosswind landings, and hopefully this will be improved ASAP.

 

Improving the tire model and improving performance on AMD cards are not related, so I don't see what is your point. Austin's task is to work on the flight model, while Ben's task is to work on the rendering engine (and scenery etc.). It's not that if Austin stops working on the flight model, he could magically work on the rendering engine and improve it. Different tasks for different people.

 

There is literally nothing about Austin's ppst that specifies he has improved the tire model WHILE MOVING. Static is what has been improved.

 

OK, owner, coder, cheerleader etc, whatever you want to call Austin, X-Plane is the only sim or game I own that doesn't work properly on my video card.  P3D is gorgeous and smooth fully modded, as is DCS World with all the modules, Il2 COD/BOS, Aerofly, FSX, FSX:SE, ProjectCars, Forza, Doom (which also runs on OpenGL) and every other modern day game.  But sure, it's not a problem with X-plane.  Many of these are also multiplatform as well.

 

Not trying to derail this thread, as I know others do share this problem based on a couple days of research, just not many on avsim who all buy the same hardware (stick with Nvidia!!!).  I will report back when I hear back from Laminar.

 

Thanks again all for the help and links!

 

Have you tried a complete driver uninstall and reinstall? Using a program like DDU preferably.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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