ryanbatcund

AA Settings XP11? Help with jaggies

Recommended Posts

It's time I attacked this issue properly....  I'm seeing a lot of jaggies in XP11.  I only use default settings and 4xAA+SSAA is what I'm at.  8X helps a little but my fps drop about 10-20%.  I am running HDR.  Do you guys use in-game or nvidia inspector settings or nvidia control panel settings?

Here is a 1:1 crop of what I mean... the runways/terminal area etc looks especially jaggy.  Mostly distant objects are the worst (no surprise there)

1_1_jaggies.jpg

 

 

Share this post


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

I pretty much live with what I see. I usually run 4x as well.

The jaggies don't bother me as much as distant scenery shimmer, and luckily XP11 seems quite improved over XP10 in the regard. I used to have to run 8x AA in XP10 just to keep it from annoying me, whereas in XP11 I can tell it's there, but it's not bad enough to distract me.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it's definitely a per scenery problem.  The author of this scenery does a very nice job of modelling, but the jaggies appear worse compared with stock scenery.  Could be my older video card etc.  I'm just curious if other people use driver level mods like nvidia CP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ryanbatcund said:

It's time I attacked this issue properly....  I'm seeing a lot of jaggies in XP11.  I only use default settings and 4xAA+SSAA is what I'm at.  8X helps a little but my fps drop about 10-20%.  I am running HDR.  Do you guys use in-game or nvidia inspector settings or nvidia control panel settings?

Here is a 1:1 crop of what I mean... the runways/terminal area etc looks especially jaggy.  Mostly distant objects are the worst (no surprise there)

1_1_jaggies.jpg

 

 

Not sure what you are getting at Ryan.  Looking at this image, I don't see any jagged edges, but maybe that's due to the small image posted.  As far as using any external "help" for the gpu, I'd like to understand why there is a need for something like this in XP.  I ask, because I tried what you are questioning and saw no discernible difference.  If anything, I make some changes within the native nvidia CP, changing performance and multi to single monitor, but that's about it.  Seems like we are rehashing an old issue that was a hot topic for the likes of FSX and P3D.  If it hasn't been understood before, Laminar is still optimizing the engine (at Austin's request, per a post by Ben in his blog), so with that said, you may not be getting optimal visuals in your setup.  Back to your image, so while I don't see anything wrong with it, in fact, it looks great, maybe you're looking to hard?  I can attest that I do see some irregularities, as Jim Stewart pointed out, but nothing that distracts from the experience to a point where I would take issue.  This issue could simply be a difference that is seen between OpenGL for XP and DirectX, from previous sims.  I cannot confirm with certainty though if changes being made within the nvidia CP or nvidia inspector will have that much of an effect over an OpenGL-driven sim, compared to one with DirectX, and maybe that's why I don't see changes either...placebo effect?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ryanbatcund said:

Yes, it's definitely a per scenery problem.  The author of this scenery does a very nice job of modelling, but the jaggies appear worse compared with stock scenery.  Could be my older video card etc.  I'm just curious if other people use driver level mods like nvidia CP.

Would you enlighten the community with details on where you are, what you are flying as well?  You may be correct in that some developers don't take full advantage of the tools and features available to them for their scenery.  it could also be a quick and dirty port over from XP10 to XP11 as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I run 4x as well, because 2x gives very blurry text in the FF757v2 VC (which of course has a lot of small text and numbers). 8x is too much for my GPU (GTX 1070). I am tempted to try DSR because I always had great results in FSX with it. So I am very curious about your all findings!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well maybe shimmery is the right word.  It's easier to tell in game and not just a screenshot.  The adjacent runway is a shimmering mess.  But you can see it from my shot... the white runway edge lines are segmented, like the centerlines of a road, where they should be solid white.  I've never tried DSR, wouldn't be a bad idea.  Except with these settings my GTX 970 is already maxed out on vram.

Oh, there is GPB500's KSNA airport, I think it was made for XP10.  It's not avail on the Org, it's donationware.  Highly recommended by the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ryanbatcund said:

 The adjacent runway is a shimmering mess.  But you can see it from my shot... the white runway edge lines are segmented, like the centerlines of a road, where they should be solid white.

Yes, ok, now I see it.  It wasn't centered in the shot, so I assumed it was something to do with the aircraft or what was beneath it.  I get that effect at a minimum, and maybe that's due to my 4k screen, but I personally don't let it bother me.  What AA settings have you tried in XP11 as a test to see which looks the best?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I've done is played with the AA slider... seems to be the only thing to affect it.  Since you're in 4k the affect should be far less than me in 1080P.  Maybe once I get a new system....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ryanbatcund said:

All I've done is played with the AA slider... seems to be the only thing to affect it.  Since you're in 4k the affect should be far less than me in 1080P.  Maybe once I get a new system....

Well I hate to say that resolution is a factor for a better experience, and shouldn't be a generalized excuse because the vast majority of simmers are running 1080p.  Perhaps a more plausible excuse would be that LR needs to break a lot more out of their "all inclusive" settings sliders.  To be honest, I've used 10 and 11, and I still liked that 10 had more settings broken out separately, sort of like an ala carte approach, rather than what ti is now.  I believe Ben has mentioned that feedback during the Beta was not the best in terms of how they structured the new UI.  I did try out a Lua based advanced settings feature (freeware at the org) but it totally wrecked my sim and I had to get rid of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you there...  I much preferred the XP10 settings.  I watched that long video Austin did after release.  Turns out some co-ceo from Google told him even he couldn't figure out the old GUI, so I guess that's a big reason why they made it "idiot proof" in XP11.  It's too dumbed down.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

I agree with you there...  I much preferred the XP10 settings.  I watched that long video Austin did after release.  Turns out some co-ceo from Google told him even he couldn't figure out the old GUI, so I guess that's a big reason why they made it "idiot proof" in XP11.  It's too dumbed down.

Yes, too dumbed down would be a good way of putting it.  My first impression of the rollout of the new UI was that it mimicked the the UI of DTGFS.  That to me was the wrong direction for LR.  The old UI was a little too sterile, but it got the job done.  As for Austin's justification for the new UI, he was consulting the wrong person, given that this simulator is user driven, it should have been left up to the users to provide the right kind of feedback. :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some tools at the org ("XP11 advanced settings", "rendering options for XP11") that try to give you more granular control. I haven't used them but some people seem to like them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, domae001 said:

There are some tools at the org ("XP11 advanced settings", "rendering options for XP11") that try to give you more granular control. I haven't used them but some people seem to like them.

My earlier post here mentions that and to be honest, it didn't do a whole lot better for the sim.  I'd much prefer to wait it out and see what LR has in store for their upcoming patch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jimm said:

Yes, too dumbed down would be a good way of putting it.  My first impression of the rollout of the new UI was that it mimicked the the UI of DTGFS.  That to me was the wrong direction for LR.  The old UI was a little too sterile, but it got the job done.  As for Austin's justification for the new UI, he was consulting the wrong person, given that this simulator is user driven, it should have been left up to the users to provide the right kind of feedback. :angry:

I doubt it was the result of one conversation with an influential CEO. I disagree with the direction they took; it would have been possible to put the more fine-grained settings on an Advanced tab, like many games do. But I do understand the explanation Ben gave in one of the dev blog posts: It's about tech support. Laminar is a tiny company without a big tech support staff. This is the explanation given in that dev post by Ben Supnik:

Quote

 

Here’s a scenario that played out over and over and over and over during the last few years: a user with a high-end gaming machine would get X-Plane, max out all of the sliders, and find the sim ran like a slide-show. The user would then randomly reduce some of the sliders, find the sim still ran like a slide show and now also looked like hell, and would complain to tech support.

Tech support would forward me the report, and when I’d get a screenshot of the rendering settings, it was clear: the user was not getting even close to the best performance/quality trade-off possible for his hardware.

X-Plane 10’s settings were too numerous, too complicated, too esoteric, too astonishing, and way too low level. Users were setting them incorrectly, and this is entirely understandable, because you had to understand the underlying rendering engine’s implementation to set them correctly.

 

Read the whole post in the link below. It's interesting and he spells out what the different parameters are that you can still tweak manually:

http://developer.x-plane.com/2017/01/where-have-all-my-settings-gone/

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read that blog etc.  Is there a way to change cloud density?  Clouds just smoke my computer....  I read that clouds are tied to the visual effects slider... but any lower and I lose HDR.

They basically took an amazing sim XP10 and just crippled its settings.  Users have many different machines... ugh... we need to adjust certain things.

Also I tried this tool, and I'm not sure it's working right.  LUA is enabled but the settings seem to have no affect on my fps.  And the clouds are just as dense no matter what sliders I change in the script.

I must need a new PC lol!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ryanbatcund said:

I've read that blog etc.  Is there a way to change cloud density?  Clouds just smoke my computer....  I read that clouds are tied to the visual effects slider... but any lower and I lose HDR.

No way that I know of. That was a setting in XP10 but I guess it's buried now? Obviously you can adjust it to a certain extent with how you set up the type of clouds and amount of layering on the weather menu, but not if you're using injected real weather. 

You can get more control with a 3rd party weather plugin. SkyMaxx Pro has settings for trading off cloud coverage vs. frame rate. It's been a while since I've run XEnviro, but I remember it being framerate friendly due to the 2D cloud rendering. 

Quote

I must need a new PC lol!

I hate to say it, but that might be the root of the problem. :happy:

I have the same graphics card as you (GTX970) but a stronger CPU and much more RAM. I'm not seeing a major hit on frame rate with default XP11 clouds.

I'm running graphics setting at High/HDR, maximum world objects, and anti-aliasing at 2X SSAA+FXAA. No changes in the Nvidia control panel other than turning threaded optimization off (which I'm not sure is still recommended, but it doesn't hurt).

I'm getting very good frame rates (average around 40 fps) at 1920x1200 monitor res, and I don't see any noticeable jaggies, or that segmented white paint line at the edge of runways in your screen shot.

Your 8 GB of RAM is the minimum spec for running X-Plane 11. Laminar's recommended spec is "16-24 GB RAM or more," so it might be that a memory crunch is affecting your frame rate, but I'm not sure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jimm said:

.... I did try out a Lua based advanced settings feature (freeware at the org) but it totally wrecked my sim and I had to get rid of it.

You as well Jim? I had a double whammy yesterday when, after sorting out the Lua problems, the newly-installed Windows Creators Edition proceeded to trash my graphics card!!  All in all not a good day - but at least the 'yachties' made me laugh. :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ryanbatcund said:

Yes, it's definitely a per scenery problem.  The author of this scenery does a very nice job of modelling, but the jaggies appear worse compared with stock scenery.  Could be my older video card etc.  I'm just curious if other people use driver level mods like nvidia CP.

Thanks Ryan.  The problem is that higher resolution textures and 3D edges will cause more shimmer/jaggies (aliasing) than low resolution (fuzzy) textures or ones that have fake 2D edges.  Everything is a trade-off and judgment is required when building scenery.  I usually opt for 3D when practical especially if it's on objects placed where you might casually get close to (i.e., taxi past, park in front of, etc)...this way it doesn't get fuzzy and lose resolution and helps the whole immersion thing (also get nice ambient occlusion baked shadows for the textures).  Example at SNA is the commuter terminals at each end of the main terminal section.  If you look at the windows, they are inset and the frames are 3D and protrude.  At distance, they shimmer...but as you pull up to them on the ramp, they look...well...3D.  Nothing fuzzy.  The windows in the long section of the terminal are high resolution 2D textures...they do not shimmer...but they will get fuzzy if you zoom in close.

I haven't tried a 4K monitor here, but on a 2560x1440 with 4AA and still some shimmering, though it's not too distracting.  The size of the monitor matters too...I'm at 27".  Pixel density is the key.  You might try a couple settngs in this article explaining the various methods to reduce them.

https://www.lifewire.com/antialiasing-pc-games-831764

Also, there is no real difference between building scenery for XP 10 or 11 except that there are now more texturing options available with 11 with reflection and "metalness".  The building of objects is identical.  Hope that link helps...I agree shimmering can be very annoying.  Hope this helps.

-- Greg

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it slightly humorous that a discussion about AA and jaggies went off in a direction about UI choices, considering that there weren't any other additional choices regarding AA in XP10. I also wish they'd placed an 'advanced' tab with some of the settings they've decided to hide, but since you can still fiddle with them at a text-file level, the loss is purely that of convenience. There are areas where the new AI shines. I really love the graphical airport / parking spot section, for example.

I personally think the trade-off was acceptable - I'd be willing to bet half the new XP users wouldn't be here if it wasn't for that new UI; the sim after all is not THAT much different than it was before.

1 hour ago, gpb500 said:

I haven't tried a 4K monitor here, but on a 2560x1440 with 4AA and still some shimmering, though it's not too distracting.  The size of the monitor matters too...I'm at 27".  Pixel density is the key.  You might try a couple settngs in this article explaining the various methods to reduce them.

https://www.lifewire.com/antialiasing-pc-games-831764

That's excellent advice. Pixel density means just as much as resolution when it comes to the visual representation of anti-aliasing.

I run a 2560x1440 on a 32" monitor for the majority of my simming, and while I love the size, the trade-off is that I have a pixel density that roughly equals a conventional 24" 1920x1080 monitor. So I end up seeing the same shimmering / jagged edges as that size of monitor. On the other end of the spectrum, I develop on a laptop with a 15.6" 1920x1080 monitor which displays noticeably less shimmering / jaggies even with far less aggressive AA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ryanbatcund said:

I agree with you there...  I much preferred the XP10 settings.  I watched that long video Austin did after release.  Turns out some co-ceo from Google told him even he couldn't figure out the old GUI, so I guess that's a big reason why they made it "idiot proof" in XP11.  It's too dumbed down.

at first i was reluctant like you where, but reading the developer blog comments of the last three blogs, i am agreeing to ben`s viewpoint.  There is one slider left that will cripple your system if you put it to max. And that is the reflection slider. And lo and behold people smacking him in the comments because they throw the sliders to the max and the performance is abysimal.

Let´s face it, if only 1% of your users truly understand the options and it causes sigificant support issues, then you revisit it. Way too many users don´t care what the settings are they want them to the max. I will admit there are some edge cases where more options would be better but in general it works great. 

Personally i spent hours after hours finetuning xp10 and in xp11 i get the same performance after 2 minutes. It`s abit like the double clutch systems in cars. They work better and apart from 1% race drivers, they are significantly faster for everyone else. But every "pro" is adament that he is faster in a manual and can drive better than a stupid automatic ;)

I love this just for the simple fact that ben does not have to answer 20 support mails a week where users complain that x-plane is broken because they get 8 fps on their latest maxxed out rig :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I briefly tried DSR yesterday and I didn't really see a benefit: I had to go max DSR (2.0x) + 2xAA to get a good image, but lost frames compared to 4xAA without DSR. DSR + 1xAA was worse in my opinion than 4xAA without DSR. My focus isn't the exterior however - it's the EICAS messages in the FF757v2. I want to be able to clearly read those from the left seat and apparently a lot of AA is needed to achieve this.

(27", 1080p, i7-4770k@3,5, GTX1070, 16GB Ram)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, domae001 said:

I briefly tried DSR yesterday and I didn't really see a benefit: I had to go max DSR (2.0x) + 2xAA to get a good image, but lost frames compared to 4xAA without DSR. DSR + 1xAA was worse in my opinion than 4xAA without DSR. My focus isn't the exterior however - it's the EICAS messages in the FF757v2. I want to be able to clearly read those from the left seat and apparently a lot of AA is needed to achieve this.

(27", 1080p, i7-4770k@3,5, GTX1070, 16GB Ram)

Could you send a screenshot our way?  I'd like to see what you are talking about, because at first glance of your post, it seems logical to use the zoom function to see the screen.  You may also want to adjust your field of view, in the XP11 settings, which I believe would be a better solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jimm said:

Could you send a screenshot our way?  I'd like to see what you are talking about, because at first glance of your post, it seems logical to use the zoom function to see the screen.  You may also want to adjust your field of view, in the XP11 settings, which I believe would be a better solution.

I didn't take any, so I'd have to go back and redo it. Of course, I could of course use the zoom function, but I want to be able to just glance at the EICAS display and read the messages without hurting my eyes and staying focussed on the primary displays. My FOV is 90 degrees, so I can see the EICAS display, the text just doesn't get sharp enough with DSR only.

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