A pleasant mystery for me

[John_Cillis 2,406]

My Xplane11 performance was always good, but I noticed with the 11.20 beta on up, my performance around sophisticated 3D airports improved, like my add-on San Francisco freeware scenery which has a highly detailed SFO airport complete with a moving peoplemover system.  So something somewhere got pleasantly changed, do not know what since I have not and do not normally fiddle with my graphics settings, which I keep maxed except for a slightly lower AA setting, which I prefer.  It is only safe to say it here, but I am preferring Xplane11 over P3DV4 more and more, every day, complete with my payware Eclipse and Velocity RG add-ons.

John

[turnandbank 243]

I found the overall performance improved with the 11.20 update as well. Definitely finding a bit more headroom than before.

[dmarques69 316]

+1 noticed a performance improvement in 11.20 also... with high settings in heavy airports with lots of AI, orthos , ultra weather xp and the FFa320  i get values of 50fps in average, with GA's in small aiports i go over 100fps 😲 i cant get not even near in P3D in similar environments for example. Very good job from Laminar.

[John_Cillis 2,406]

On 5/18/2018 at 10:49 AM, dmarques69 said:

+1 noticed a performance improvement in 11.20 also... with high settings in heavy airports with lots of AI, orthos , ultra weather xp and the FFa320  i get values of 50fps in average, with GA's in small aiports i go over 100fps 😲 i cant get not even near in P3D in similar environments for example. Very good job from Laminar.

I have always noticed Xplane11 had an edge over P3D, mainly in AI and 3D buildings + autogen, and even my Aerobask Eclipse which I argue is just as heavy in avionics as a heavy jet, with a fully programmable FMS, is a stellar performer.  I took a gamble on Xplane11 because my vid card has 3GB of memory but running Xplane's diagnostics I discovered I just squeak by with full Ortho at just under 3GB of VRAM usage.  I am afraid to get Xplane12 when it is released because Xplane11 is just so darn satisfying.  I still run P3D because I have some nice add-on aircraft there, almost two dozen, mainly Carenado and Alabeo, and mainly because Carenado let me use my FSX licenses for their P3D upgrades, so I did not have to reinvest (although I bought two of their titles again before I discovered that).  As for my Xplane11 Aerobask experience, I will definitely purchase from Aerobask again, had some trouble early on getting my airport database installed since it was legacy Xplane10, but they walked me thru it.  Good people, wherever they work and live!

John

[jcomm 5,971]

XPlane 11, as well as P3Dv4.2 are excellent performers in my old i5 2500, and GTX 960 4 GB GPU, provided, of course, I set my graphics options accordingly.

In XP11 I use mostly the Toliss A319 and the FF A320, while in P3Dv4.2 I use only the Fslabs A320. They're performing just great on both platforms, but in XP11 I have to lower scenery detail to at most Medium,  with HDR on and shadows set at the lowest possible tick, and flight models per frame set to 3 or 4, while in P3Dv4.2 I usually set Autogen buildings and trees full left ( NILL ) in order to be able to profit from detailed clouds with ASP4, and also totally disable shadows and light effects ( I never install Spotlights with the FSlabs A320 ).

Anyway truth is I am able to use these sophisticated add-ons on both sims without impact in the overall experience...

Still, IL2 Battle of Stalingrad puts both P3D and XP, as well as DCS World on their knees regarding performance ( and actually everything else in the feel of flight side … ). I guess this sim uses the GPU a lot more than either XP or P3D.

Condorsoaring v2 with it's updated graphics, including dense trees, is also a smooth performer. I am yet to re-install AEFS2 one day, but I recall having also great performance with that one, even though I don't think I can compare given the lesser amount of details simulated either in terms of aircraft systems or scenery and effects...

Edited May 20, 2018 by jcomm