22 minutes ago, FlightSimmer68 said:

Yes! Just like you described. I've never encountered it before, either in the PMDG 737, or the Majestic Dash8 (the only other aircraft I have). I'm on P3D 4.1.

What are FPS like for you Matt compared to the NG, 

25 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

What are FPS like for you Matt compared to the NG, 

On average, I'd say 8-10 less, but nothing to complain about really. My system is a bit old ([email protected], GTX970) and I do like to push sliders to the right, along with Orbx, ASP+ASCA & PTA. I don't mind dropping into the high teens of FPS, but that usually only happens at places like EGLL and with heavy cloud. I don't know if the CS757 needs optimisation, or whether it's just a demanding aircraft. I plan on getting the PMDG 747 or 777 soon. I expect them to be more resource hungry than the NGX.

The more I fly the CS757, the more I like it. I don't regret my purchase and it's nice to have a plane I'm familiar with in both P3D and XP11.

All these questions about whether to buy or not... here’s one idea: just wait. Don’t pay Captain Sim $75 to test their product. 

1 hour ago, FlightSimmer68 said:

On average, I'd say 8-10 less,

That just killed it , but thanks for the info.

34 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

That just killed it , but thanks for the info.

I’ll offer a differing view that I really don’t notice a difference between the two. I don’t tightly watch and compare fps between aircraft but I certainly haven't Noticed the 757 be a frame rate hog.

58 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

That just killed it , but thanks for the info.

I should have been clearer. On average I get 35 and up in the NGX, so that puts the CS757 at a low of about 25, again on average. That's fine for me. Of course in heavy cloud and near a busy city airport, that goes down, maybe to 20-25 for the NGX (sometimes less), but I'd say that the 757 doesn't go down to 10-15 in a similar situation. It's probably closer to the NGX. It's all rather meaningless and generally I stopped playing the FPS game years ago. It's good for setting up and dialing in settings, but that's all. If its 20 and smooth that's better than 30 and stuttery. I'm not paying all this money to watch some red digits top-left!

If I toned down my settings I'd get better frames. Eg, I run 11 cloud layers in ASP, which is way too high really, but my system can handle it and I like the visuals, even if frames are hovering above 20. I just have to accept that somewhere like EGLL will hurt frames (unless I really lower sliders) and I don't even think of flying there at dawn/dusk (which can cripple even a top-end system, from what I've read).

So, again, on average, frames are lower with the 757, but not by so much as it's a big deal.

I'd say hold off buying for now. See what improvements are made and keep an eye on this thread.

2 hours ago, Chapstick said:

All these questions about whether to buy or not... here’s one idea: just wait. Don’t pay Captain Sim $75 to test their product. 

I was hesitant as I've got burned on the Ultimate Traffic fiasco, but CS are actually pretty quick in releasing hotfixes. 

57 minutes ago, FlightSimmer68 said:

I should have been clearer. On average I get 35 and up in the NGX, so that puts the CS757 at a low of about 25, again on average. That's fine for me. Of course in heavy cloud and near a busy city airport, that goes down, maybe to 20-25 for the NGX (sometimes less), but I'd say that the 757 doesn't go down to 10-15 in a similar situation. It's probably closer to the NGX. It's all rather meaningless and generally I stopped playing the FPS game years ago. It's good for setting up and dialing in settings, but that's all. If its 20 and smooth that's better than 30 and stuttery. I'm not paying all this money to watch some red digits top-left!

I totally agree. This information does sound better as the NG for me is when I look at it, its around 42 ish, so the 757 at even 30 would be ok as I lock at 25.

I don’t know  

 

6 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

 

 

That is an interesting comment. Was it like the runway "jumped up to meet you" as you were about to flare? I experienced exactly the same thing last night.....in the PMDG 737-600 NGX, and I have noted it before (in the 737, and also the PMDG 747-400 v3). This is in P3D v3.3.5.

 

6 hours ago, FlightSimmer68 said:

Yes! Just like you described. I've never encountered it before, either in the PMDG 737, or the Majestic Dash8 (the only other aircraft I have). I'm on P3D 4.1.

Known issue with payware aircraft. Too high a mesh setting is the cause. Set to 5m or higher.

10 hours ago, B777ER said:

 

Known issue with payware aircraft. Too high a mesh setting is the cause. Set to 5m or higher.

Mesh is 5m as per Orbx documentation.

On 07/02/2018 at 3:57 PM, Christopher Low said:

 

 

That is an interesting comment. Was it like the runway "jumped up to meet you" as you were about to flare? I experienced exactly the same thing last night.....in the PMDG 737-600 NGX, and I have noted it before (in the 737, and also the PMDG 747-400 v3). This is in P3D v3.3.5.

And it's just happened again at KBOS 33L in the PMDG 737-800W NGX. Scenery issue perhaps?

29 minutes ago, FlightSimmer68 said:

And it's just happened again at KBOS 33L in the PMDG 737-800W NGX. Scenery issue perhaps?

Move your mesh to 5m and try again, then go to 10m and try again. Report back.

1 hour ago, B777ER said:

Move your mesh to 5m and try again, then go to 10m and try again. Report back.

So the first time mesh was 5m. I flew the same flight at 10m and things were better, but I did notice the altitude announcement went 50, 30, 20, 10 so it skipped the 40 callout.

[edit] I'm using FreeMeshX USA if that's relevant.

40 agl missed not relevant. It's the third party mesh, it fools with things. I have Pilots mesh for P3Dv4. I moved mine to 5m from 1m and gave not seen this issue reoccur. 

I certainly will not be using any mesh resolution worse than 5 metres. I didn't purchase my Horizon VFR UK Photographic Scenery to use default terrain mesh quality.