Chris27

FSX to P3D V3 or V4

Recommended Posts

Hi guys, looking for some advice. Im an avid FSX user and have invested a lot of time (and money) on various addons over the years. Visually, it looks great but sadly being 32 bit FSX sp2 is now showing its age and im sick of the constant OOMs when i fly over London or approach Heathrow.

My pc specs are:
Windows 7 ultimate 64 bit sp1
Intel i5 6600k overclocked to 4.4ghz
16gb corsair ram
Nvidia GTX970 graphics 4gb
Dedicated 250gb ssd for flight sim
1tb hard drive

Im looking to make the leap to P3D either v3.4, or V4. I fly a lot of heavy stuff such as PMDG, Aerosoft airbus etc and love ORBX, UK2000, Fly Tampa etc as well as Activesky weather. My home airport of Newcastle is not yet V4 compatible, so will my pc run P3DV3 better than FSX? Im not after miracles, just nice smooth fps and the occasional microstutter in complex scenery.

Thanks for your advice 

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

25 minutes ago, Chris27 said:

Visually, it looks great but sadly being 32 bit FSX sp2 is now showing its age and im sick of the constant OOMs when i fly over London or approach Heathrow.



Im looking to make the leap to P3D either v3.4, or V4. I fly a lot of heavy stuff such as PMDG, Aerosoft airbus etc and love ORBX, UK2000, Fly Tampa etc as well as Activesky weather. My home airport of Newcastle is not yet V4 compatible, so will my pc run P3DV3 better than FSX? 

If OOMs are a problem for you in FSX then P3D v3 won’t help you at all since it’s 32 bit as well, although it’s memory management might be a little bit better than FSX, but it’s still 32 bit and OOMs will still be a factor.

You’ll have to bite the bullet and get v4 since it’s 64 bit and should cure your OOM issues. Going to v3 would just enhance visuals (cloud shadows, etc) but your still capped with the memory restriction being 32 bit.

Or wait until your home airport Newcastle is available for v4 and make the switch then.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Many thanks for your reply. Ok cool i might just go for v4. I know its 64 bit and new airports are being released all the time :)

Share this post


Link to post

I'm certainly not the best reference in as far as using Prepr3d goes, although I have bought all of it's versions since "day 1", but undoubtedly v4.2 is the best looking, the smoothest, actually the most enjoyable MSFS-based version of a simulator I have ever used, including FSX, FSW and other P3D versions.

These days I use P3D only for the sake of enjoying what I also consider to be, on pair with what the Aerosoft Airbus was in times of FSX, the most enjoyable Airbus simulation available, and I have used pretty much every Airbus add-on or the FSX and XP platforms ( would go for Airlinetools A32x if it wasn't so expensive though... ).

In P3Dv4.2 running the FSlabs A32x ( latest update from March ) I get superb performance in my rather old rig - i5 2500 @ 3,3 GHz 16 GB DDR3, GTX 960 4GB GDDR5, win10 Pro 64. Of course I use very conservative settings for graphics and scenery because I am well aware there are no miracles ! Should I buy a better rig one day, I will surely try to get from P3D the same I see in some extraordinary videos :-)

Edited by jcomm
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

UK2000 Newcastle airport is compatible with P3D v4 as are all the others from UK2000.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

When upgrading to v4, be sure the add-ons you use are compatible. I have had several issues since upgrading to 4.2. 4.1 was very stable for me and I had very few issues. Since upgrading to 4.2, my CPU overheats on almost all flights over 2hrs. I had to purchase a CPU watercooler and will be installing that tomorrow. ActiveSky is having an issue with their latest upgrade in regards to some permissions and .dlls. You have to ensure you are running the latest FSUIPC for FSDT to work properly. I would suggest trying to get your hands on 4.1 and run that for now, especially if you don't have a top of the line rig. I personally don't want to move away from P3D in the future due to all the money I have spent on add-ons, but I feel that P3D is not progressing nearly as much as I would like to see. I am starting to move to FSW a little more and have enjoyed flying on there. There is still a lot of work that has to be done on that simulator, but the software is certainly promising. I hope you have better luck with upgrading then I have.

Share this post


Link to post

FWIW, P3Dv3 isn't an option, anyway, as Lockheed Martin does not continue to sell new licenses to older versions once a new version is released.

The two biggest benefits to P3Dv4 over FSX, and they *are* big, is the pretty much complete elimination of the OOM problems associated with the 4GB 32-bit VAS limit, allowing flights with complex acft and scenery limited only by the PC's capability, and the move from DirectX9/10 to DirectX11, which puts much, much more of the power of modern GPUs into play.

Regards

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

With all respect, it is not true that "Lockheed Martin does not continue to sell new licenses to older version once a new version is released."

In fact, you can still buy a license for P3D v1 or v2 if you want to.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Afterburner said:

With all respect, it is not true that "Lockheed Martin does not continue to sell new licenses to older version once a new version is released."

In fact, you can still buy a license for P3D v1 or v2 if you want to.

Correct but that was due to the many complaints from users who wanted the old versions. For a while there, when a new version was released, the old one was removed from the store.

Vic

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Chris27 said:

Many thanks for your reply. Ok cool i might just go for v4. I know its 64 bit and new airports are being released all the time :)

Wow thanks for the replies everyone. I'll look into upgrading when i have a bit of time on my hands towards the end of the week. The comments seem positive though, so im looking forward to making the leap into a new era of flight sim :)

Share this post


Link to post

So with the specs i posted above, can my rig comfortably handle V4 on medium settings or higher?

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post

I think your specs are fine for V4.

I recently made the jump from FSX to V4 after decades of flying Microsoft flight sims.  What a huge difference, and no ooms!

Most of my add-ons for scenery and aircraft transfered over without much trouble at all.

I think you'll be very pleased.

JOHN

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

You'll hear it over and over but one important difference between FSX and P3D

ignore fps meaning don't set up your system for the highest FPS you can get - aim for the lowest fps you can run and still get smooth performance. Many of us lock at 20 - as long as it is smooth you'll get the best visuals. Each system will react differently but go as low as you can.

Enjoy - 

Vic

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Afterburner said:

With all respect, it is not true that "Lockheed Martin does not continue to sell new licenses to older version once a new version is released."

In fact, you can still buy a license for P3D v1 or v2 if you want to.

Yup, you're right...I see where there are now dropdowns for the older versions on their store page.

Regards

 

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, vgbaron said:

You'll hear it over and over but one important difference between FSX and P3D

ignore fps meaning don't set up your system for the highest FPS you can get - aim for the lowest fps you can run and still get smooth performance. Many of us lock at 20 - as long as it is smooth you'll get the best visuals. Each system will react differently but go as low as you can.

Enjoy - 

Vic

You’ll hear it over and over from a very small group of people... :)

my advice:

- don’t ignore fps

- don’t aim for low fps

- do turn your sliders down and aim to get 30 fps if you like smooth flight. Of if you can get 60 fps per second, that will be even smoother (if youre running a monitor with a 60 hz refresh  rate).

- do buy good hardware if you can afford it (and overclock the cpu as far as possible) -tweaking the sim will give you slim or no gains in P3D v4, so sliders, addon choice and hardware are the ways to increase performance.

20 FPS is very, very slow. I think its only because we got used to a decade of atrocious frame rates in FSX that people think 20 fps is in any way acceptible. Aerofly FS2 lets you lock at 120mfps or 240 fps - nothing slower than that! It’s 2018 now, folks! ;)

if you start flying VR- which you really should, in p3d v4.2 - you’re going to want at least 45 FPS for sustained VR-only flying, and a solid  90 FPS is what you’d ideally like to see (though you’ll need to wait for better hardware and software for that to be realistic with complex aircraft in P3D.

Enjoy P3D v4, it’s a big step up from FSX.

Share this post


Link to post

Well Oz - it's good you have an opinion even though it is incorrect. You fall into the same trap as many others. You are equating higher FPS with smoother visuals - too bad that is not true. One can run consistently at 60fps and NOT be smooth.

Tell you what, I'd rather run smooth at 20-30 than choppy at 50-60.

SO, to reiterate for the OP - tune for the lowest FPS and the SMOOTHEST perforemance. Once you get that baseline you can adjust for better fps for bragging rights becquse - *IF* you are at the sweet spot, be it 20, 25, 30 with SMOOTH visuals and performance  you will get no better results by increasing fps - in fact you may find the opposite.

No matter what your FPS, if the sim is not smooth - it makes no difference - get there first and THEN tweak to your personal preference.

Vic

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, vgbaron said:

Well Oz - it's good you have an opinion even though it is incorrect. You fall into the same trap as many others. You are equating higher FPS with smoother visuals - too bad that is not true. One can run consistently at 60fps and NOT be smooth.

Tell you what, I'd rather run smooth at 20-30 than choppy at 50-60.

SO, to reiterate for the OP - tune for the lowest FPS and the SMOOTHEST perforemance. Once you get that baseline you can adjust for better fps for bragging rights becquse - *IF* you are at the sweet spot, be it 20, 25, 30 with SMOOTH visuals and performance  you will get no better results by increasing fps - in fact you may find the opposite.

No matter what your FPS, if the sim is not smooth - it makes no difference - get there first and THEN tweak to your personal preference.

Vic

Re: “Well Oz - it's good you have an opinion even though it is incorrect.”

Lol. I’m just going to leave that one there. Ah, Avsim...

As for rest...

- I’m not falling into any traps, as far as im aware. I’m responding to you putting forward your “you must aim for 20 FPS/tune for lowest FPS” as a fact that basically everyone knows “you’ll hear it over and over again”. It’s not a fact, it’s not even a particularly commonly-stated opinion around here, its your opinion. It may work for you but I suspect you’re in the minority here. As far as I can determine, most people fly with frame rate unlocked, or aim for half their refresh monitor refresh rate (31 or 30 Hz), though Im sure that some aim for or lock at lower frame rates than this.

- I didn’t equate higher FPS with smoother visuals, per se. I personally value smoothness over absolute frame rate. And I’ve virtually never seen a poster here “bragging” about FPS. I think almost eveyone wants smoothness. I usually run with frames unlocked, and I’m going to be pleased whenever the frame rate is high (rather than displeased, which is what you suggest I should be). Certain sliders and addons (the FSL A320 springs to mind) give inconsistent frame rates, which negatively impact smoothness even if the average frame rate is alright. I try and avoid these negative impacts where possible, as “smoothness is king”.

- FWIW, if you’re running consistently at 60 FPS, things will be smooth, on a 60Hz monitor, Very smooth. I did this for a while in v3, and it gave me a smoother flight experience that i’ve ever had before or since. You won’t (quite) get that experience at 30 fps, and certainly not at 20 FPS. Unfortunately, given current hardware and software, 60 FPS requires too many sacrifices in terms of turning down sliders for the likes of most. And you’ll need to be consistently at 60 FPS, which means your unlocked frame rate needs to be substantially higher than this. Ideally, you’d like 120 FPS (like Aerofly FS2 delivers), but that’s not going to be practical in P3D any time soon.

- The problem with locking at any specific frame rate is that once your frames drop below this, you’ll get obvious stutters. Like many others, I generally fly with frames unlocked - on the whole, the P3D engine tends to respond better to this approach, in terms of delivering smooth flight. As noted above, locking at 30/31 FPS can also give good results and is achievable with modern hardware. On certain hardware/software combinations, a lower frame rate may be appropriate, but whether locked or unlocked , 20 FPS is not a number that I’d ever be very excited about.

For those transitioning to VR flight, frame rates and smoothness become even more important...but that’s another story.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
55 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

- FWIW, if you’re running consistently at 60 FPS, things will be smooth, on a 60Hz monitor, Very smooth. I did this for a while in v3, and it gave me a smoother flight experience that i’ve ever had before or since. You won’t (quite) get that experience at 30 fps, and certainly not at 20 FPS

As long as you believe this, we'll be talking in different languages. Smoothness is not now nor has it EVER been a function of pure FPS.  What I'm saying is - if your system is smooth at 20 or it is smooth at 60 - there is no benefit to running at 60 other than bragging rights.

IF you see an improvement over 20 at 60 or 30 - then your setup at 20 was NOT smooth. However, depending on hardware, you just may not be able to go that low and be smooth. 20 is a number that works for me and many others but I know of many that have to be up around 30.

It's simple - I'm talking about two states - smooth or not smooth - if one is smoother then the other is not smooth.If you see stutters, pauses, flickering long frames etc- your sim is not smooth

We've both voiced our opinions, each person try and decide what THEY like on THEIR hardware.

And FWIW, I am not in a minority. I mod several forums on several different sites and read through hundreds of posts each day and have for quite a few years - I think I have a pretty good feel for what is the current trend. There are a lot more users flying P3D with low FPS and excellent performance than you are obviously aware of. The bottom line - it's your system and your eyes - decide what you like - I am providing a solid base starting point - the lowest fps where you can maintain the smoothest performance. Think about how the P3D engine works and you might understand why this is good advice and a good starting point, especially for someone coming over from FSX where FPS is king.

Vic

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think it is indeed best to go for smoothness and to not focus on fps. However, smoothness is a very subjective thing. You can define smoothness as 'all frames are being shown to me with the exact same time interval and without any stutters' or 'I don't have the idea I am looking at frames at all and I certainly don't see stutters' I think Robert's main point is that 'measurable smoothness' at an fps of 20 isn't smooth for him. It neither is for me. I tried locking/going for smoothness at 20 fps and even though there were no stutters and things were 'smooth' (as in 'all frames are being shown to me with the exact same time interval') it never looked 'smooth' to me. My eyes just can't perceive 20 fps as smooth. I need something like maybe at least 25 but preferably 30 before I can call something smooth. But even then it isn't really totally smooth for me. Smooth is what Aerofly FS 2 gives me. Smoothness isn't just about not having stutters or pauses or long frames. To me there is a perceptible difference between smoothness at 20 fps or 30 fps or 60 fps.

But there is more to it. I use TrackIR with P3D and if I keep my head still things can look pretty smooth. However, when I look around things don't look that smooth anymore. But I've accepted that and I would still call my sim smooth as long as things are okay when just looking ahead. Others though may want smoothness at ALL times, no matter what. And they won't call their sim smooth even if they only see stutters when looking sideways or whatever. 

In short: smoothness is very subjective and not only depends on hardware and settings but also on perception and preference.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, vgbaron said:

As long as you believe this, we'll be talking in different languages. Smoothness is not now nor has it EVER been a function of pure FPS.  

Really? How about 5 FPS then — could that be smooth too? It seems clear to me that the FPS is by far the most important factor for smoothness. We’re just arguing about where to draw the line.

I agree with Oz. I convinced myself for years that 20 FPS in FSX was “smooth.” It wasn’t...

Anything above 30 FPS means smooth panning, which feels qualitatively different. Even higher at 60 FPS is smoother still. Hard to get that consistently though.

James

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, honanhal said:

Really? How about 5 FPS then — could that be smooth too? It seems clear to me that the FPS is by far the most important factor for smoothness. We’re just arguing about where to draw the line.

I agree with Oz. I convinced myself for years that 20 FPS in FSX was “smooth.” It wasn’t...

Anything above 30 FPS means smooth panning, which feels qualitatively different. Even higher at 60 FPS is smoother still. Hard to get that consistently though.

James

I think James, the issue is perception of smoothness, rather than smoothness being regarded as being smooth simply because of higher frames.:wink: I hope that makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Rockliffe said:

I think James, the issue is perception of smoothness, rather than smoothness being regarded as being smooth simply because of higher frames.:wink: I hope that makes sense.

That's fair enough! But I maintain the best, albeit imperfect, proxy for that smoothness is higher frames. Someone mentioned the FSL A320, which can get high frames but be inconsistent and jerky. That's true. But if you look at the FPS counter, the FPS are fluctuating when things get jerky, and it's when they dip down below 30 FPS that things get ugly. So ultimately we're still talking about FPS 90% of the time when it comes to smoothness. I think we're all in violent agreement that average high FPS does not guarantee smoothness.

My point is that consistently hitting 20 FPS is not going to get you what I -- and apparently a lot of other people -- would perceive as "smooth," although it could at the same time show an absence of jerkiness, if that makes sense. To each his own, though. If I was happy with that kind of performance it would save me a lot of money on hardware!

James

Share this post


Link to post
On 4/21/2018 at 2:41 PM, vgbaron said:

ignore fps meaning don't set up your system for the highest FPS you can get - aim for the lowest fps you can run and still get smooth performance. Many of us lock at 20 - as long as it is smooth you'll get the best visuals. Each system will react differently but go as low as you can.

I fail to see how so many can misunderstand the above statement. Shall I parse each line with an explanation?

20 fps is a STARTING POINT - for some (like me) it also became the ending point. on MY system I can run 20fps perfectly smooth AND I can also run 30 fps perfectly smooth - other then fps there is no VISUAL or NOTICEABLE performance difference. Actually running at 20 allows my cpu more room for other things.

My point is, especially to someone coming from FSX, tune for smoothness FIRST at the LOWEST fps where you can maintain smoothness - once you are there, everything else is gravy.

Quote

Each system will react differently but go as low as you can.

Never did I say LOCK AT 20 and leave it - it is a relationship between FPS and settings that produce smoothness - it is NOT just raw fps - evidenced by those complaining about stutters at high fps.

It is either smooth or not - there is NO in between.

And since we have hashed THIS subject over and over many times it's time to move on. The OP got his answer(s) - now the ball is in his court.

Peace - 

Vic

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.