The TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP Tweak

[Twenty6 692]

Add TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=9 under [TERRAIN] in prepar3d.cfg

[Jac_49 35]

Add TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=9 (or 10) under [TERRAIN] in prepar3d.cfg 

Jac

[pmb 5,137]

As far as I know, setting TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=9 is equivalent to checking the checkbox "Use high-resolution terrain textures" in the User Interface under "World", thus it's not actually necessary to tweak the config file.

TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10 is different though and can't be set via the UI, for a reason.

Kind regards, Michael

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

Not sure that setting TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=9 is equivalent to checking the checkbox "Use high-resolution terrain textures" in the User Interface under "World"...

The guidance from the LM team is less than clear on this..

As for it already being the default... as best I can tell, the default is =8.

Here is my Terrain section:

[TERRAIN]
TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=9
LOD_RADIUS=4.500000
TESSELLATION_FACTOR=85
MESH_RESOLUTION=23
TEXTURE_RESOLUTION=25
AUTOGEN_VEGETATION_DENSITY=2
AUTOGEN_BUILDING_DENSITY=3
DETAIL_TEXTURE=1
HIGH_RESOLUTION_TERRAIN_TEXTURES=0

 

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

8 hours ago, simbol said:

Hi Bert,

I know this settings affects memory load, but would it have a reasonable impact on GPU load?  I have an EVGA 980TI OC and water cooled, unfortunately it is already running to its limits in terms of GPU load, the memory is still ok.

Best Regards,

Simbol

It doubles the amount of memory used on my GPU.. as for GPU load, I have not noticed a change.

As best I can tell, it loads more detailed texture tiles out farther in the distance, with the result that they are not flipping right in front of the airplane..

[pmb 5,137]

7 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

As best I can tell, it loads more detailed texture tiles out farther in the distance, with the result that they are not flipping right in front of the airplane..

I usually use TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10. You are right, textures (in mountainous regions) don't longer flip right in front of the plane but farther away, being a bit less annoying.

Would be high time LM tackles the issue from the root cause.

And yes, the default is 8.

Kind regards, Michael

[pmb 5,137]

28 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

Not sure that setting TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=9 is equivalent to checking the checkbox "Use high-resolution terrain textures" in the User Interface under "World"...

I thought I read this on the LM  forum but can't find the contribution anymore. Thus it may or my not apply, perhaps someone of the experts can verify/falsify my statement.

Kind regards, Michael

[Angelo Cosma 61]

I've used 9 and 10. They are both great, my system can handle 10 all day. I ended up reverting though because even on my Samsung 960 Nvme drive the load times were EXCRUCIATINGLY slow... It wasn't worth the trade off.

Yes it looked great but not that much better than default to wait almost 2-3 minutes or more to load. Yes Vram was 9.5 to 10gb but the card still had overhead. 

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

24 minutes ago, pmb said:

 You are right, textures (in mountainous regions) don't longer flip right in front of the plane but farther away, being a bit less annoying.

 

Just to add to the confusion... mountainous regions are not really the issue, it is texture resolution on flat land, not mesh that I notice the improvement on..

[KL Oo 695]

Hi All,

 

I'm bumping an old thread instead of starting a new one.

 

I'm one who uses the TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP = 10 tweak as the visual effects are fantastic. I am mindful however that using this tweak uses a massive amount of memory on the graphics card (maxes out the 8GB on my 1080) and I seem to recall Rob saying once that you really need at LEAST 8GB of video memory to utilise it.

 

With the new 2000 series cards around the corner, I note that only the 2080 TI has more than the 8GB with the 2080 coming with 8GB. Early reports I've seen indicate that the 2080 and the 1080 TI are very similar in performance with the 1080 TI likely to become significantly cheaper.

 

Given that the 1080 TI comes with 11GB of RAM, is this a better choice over the 2080 with 8GB. Mindful that there are other aspects of the 2080 that are superior.

 

Thoughts?

 

[fghdgdfdfgfgf 111]

1 hour ago, KL Oo said:

Given that the 1080 TI comes with 11GB of RAM, is this a better choice over the 2080 with 8GB. Mindful that there are other aspects of the 2080 that are superior.

 

Thoughts?

 

I would venture to guess that a 1080ti will out perform the 2080 in P3D 4,3 performance when using TSE=10 <I'm sometimes close to 9GBs with it.>.  ....heck, the 1080ti might out perform the 2080 out right (with 1440P or smaller resolution)..

[Mace 1,902]

My first thought is that the 2080 cards will soon have more than 8 GB vram.   Maybe some initial reference card or lower-end 2080 might just have 8, but I can foresee 2080's with a lot more vram than that.

[argosafe 14]

Looking forward to seeing what this does with my system (1080Ti and an already great sim set set up - in my opinion!) 

Edited September 21, 2018 by argosafe

[Michael Moe 494]

I have the 1080TI .Should I try exp=10 ?Should I still be activating UHD textures inside P3D?.

How many is using it?is it only VRAM related or will it increase my overclocked CPU temp?

Thanks Michael Moe 

[downscc 1,327]

57 minutes ago, Michael Moe said:

I have the 1080TI .Should I try exp=10 ?Should I still be activating UHD textures inside P3D?.

How many is using it?is it only VRAM related or will it increase my overclocked CPU temp?

Thanks Michael Moe 

I've been running TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP = 10 with high textures for six months with a stock 8700K and 1080Ti SLI.  It takes much longer to load but once it is up and going it looks great and I've not seen an impact on CPU.  The VRAM loading runs about 7 GB.  I see GPU loading on the SLI running about 17-20% so I expect that would increase with a single 1080Ti but not over the top.

The visual improvement is worth it if your system is capable.

Edited September 21, 2018 by downscc