Positive and Negative points on V4

[virtuali 4,419]

11 hours ago, 0Artur0 said:

I suspect that X-plane devs are paying all those people making P3D v4 Youtube videos. I haven't seen that low FPS and such stutterfests since the launch of FSX back in the day. :) I'm yet to see a Youtube video of v4 depicting a smooth and visually pleasing experience.

It's possible that, since P3D 4 uses the GPU way more of V3 and even way more than FSX, video capturing has a larger performance hit than usual, since Shadowplay, for example, use the GPU to encode video in realtime, which great if the GPU is underused in the game, but it's not so great, if it's already pushed (and P3D V4 *will* push it a lot, with high settings ), so I guess capturing might have some side effects on smoothness.

I believe there are hardware gadgets that can capture or stream directly from the hdmi port, so they have 0 perfomance impact.

[markmasterson 63]

22 hours ago, himmelhorse said:

MehdiAli,

Just a couple of comments.  

I would like to point out that when FSW was asking the community what they wanted in the be all next Generation flight simulator platform, most of the community registered the comment that they wanted a 64bit platform. I believe that most thought that once they had that, the addon developers (3PD) would add some incredibly good finishing touches.  We actually got something with a lot of potential but something far from the majority wants. An early access programme which was, in many respects a retrograde step. Again, early access but with potential.

Lockheed Martin, in total contrast, consulted with nobody other than 3PD, obviously listened to the general comments and supplied exactly what people were asking for with FSW. It is undeniably 64bit FSX with some improvements. Most of the addon developers are now feverishy working on updates and if LM leave this platform in its existing state, I will eat the crotch out of anybodies nightie LOL. I believe that this is a far cry from what LM  will  be offering in 12 months time or even sooner.

Your oft repeated comments regarding the negligible difference from FSX  are quite right but I feel it MAY be a little unfair in some ways.

I will probably buy both in the long term but I have to admit that P3D is, even right now, a MUST HAVE whilst FSW is not on the radar until it is a complete platform with many many more addon developers on board.

The fact remains that at the moment we are in flight sim heaven and I am, for one, loving it.

 

Regards to all

Tony Chilcott

I have no wish to reignite the FSW/P3D war of words and simply, in my own inept way, 

+1

[Boeing or not going 578]

Is there no need for affinity mask now in v4 that it balances the cpu better?

[Mickeyj 35]

2 hours ago, gamer19 said:

That is actually pretty cool title. P3D(6)4. How didn't I come up with it, damn...

Hi gamer19,

:D :D :D im a really lazy guy the term "Prepar3d v4 x64bit" was kinda long to write so i kept it short... ;)

[Mickeyj 35]

1 hour ago, virtuali said:

It's possible that, since P3D 4 uses the GPU way more of V3 and even way more than FSX, video capturing has a larger performance hit than usual, since Shadowplay, for example, use the GPU to encode video in realtime, which great if the GPU is underused in the game, but it's not so great, if it's already pushed (and P3D V4 *will* push it a lot, with high settings ), so I guess capturing might have some side effects on smoothness.

I believe there are hardware gadgets that can capture or stream directly from the hdmi port, so they have 0 perfomance impact.

Hi Umberto,

havent done any vids in a long time but i think it is 1) on driver level, i had some footage done with v3.x that was really crappy  and 2.) the v4 theory sounds logic to me. Hope to get the new sim up and running in the next days to give it a go with video.

[markmasterson 63]

3 hours ago, rlashier said:

The similarities of the P3dv4 engine to FSX are both a blessing and a curse. Yes, the default scenery, ATC, and flight models are a bit aged, as they are part of FSX's lineage. We can hope for incremental improvements perhaps in these components over time, as the LM developers seem very able and they do deliver the goods.

On the blessing side, I can't imagine that we would have much of a stable of add-ons in short order if LM had developed the new sim from scratch with all new coding. But because Prepar3dv.4 does descend from FSX, the vast selection of great add-ons we have come to know and love will likely be adapted and made available from 3rd party developers in a matter of weeks. And the release of v4 without the VAS constraints of 32-bit opens up all sorts of incredible possibilities for even more complex and beautiful scenery and aircraft models to appear on the scene. I'm thrilled.

I don't really get the argument some make that v4 is not worth the $60 investment. Heck, we have paid that and more for many individual add-ons, and this new v4 base will leverage so many enhancements in the add-ons that come to market. With 32-bit sims, there was really no point to owning much more than a mid-level video card. Now, the GPU becomes much more vital, and investments here will have a big pay-off in performance and the enjoyment of new levels of eye candy you could only dream about in the past.

The long awaited 64-bit v4 is here. Rejoice and be glad!

Rich

When we look at the cost of product, think the amount of "learning" you can get for $60.  A local simulator is 250.00 per hour.   Going to a movie with 4 and getting popcorn is $60.00.   I guess I look at the future and the amount of knowledge that I gain.  $60.00 is nothing

[Radial9 69]

Please take this with the humor it is written with. Some of the folks here and on other threads regarding P3Dv4 need to step back and come up from the yoke for a breath of fresh air.

Please let me add my perspective here. I had been virtual flying for nearly 10 years, pretty regularly. Two years ago I had some serious hardware issues and never rebuilt my virtual flying computer. I believed then the hobby was going away. Dead. Finished. Over. I won’t make judgement comments on various platforms, the future just looked awful for our hobby. Truthfully, it was.

Retirement is staring me in the face. I’m in the process of dropping $3.5K for new hardware over the next 60 days for a dedicated flightsim computer. I will most likely drop another $2K on new cockpit hardware, GoFlight, TrackIR,  Etc.

Now I know most of you don’t have a clue who I am or what I do. However… I’m no fool. The hobby has a VERY BRIGHT FUTURE. It just won’t unfold in that instant video online gotta consume it now Youtube smartphone instant forum posting moment everyone lives in now.

Patience Grasshoppers…. You ain’t seen nothing yet. If LM puts even 5% of their technology into the flightsim world over the next few years, we are going to be very happy campers. Remember… these are toys, it’s not real, it’s a hobby….If you are REALLY upset….build your own. Or pull a VR mask over your head and really check out.

Cheers,

Radial9

[Farlis 2,277]

Absolutely positive for me is the dynamic lighting when it comes to thunderstorms at night. When you fly above them it looks exactly like it does in the real world.

[gamer19 23]

50 minutes ago, Farlis said:

Absolutely positive for me is the dynamic lighting when it comes to thunderstorms at night. When you fly above them it looks exactly like it does in the real world.

Sadly 99% of us won't see it cause just "dynamic lighting" eats up the most fps.

Oh hell... we may take a peek, to see those amazin' effects, then back to dynamic lighting - off again.

Sadly, there's a whole thread about it.

 

 

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

I'd say that covers it. Now the thread can be locked.