So I dont know If my system can run all of this...

[Denni 0]

I posted something similar before, but I didn't give detail. I want to know if my system can run P3D at a smooth FPS. 

PC:

I7 6700K 8 Core 2.6 GHZ

GTX 970M

 

Add-Ons I plan to get:

FTX Global

PMDG 737 NGX

Active Sky

REX

Aerosoft EDDF (Frankfurt)

Taxi2Gate LFPG (Charles De Gaulle)

FS2 Crew 737 NGX 

EZDOK V2

PTA

Ultimate Traffic Live

And P3D obviously

 

So....hows it looking for my PC? Be honest.

[aeronauta 67]

Honest...no

 

Jorge

[DylanC 181]

39 minutes ago, Denni said:

I posted something similar before, but I didn't give detail. I want to know if my system can run P3D at a smooth FPS. 

PC:

I7 6700K 8 Core 2.6 GHZ

GTX 970M

 

Add-Ons I plan to get:

FTX Global

PMDG 737 NGX

Active Sky

REX

Aerosoft EDDF (Frankfurt)

Taxi2Gate LFPG (Charles De Gaulle)

FS2 Crew 737 NGX 

EZDOK V2

PTA

Ultimate Traffic Live

And P3D obviously

 

So....hows it looking for my PC? Be honest.

Denni, of course your system can run P3D at a smooth FPS.  There are some considerations that will need to be undertaken.  However, one question.  Why is your 6700K down clocked to 2.6 GHZ?

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

Is this a laptop?

[Chock 17,769]

It'll run, but you aren't going to see it blistering along at a massively high fps with everything you list there, some of those are really going to tax even a really decent computer, especially around LFPG..

But it's not all bad news: One thing you should certainly consider is one of those fibre frame add-ons such as FFTF Dynamic P3D v4. Add-ons such as these adjust the details levels on the fly to keep frame rates up, it's a compromise, but an easy one to live with if you like your fancy add-ons. Another thing to do, is install P3D, get it running really well when clean, and then introduce each add-on one at a time in the order in which you most favour/consider those add-ons as 'must haves', then re-tweak it with each one installed to learn which add-on really makes it struggle, instead of installing everything en-mass. In this way you can determine what you can and cannot live without. The fact is, sometimes you do have to compromise with flight sims and just because you have all the fancy add-ons does not mean it is always wise to run them all at once.

Even the very best PCs can fall over with tons of add-ons running, and you should be aware that Paris Charles DeGaulle is notorious for making things hard, especially with fancy airport and traffic add-ons. This is because there are 25 airports surrounding Paris, not all of them large, but three of them are fairly major ones (Beauvais, Orly and CDG) and Paris itself is a big sprawling city, so with autogen up high it can be a real struggle graphics-wise even on a kick @ss computer. With AI traffic settings on high going into and out of all that lot, P3D would be loading in a lot of scenery and traffic when you get near LFPG, and that's exactly the time when you need decent frame rates, so consider the detail radius and traffic settings when you fly in and out of there with a lot of add-ons running. That FFTF add on would really help in that regard.

Edited June 4, 2018 by Chock

[Mitch24 194]

I have an i5-2500K and a GTX 1060 , and I can run Active Sky, PMDG NGX, FlightBeam KMSP, Ultimate Traffic, nearly all sliders on Max and at night with Dynamic Lighting sitting at the Gate at nearly 20 Fps, which is perfectly fine for me. 

[ryanbatc 12,846]

31 minutes ago, Mitch24 said:

I have an i5-2500K and a GTX 1060 , and I can run Active Sky, PMDG NGX, FlightBeam KMSP, Ultimate Traffic, nearly all sliders on Max and at night with Dynamic Lighting sitting at the Gate at nearly 20 Fps, which is perfectly fine for me. 

I've got a GTX 970 and my 2500k is 4GHz but with those sliders I'd get about 12 fps on final in heavy clouds.  Sitting at the gate... maybe 20 I guess.

I don't think the OP will have a very enjoyable time with his mobile cpu at 2.6GHz

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Mitch24 said:

I have an i5-2500K and a GTX 1060 , and I can run Active Sky, PMDG NGX, FlightBeam KMSP, Ultimate Traffic, nearly all sliders on Max and at night with Dynamic Lighting sitting at the Gate at nearly 20 Fps, which is perfectly fine for me. 

Nearly 20 fps wouldn't be fine with me. Certainly not perfectly fine. Anything below 25 fps looks horrible to me. But maybe that's because I also experienced Aerofly FS 2 at >100 fps. Anyway, I have an i7 4790K@4.5 and a GTX 1080 and in order to keep things smooth (>25 fps) I really have to turn down a lot of settings. (The ones I turn down depend on the plane I fly and the scenery I use.)

I don't think the OP will be very happy with his performance after spending all that money on all those addons. When someone who is new to flightsims talks about 'smooth' he or she usually means 'above 60 fps'. That certainly isn't going to happen.

Only flightsimmers who have been using FSX/P3D/XP for a long time call an fps below 30 smooth. 😎 No one else will.

[aeronauta 67]

Honest...no.

 

Jorge

[mokeiko 39]

"Only flightsimmers who have been using FSX/P3D/XP for a long time call an fps below 30 smooth. 😎 No one else will."

LOL, how true

[edzunu 29]

But I have a I7 6700k and factory default setting is 4 GHZ. How you do have a 7600k running a 2.6 GHZ?

[SteveW 1,792]

7 hours ago, J van E said:

Only flightsimmers who have been using FSX/P3D/XP for a long time call an fps below 30 smooth. 😎 No one else will.

Consistent 24-30 is fine, a sim whacking between 40 and 60fps is a joke.

[vgbaron 3,616]

1 hour ago, SteveW said:

Consistent 24-30 is fine, a sim whacking between 40 and 60fps is a joke.

But it's FASTER so it MUST be better!

😈

[overspeed3 410]

I have a 6700k not overclocked, and I always get 4.00 GHZ -  so I'm going to assume you have a laptop?

(If you have a desktop, there may be a problem).

[Guest]

1 hour ago, SteveW said:

Consistent 24-30 is fine, a sim whacking between 40 and 60fps is a joke.

I have to agree that a consistent 24-30 is fine: I get that with TrueEarth Netherlands and a specific set of settings and it's fine to enjoy the scenery. But it's no match to the superb smoothness I can experience in Aerofly FS 2 (usually 60 due to vsync). The difference is obvious, staggering, huge, and so on. You can indeed call 24 fps smooth because it is consistent but it's not 'real life smooth' as 60 fps is. With 24 fps I am aware of the fact that I am looking at frames that are shown to me in quick succesion, with 60 (or higher) things look real and the idea of frames is gone.