Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
harun

747/777 p3d v4 Dynamic Light FPS Dropp

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, dgeddesjr said:

PMDG chose to not allow their aircraft to fallback to any other lighting method.  If a fix is going to come it has to come from one or the other.

This was discussed to death in the last dynamic lights thread. It is not that simple to have a fallback lighting method on the 777 and 747. That's not how the code works, and as far as I'm aware, it's not possible to code a switch between one or the other. The limitation comes from P3D, not PMDG.

  • Upvote 1

Cheers,
Chris Brand
Boeing777_Banner_Pilot.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, PMDG777 said:

This was discussed to death in the last dynamic lights thread. It is not that simple to have a fallback lighting method on the 777 and 747. That's not how the code works, and as far as I'm aware, it's not possible to code a switch between one or the other. The limitation comes from P3D, not PMDG.

But it is possible...the default F-22 for example.  The landing light will illuminate the ground with DL either on or off.  With DL off, it clearly looks like what we would see in P3D v3 and earlier, even back to FSX.  There is a difference between "it's not possible for us to implement when operating within the constraints of our current development staff and without having to add a bunch more code" and "it's not possible because the platform doesn't allow it".  I can understand PMDG's position though if the real reason is the former.                                  


Don Geddes

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, dgeddesjr said:

But it is possible...the default F-22 for example.  The landing light will illuminate the ground with DL either on or off.  With DL off, it clearly looks like what we would see in P3D v3 and earlier, even back to FSX.  There is a difference between "it's not possible for us to implement when operating within the constraints of our current development staff and without having to add a bunch more code" and "it's not possible because the platform doesn't allow it".  I can understand PMDG's position though if the real reason is the former.                                  

The default F-22 doesn't have dynamic lights so is unaffected by that option being on or off.


Cheers,
Chris Brand
Boeing777_Banner_Pilot.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, PMDG777 said:

The default F-22 doesn't have dynamic lights so is unaffected by that option being on or off.

Yes it does, I just tested it.  Feel free to try it out for yourself.  They are not extremely bright but the DL does work on the default F-22.  


Don Geddes

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, dgeddesjr said:

Yes it does, I just tested it.  Feel free to try it out for yourself.  They are not extremely bright but the DL does work on the default F-22.  

So if you turn DL off, the F22 lights don't light up the ground?


Cheers,
Chris Brand
Boeing777_Banner_Pilot.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, PMDG777 said:

So if you turn DL off, the F22 lights don't light up the ground?

No, with DL off the F-22 nose landing light does light up the ground in front of the aircraft, but of course illuminates nothing else.  It just looks like what we would see in P3D and FSX versions before DL ever existed in the platform.  


Don Geddes

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, dgeddesjr said:

No, with DL off the F-22 nose landing light does light up the ground in front of the aircraft, but of course illuminates nothing else.  It just looks like what we would see in P3D and FSX versions before DL ever existed in the platform.  

Well I distinctly remember in the last dynamic lights thread PMDG saying that it either wasn't possible or wasn't worth the time and code required. I can't find it anymore which is a pity.


Cheers,
Chris Brand
Boeing777_Banner_Pilot.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, dgeddesjr said:

DL is a Prepar3D feature, it's something that PMDG chose to use.  Correct me if I'm wrong and point out the post where PMDG stated otherwise, but they chose to use the DL feature in Prepar3D and haven't stated that there is any other workaround.  So it's either LM did not provide an alternative in this situation (either use DL or your lights don't illuminate the ground) or PMDG chose to not allow their aircraft to fallback to any other lighting method.  If a fix is going to come it has to come from one or the other.  I'm not trying to blame anyone, but one of them has to change.  It sure does seem that the fix should come from PMDG but I haven't seen any indication that they are going to do that.

I agree, if something is broken. I don't agree that it is.  Only a few are having problems and a few of those want to blame anybody but themselves.  PMDG chose dynamic lighting and for whatever reason, probably good ones, only dynamic lighting.  What is supposed to get fixed, if most do not have a problem?


Dan Downs KCRP

Share this post


Link to post
52 minutes ago, downscc said:

if most do not have a problem

Define "most," Dan.

DL performance complaints likely come from people like me, that, through their AA, shadow, reflections, etc. settings are already straining their GPUs (I have a GTX1080Ti) and the increased strain from DL is the last straw.

That you and others don't see the constraint doesn't mean it doesn't exist; it simply means you have enough GPU headroom to accommodate DL. But the undeniable fact remains that DL requires a lot (subjective term, I know) of GPU usage. Whether that increased usage results in a loss of frames, vis-a-vis the GPU(s) binding, is completely dependent on plenty of other settings like I've said.

And if you tell me to turn my AA settings down, I'll tell you to go back to FS98, because that's what P3D will look like.

6 hours ago, xkoote said:

I'm sorry, but a bottlenecking GTX 1080 because you turn lights on is not progress nor evolution

Well put. I can appreciate DL but I can't believe the GPU resources required to render it. I know the comparison to other game engines is not only clumsy but also moot, but if we could chuck fancy aircraft and scenery packages into The Witcher 3 or GTA 5, we'd all be much better off.

  • Upvote 1

Garrett Frank

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, garrett_frank said:

Define "most," Dan.

DL performance complaints likely come from people like me, that, through their AA, shadow, reflections, etc. settings are already straining their GPUs (I have a GTX1080Ti) and the increased strain from DL is the last straw.

That you and others don't see the constraint doesn't mean it doesn't exist; it simply means you have enough GPU headroom to accommodate DL. But the undeniable fact remains that DL requires a lot (subjective term, I know) of GPU usage. Whether that increased usage results in a loss of frames, vis-a-vis the GPU(s) binding, is completely dependent on plenty of other settings like I've said.

And if you tell me to turn my AA settings down, I'll tell you to go back to FS98, because that's what P3D will look like.

If you're having problems with a 1080Ti, then the graphics card is not the problem, but rather your unrealistic expectations of what settings you can push or you've crammed too many addons into your install or both. I run P3Dv4 on a 3 year old iMac with a GTX 775M graphics card and 2GB VRAM, I'm not having problems, why? Because I'm sacrificing things like AA and how far I can see a building in the distance so that it performs better. I care about the systems, if I want to look at the ground and out to the distance then I'll fly a C172.

Quote

Well put. I can appreciate DL but I can't believe the GPU resources required to render it. I know the comparison to other game engines is not only clumsy but also moot, but if we could chuck fancy aircraft and scenery packages into The Witcher 3 or GTA 5, we'd all be much better off.

Sure it could be in another engine, but the flight model and the ridiculous amount of calculations wouldn't exist. You're forgetting that this is a simulator, not a game. Games are designed to look good, simulators are designed to provide accurate and realistic physics and models. If this was in the GTA V engine or similar, it would look great, but instead you'd be here complaining about how the flight model isn't realistic enough. You can have backend flight model and systems realism, or it can look pretty, but as it stands you can't have both, you need to sacrifice one for the other.


Cheers,
Chris Brand
Boeing777_Banner_Pilot.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

Did you install the latest 747 micro update? I haven't yet installed it, but according to the change log it restored the dynamic lighting stuff to the previous update, in order to avoid the fps decrease that had been experienced.


James Goggi

Share this post


Link to post

Temporary solution - don't switch on all lights like a Christmas tree. Landing / take off with the inboard landing lights only, taxi - nose taxi light only. Gives reasonable FPS. 


 

Regards,

Martin Martinov / VATSIM 1207931

 

fs2crew777.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

So I've just got myself a new 4K monitor and runs so smooth at 30Hz UNTIL you turn on Dynamic Lights...

GPU performance is around 50/60% with my GTX980TI with some pretty nice settings, the minute dynamic lights is selected on within the UI and add lights on 777/747 then bang 100% GPU usage and frames drop like a brick...

For the record: I am not using any AA within P3D as I don't need to with 4K, my settings are below and based on whats GPU intensive even turning them off doesn't really give much headroom with dynamic lights (Just wait for winter and Active Sky storms) and we'll be peaking 100% again even with everything else off.

The stock object aircraft that come shipped with P3D have dynamic lights but also legacy light textures for when you turn dynamic lights off... I honestly think that PMDG should be following suit; people keep saying this is a simulator and it's exactly that - the lights selection is part of any SOP and procedure so turning certain ones off defeats the purpose - this isn't going backwards, it's offering ability for everyone to enjoy the simulation, if this is considering going backwards in pursuit of performance then maybe the FO displays being switched off should be removed too or the radar options within the FMC?

I am now flying with dynamic lights off and who knows in the future potentially LM will be able to optimise it to a level where it can be used properly... Just a bit of a killer when landing and no lights infont of the aircraft - Since you still support p3dv3 can this option not be added please within v4 ;)

My settings for reason of doubt:

4K Monitor resolution with No FXAA or AA, frame rate unlimited with triple buffering and Vsync on (30hz from monitor so limits to that)

Scenery LOD: High
Tessellation: High (Tried Low and didn't really do any difference with GPU/CPU Perf)
Mesh: 5M (Needed for certain sceneries)
Scenery Texture: 15CM (Needed for certain sceneries - changing didn't make any noticeable performance difference)

Scener Complexity: Dense, Autogen Buidling: Dense, Autogen Tree: Dense, Distance: High - have been playing around with this and it doesn't seem to have much more than maybe 1-2fps difference for me on these compared to low/ normal. No Speed Trees.

Water: Medium with no bathymetry and reflections of simobject only. Special effects both high but again tried medium and no real difference.

Lighting: HDR On, Landing lights illuminate on (legacy option?), Dynamic Lights (Now off unfortunately) and reflections: Low (Tried turning these off and had not a squat of difference with GPU load),

shadows quality High, draw distance medium, simobjects receive/ and cast on - I can add most these on with very little difference in performance bar vegetation cast - Again I switched all these off to try with dynamic lighting on and it barely gave me headroom.

Weather: Draw distance within ActiveSky visibility max 90 with cloud distance of max 80 and volfog (Tried turning vol fog off and managed to keep GPU performance at 90/95% usage with dynamic lights, but this peaked at 100% when on the runway again)

As you can see, conservative settings and with dynamic lights off I hold 30 fps rock steady in all situations and GPU usage peaks at most around 75/80% in dense cloud.

 

Jonathon Ryans.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

The question is are Pmdg just chasing there tails on DL because of unrealistic expectations?

A 1080TI user is upset about DL? Really?

Im using a pair of 1080's and was incredibly happy with the DL performance getting zero Fps drop with 3/4 max settings pulling 40Fps yet due to a limited number of complaints we are all due to the rollback now suffering.

So where the complainants being unrealistic in having everything maxed, running an intense addon and then simply complaining because there is no computer which can do everything at this stage.

The arrogance of statements like "dont tell me to turn my settings down" simply wreak of an unrealistic attitude no amount of developement will ever satisfy. And in the process we are all now stuck with the original DL version which had for most people been very good indeed.

 

  • Upvote 1

Darren Howie

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, DEHowie said:

Im using a pair of 1080's and was incredibly happy with the DL performance getting zero Fps drop with 3/4 max settings pulling 40Fps yet due to a limited number of complaints we are all due to the rollback now suffering.

 

Well good for you, however not many can afford two 1080's which would be well north of $1000

  • Upvote 1

Eric 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

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  
  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
  • Donation Goals

    AVSIM's 2020 Fundraising Goal

    Donate to our annual general fundraising goal. This donation keeps our doors open and providing you service 24 x 7 x 365. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. We reset this goal every new year for the following year's goal.


    34%
    $8,560.00 of $25,000.00 Donate Now
×
×
  • Create New...