I've bought P3D v4 today and I'm a bit disappointed with the performance of the sim. I was under the impression that I'll have the same if not similar fps that V3 has if I use the same settings. To my surprise the fps hit halved. As an example loading with the PMDG 737 into Tegel airport in V3 I have 45+ fps. Using exactly the same settings in v4 my fps is around 22. I've managed to bring it up to 28 disabling the "Use High resolution terrain textures" but I'm still well bellow what I can achieve in V3 and I haven't even installed ORBX yet. 

P3D v3 settings and FPS:

P3D v4 settings and FPS:

 

To say I'm disappointed is and understatement. I've read how the fps was miserly improved over the V3, but no one mentioned that the performance is worse. Has anyone else experienced the same?

I have a similar system as yours but I noticed a performance increase, especially considering that the autogen is displaying further out and I can even run road traffic without a hit.  I'm not much help of course but you should definitely be seeing better than that I would think.  Were you running any affinity mask on V3?  Also, I get better performance with Vsync and Triple Buffering OFF along with the unlimited frames.

No affinity mask in any of the simulators. The settings are exactly the same.

The settings are not the same. There have been changes in v4 that affect performance, the extended LOD and autogen, the lighting, etc. Adjust your settings to get what you want. I suggest not paying as much attention to FPS and more attention to smooth performance.

Since I lock my system at 20 and don't pay attention to FPS I tune my system for the smoothest operation possible. Flying around the LAX area I can see to the ocean all the way to the ocean. Could not do that in V3.

Vic

30 minutes ago, vgbaron said:

The settings are not the same. There have been changes in v4 that affect performance, the extended LOD and autogen, the lighting, etc. Adjust your settings to get what you want. I suggest not paying as much attention to FPS and more attention to smooth performance.

Since I lock my system at 20 and don't pay attention to FPS I tune my system for the smoothest operation possible. Flying around the LAX area I can see to the ocean all the way to the ocean. Could not do that in V3.

Vic

What you said contradicts what many are claiming. I'm not saying you're wrong I'm only saying I wish I've read your reply sooner. I was hoping I'd be able to keep the same settings and achieve the same performance but alas, it is not meant to be.

 

I'll try to play around with settings to achieve the best performance but considering the performance I get from V3 I doubt I'll ever switch to V4.

your AA setting is different, minor but worth for the sake of experiment

traffic tab is same, or all 0?

I have a similar system and have only a couple hours playing with V4 but I have v-sync off now with better results somehow? i would flick that off and see... but i have not been scientific about it yet , so many things to play with and set up again since I took the v4 opportunity as an excuse to upgrade and reformat to windows 10...

 

what about video drivers?  are you on the newest or clinging to older because of that vas leak stuff a few months ago?  New might benefit V4 ?

 

lastly - do this test with weather cleared . that takes out a major variable , not sure if you have Active sky or similar running in these shots ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

and try it with another aircraft , takes out another variable - you uninstalled the NGX completely for v4 reinstall right?  not sure if that could harm but that was the instructions

Don't compare the sliders between v3 and v4.  You get a lot more for the same level of density in v4 as you would in v3.  Also, don't use SSAA, use MSAA only.  SSAA is a huge performance killer.  So are dynamic reflections and lighting--Especially with PMDG aircraft at night.  If you want to see your own landing lights from the cockpit, you need dynamic lighting on.  If you keep it on, chances are that you're going to be unpleasantly surprised with a horrendous performance hit, especially at payware airports with AI.  Same can be said for autogen loading times and a host of other annoyances.  Welcome to 64bit.  Overall it's a better platform, but there are some bugs that need to be worked out, and it's going to take time to "mature".  I'm still debating whether or not to go back to v3 until things improve.

Runway  08 and 26? Not from exact same perspectiv.?  Strange that you loose that much though. 

Michael Moe

The autogen settings are not identical. The v3 equivalent would be Medium autogen view distance not high. I believe the density is also higher in v4 compared to v3

41 minutes ago, Breene said:

and try it with another aircraft , takes out another variable - you uninstalled the NGX completely for v4 reinstall right?  not sure if that could harm but that was the instructions

The thing is I don't use other aircraft. My main sim is Xplane while I still use P3D for PMDG.

38 minutes ago, dal330200 said:

Don't compare the sliders between v3 and v4.  You get a lot more for the same level of density in v4 as you would in v3.  Also, don't use SSAA, use MSAA only.  SSAA is a huge performance killer.  So are dynamic reflections and lighting--Especially with PMDG aircraft at night.  If you want to see your own landing lights from the cockpit, you need dynamic lighting on.  If you keep it on, chances are that you're going to be unpleasantly surprised with a horrendous performance hit, especially at payware airports with AI.  Same can be said for autogen loading times and a host of other annoyances.  Welcome to 64bit.  Overall it's a better platform, but there are some bugs that need to be worked out, and it's going to take time to "mature".  I'm still debating whether or not to go back to v3 until things improve.

SSAA doesn't really tax my gpu much but I did try the MSAA which brought no improvement. Never used dynamic reflections or lightning so I have those unticked.

36 minutes ago, Michael Moe said:

Runway  08 and 26? Not from exact same perspectiv.?  Strange that you loose that much though. 

Michael Moe

It was 08 for both tests.

7 minutes ago, GHarrall said:

The autogen settings are not identical. The v3 equivalent would be Medium autogen view distance not high. I believe the density is also higher in v4 compared to v3

This was it. Setting the autogent view distance to medium my frames returned to comfortable 40 fps with autogent density to extreme. Now I need to install ORBX and see how my frames will hold from there.

 

Thank you.

Good to hear.  It's a bit confusing at first, but v4 packs a punch at lower slider settings.  I love x-plane 11, but I think the weather engine and addon airports need some improvements in quality.  I love the ground textures, haze and lighting though, and there's plenty of additional aircraft to fly that aren't in P3D...so I use both too.

2 minutes ago, dal330200 said:

Good to hear.  It's a bit confusing at first, but v4 packs a punch at lower slider settings.  I love x-plane 11, but I think the weather engine and addon airports need some improvements in quality.  I love the ground textures, haze and lighting though, and there's plenty of additional aircraft to fly that aren't in P3D...so I use both too.

So do I :)

Oh as far as ORBX, I didn't notice much of a performance hit, even after Vector came out and I installed everything with all of the boxes ticked.  However, the amount of street lights that you see at night is dependent on autogen density.  P3D comes stock with some pretty good vector data as well if you don't want to wait for that huge download today.

John