I had P3D and all addons installed on a crucial ssd. Now, I installed a second, but much faster SSD (Samsung 950) in my computer and moved the ORBX folder, Scenery Folder and SimObjects folder to the new faster SSD. Then i created symbolic links from the original p3d folder on my existing ssd to the folders on the new SSD. I was hoping to achieve the following: 1) To create space on my existing SSD, and 2) I was hoping that the scenery would load much faster since the new SSD has much faster loading speeds.

Of course number I achieved more space on my existing ssd but when starting and loading a sim session in P3D the scenery does not load any faster as before. There is actually zero difference in loading speed.

So I wonder, is the reason that I created symbolic links that the scenery does not load faster, or is an M2 ssd just not faster when it comes to p3d?

I was wondering this too. Interesting. (Food for thought)

Ice

 

 

I have the M2 SSD Samsung 960 (500GB) and (1TB) in both M2 slots on the system I just built (see my specs in my signature).  I have P3D sitting on the 1TB M2 (with FSDT, FlightBeam, Orbx sceneries) and the C: drive on the 500GB M2.  I have a couple of other 500GB SSD's that handle my other sceneries.

SSD's load P3D faster (and FSX) than a HDD but I do not expect scenery or the application to run faster.  That's the way it always has been with SSD's... faster loading times but nothing else changes.  From all of the research and testing done here in regards to SSD's that I have seen, it has been shown that SSD's load the application faster (and Windows might load faster when you turn your computer on).  But while running the application and all of the scenery and aircraft and weather and utilities, nothing should change in regards to how fast FSX/P3D runs. 

Did you download and run Samsung Magician?  You want to be sure you have the latest firmware and drivers.  It also has a benchmark test you can run to make sure the drive is working properly with TRIM enabled.

There is no device out there today that will make P3D run faster but maybe software coding where the CPU/GPU could be equally utilized would help make scenery load a little faster.  You have the SSD's ready and able.  Now you just need the programming so that your CPU and GPU will be utilized to run things faster on your SSD's.  That might just happen someday if and when P3D becomes a 64 bit application but it will still be difficult for some as many will think they can crank their sliders all the way to the right and P3D will run perfectly without any issues.  The higher the sliders, the more textures that have to be rendered at a higher quality.  Don't think many machines today can handle those types of operations.  It is why I strongly suggest individuals move their sliders back and let the application "breathe" by giving it some space.  You do not need high quality textures to enjoy P3D (or FSX).  Besides, Lockheed Martin did not develop Orbx sceneries or FSDT airports as those were done by third parties.  They just made an application and third party developers decided to try to profit from adding some nice eye-candy add-ons for your enjoyment.  IMHO, those are the killers of P3D loading (rendering) times.

Best regards,

Jim

Wow! Nice pc specs ! Which does more for driving P3D, the 5 GHZ cpu or the gtx 1080?

Yes. I always find it strange that games provide options to crank up the graphics to a level that almost no computer can handle.

It will help your loading time when you change from HDD to SSD, but between SSD you can hardly tell the difference. At least not with FSX or P3D, so buying expensive SSDs wouldn't help.

In the end, its the CPU that bottleneck occurs.

Hoang Le
 

I don't like to use symbolic links.  Not because they are fast or slow but because I like to keep things simple.  I have a number of sceneries that I share between FSX and P3D, on separate drives, simply by entering the correct location in the scenery library.  I use SceneryConfigEditor almost exclusively to manage the libraries because it is easy to use without the simulator running.

Hi Jim,

Did you notice a quicker load time when approaching a complex airport. Since P3D 3.4 I think LM made the airport scenery load later and therefore more noticeable. (Eg FB KSFOHD) 

I have a 6700k (4.8) and Titan X (pascal) with standard SSD's running the sim fairly well (smooth) although plagued by occasional blurries. 

My question is not about blurries but scenery loading, if I went for a 960 EVO Series NVMe M.2 drive would this load the airport scenery quicker and therefore less noticeable. Would the runway and terminal load instantly rather than a few seconds as it currently does?

Thx

IM

Even a basic SATA SSD is fast enough to keep up with P3D loading scenery. The bottleneck then becomes the CPU and the actual software routine (parts of it are single threaded). Once inside the sim and just flying around, the transfer speed that P3D demands is only a few MB/s, the scenery compositing etc. is what takes time. You can track this from the Resource monitor or the task manager (in Win 10).

7 hours ago, JimmiG said:

Even a basic SATA SSD is fast enough to keep up with P3D loading scenery. The bottleneck then becomes the CPU and the actual software routine (parts of it are single threaded). Once inside the sim and just flying around, the transfer speed that P3D demands is only a few MB/s, the scenery compositing etc. is what takes time. You can track this from the Resource monitor or the task manager (in Win 10).

Agree... I am using an Intel M.2 NVMe 850MB SSD but still wait for scenery to load and still have halts to load airport objects.  I too think the problem is with outdated software not able to keep up with today's technology.

Thanks JimmiG and Downscc, that answers that. Finally hardware has caught up and perhaps passed FSX/P3D. Now it's the actual game software that's the bottleneck. 😝

Took a while though, I remember having to fly the SIM's with all the setting slides to the left.