Hello all

 

 

With sliders on high and just the basic hardware Plugins. I monitoring resources CPU about 35% Mem 63% (5Gig out of 8) and this thing is barely moves, with the same setup I get FSX-SE running ORBX at steady 30FPS ( Limited Frames to 30)

 

Am I missing something here ??

 

Appreciate any advice

 

Yair    

What resolution are you running at? What aircraft are you using? What is your number of world objects setting? XP11 can drop huge amounts of FPS if you have world objects on max, as well as having draw shadows on scenery. It is also EXTREMELY VRAM hungry in general, especially if you are running 4K with certain addon aircraft and scenery. Considering you have a 970, I would take a look at how much VRAM you are using with your settings as I regularly see usage above 5-6GB on my sim.

What resolution are you running at? What aircraft are you using? What is your number of world objects setting? XP11 can drop huge amounts of FPS if you have world objects on max, as well as having draw shadows on scenery. It is also EXTREMELY VRAM hungry in general, especially if you are running 4K with certain addon aircraft and scenery. Considering you have a 970, I would take a look at how much VRAM you are using with your settings as I regularly see usage above 5-6GB on my sim.

the 970 only has 3gb vram

K. U R right,  I had to provide a bit more info

 

• I'm running only one Plasma TV 1920x1080
• Sliders are on high, not on extremely high
• Not drowning Shadows 
• Stock AC and 2 Carenado B58 & Bonanza A36
• Flying low & slow in SoCal no Photorealistic sentries just something basic to enhance the stock scenery   
• GTX970 got 4MB VRAM (Utilize only 3.5)
• consume about 5GB-6GB of Mem, so there is some slack
• CPU consumption is about 35% 
• All stock no OC 

 

Reg.

 

YAIR 

Turn off threaded optimization in Nvidia inspector

..did not know the inspector has anything with X-Plane ..but if you say so :-) ...and it worked, we are 30FPS easy ... now the only thing we need to get read off the stuttering, can u pull another rabbet ?????

the 970 only has 3gb vram

The 970 technically has 4GB but only 3.5GB of usable VRAM before you see significant performance drops. I run 1080s with 8GB of VRAM and the way my X-Plane is set up (medium to high settings) it usually uses at least 5GB, but with some addons I have seen 7.5GB or more. Which is why I would think that the main problem in the case of the 970 is lack of VRAM.

I run the same system and get 30fps average. As mentioned turn off Threaded Optimisation and also reduce reflections, this will kill any graphic card. Another thing to check is that you don't have textures set to maximum, high is a good setting.

K. I reduced reflection to medium and all other sliders are set to High, my anti-aliasing is 2x SSAA+FXAA, have no idea what it mean but I hope it will do the "Trick", I just need to get read of the stuttering ....

 

Cheers

 

Yair    

I wonder if SAO and medium Reflections can actually be enjoyed on a top system. I've tried SAO and got halved my FPS. Same for reflections. Only running a GTX770 so no complain but I was curious if these features are enjoable by anyone or just there for marketing purpose and will become effective only in a couple of years with the overall system speed increase.

The 970 technically has 4GB but only 3.5GB of usable VRAM before you see significant performance drops. I run 1080s with 8GB of VRAM and the way my X-Plane is set up (medium to high settings) it usually uses at least 5GB, but with some addons I have seen 7.5GB or more. Which is why I would think that the main problem in the case of the 970 is lack of VRAM.

also the 970 has been having a rought time for nvidia and users:

 

The GTX 970 woes

After the GTX 970 rolled out in September 2014, gamers started to notice that the card's performance would suffer when it used more than 3.5GB of the card’s 4GB of VRAM.

Nvidia later admitted that the design of the card was to blame, which split the card’s memory into 3.5GB and 512MB segments. Nvidia’s CEO later explained that the memory segmentation was an inventive way to make the GTX 970 a 4GB card when it normally would’ve been 3GB.

At the same time of the memory fallout, Nvidia also divulged that the card had 56 render output units as opposed to the originally stated 64 ROPs.

Some online retailers offered refunds to irked customers as a result of the memory and ROP discrepancies, and the first lawsuit over the issue was filed in February 2015. The lawsuits largely claimed that Nvidia misled its customers. Nvidia denied those allegations. The proposed settlement would not force the company admit to any liability. The Register has a copy of the proposed settlement if you want to take a look.

 

At the time of the controversy, we said the GTX 970 still delivered great performance for the price. Knowing those key details about the graphics card's capabilities makes it easier for buyers to understand its potential strengths and weaknesses. For example, the reduced frame buffer makes the GTX 970 less appealing for people looking to use two graphics cards in one PC to drive a 4K monitor. That said, the GTX 970 has since been overshadowed by newer graphics cards that offer higher performance at equal or better prices.

The impact on you at home: Speaking of prices, GTX 970 owners will want to pay attention to court proceedings next month. Soon you may be able to get a $30 rebate on your card. In fact, if you bought your card from Amazon, you might even be able to get a refund right now. Users on Reddit’s PC forums are reporting that the online retailer is still offering a 20 percent refund on at least some GTX 970 purchases, similar to what it offered users in February 2015.

I wonder if SAO and medium Reflections can actually be enjoyed on a top system. I've tried SAO and got halved my FPS. Same for reflections. Only running a GTX770 so no complain but I was curious if these features are enjoable by anyone or just there for marketing purpose and will become effective only in a couple of years with the overall system speed increase.

 

I have an i7 6850k cpu and run a GTX 1080. I can run everything completely maxed in the Seattle area and I usually get 23 to 28 fps. Where I usually fly, Oklahoma City, I get around thirty +. This GPU usually only loads 2.7megs a a time the most I have ever seen it load is 4 meg a KLAX or KSAN with MisterX scenery. Most of the time I run with textures high and reflections and shadows off, for 60 +or- fps. Everything else maxed. 

I have an i7 6850k cpu and run a GTX 1080. I can run everything completely maxed in the Seattle area and I usually get 23 to 28 fps. Where I usually fly, Oklahoma City, I get around thirty +. This GPU usually only loads 2.7megs a a time the most I have ever seen it load is 4 meg a KLAX or KSAN with MisterX scenery. Most of the time I run with textures high and reflections and shadows off, for 60 +or- fps. Everything else maxed. 

Thanx Donald for numbers, this 1080 looks like a mandatory buy in the future, what kind of resolution do you run at? I need a wider monitor and a bit undecided between a 2560*1080 or a 3440*1440 but I wonder at this last resolution if a 1080 can push the same FPS as yours.

Dang, I never saw anything about this. And I have 2 GTX 970's. 
Checked emails, never notified. Nvidia stole $60 from me...

I have a 970 dont see any performance issues with Vram going over 3.5?