FFPS:FFTF question

[Nyxx 6,993]

The most demanding time imo when you need, see good texture loading is when am below 10,000 ft and are at 250 kt that can be a GS of 270-280. Flying into a big addon airport. Add to that FSL etc,

Now if I am still getting good texture loading all the way to the airport imo there is no bigger test. When am at cruise that's the easiest time my PC has to load textures. So why I need a more default 0.33 setting is beyond me and if when this app give you a 0.05 or another really low number if your not getting burriers then why anyone would need a high number at any other time is beyond me.

But like I said if people have texture loading problems them it might help them. But at the most demanding time, flying low and into a big airport the app is giving you a low number anyway! so if people are getting bad burriers then then they should look at their setting. Or not have a FFTF at all.

Edited March 29, 2018 by Nyxx

[Cruachan 705]

What folk may be overlooking is the final choice of FFTF value made by LM was based on their experience with the stock simulator as worked on and tuned for optimal performance by their Development team. Our installations, on the other hand, are varied and wide in terms of hardware and installed Addon complexity. It is perhaps fortuitous that judicious settings allows this value (0.33) to deliver what we need... most of the time, and that, as I see it, is the point. There are occasions when performance falls short and our sims start to struggle. 

Being able to smoothly adjust the FFTF value dynamically is a welcome addition to our armoury. As has been demonstrated, it helps to bridge the gap when the texture and object loading demands become perilously close to or fall beyond that red line and situations where performance is perceived as being perfectly acceptable and likely to be far more tolerant of a wider range of FFTF values.

Mike

Edited March 29, 2018 by Cruachan

[Dirk98 354]

 

3 hours ago, SteveW said:

Thanks Mike.

Part of the way it works is that there is overhead in the system. The same tests without locking, using Unlimited VSync=Off don't prove much other than what I showed in the earlier set of graphs. 

And how about using Unlimited FPS with VSync=On?

Thanks.

[Nyxx 6,993]

2 hours ago, Cruachan said:

What folk may be overlooking is the final choice of FFTF value made by LM was based on their experience with the stock simulator as worked on and tuned for optimal performance by their Development team. Our installations, on the other hand, are varied and wide in terms of hardware and installed Addon complexity. It is perhaps fortuitous that judicious settings allows this value (0.33) to deliver what we need... most of the time, and that, as I see it, is the point. There are occasions when performance falls short and our sims start to struggle. 

Being able to smoothly adjust the FFTF value dynamically is a welcome addition to our armoury. As has been demonstrated, it helps to bridge the gap when the texture and object loading demands become perilously close to or fall beyond that red line and situations where performance is perceived as being perfectly acceptable and likely to be far more tolerant of a wider range of FFTF values.

Mike

If this app works for you Mike then that great. It is another tool for us to use if anyone feels fit.

---------

About the default 0.33. That to me and this is the petrol head/my other hobby coming out My car Runs stock at 240bhp. My Audi can run perfectly in the desert at 40+ or were its -20, but here in the UK our temps range from -4 to around 28 give or take. So if I take my car to APR they can remap the ECU to work at its very best without the car needing to work in the exsteams that Audi need to build in to every car. A remap on my car stage 1 takes it to 310bhp with nothing else being done It even means I get better MPG because the engine is running more optimally. Thats a pug in and drive out 30 mins later. So take the 0.33 of LM as the safe setting not the optimum for everyone.

 

Edited March 29, 2018 by Nyxx

[Pete Dowson 558]

4 hours ago, Nyxx said:

Now if I am still getting good texture loading all the way to the airport imo there is no bigger test. When am at cruise that's the easiest time my PC has to load textures. So why I need a more default 0.33 setting is beyond me and if when this app give you a 0.05 or another really low number if your not getting burriers then why anyone would need a high number at any other time is beyond me.

If you don't get blurries then you don't need FFTF changes, obviously. But it is evident that not all users' systems and needs are the same!

I've never found any problem with nearby texture loading. As far as I'm aware, blurries are not caused by no textures (there are evidently some textures there), but by low resolution textures.  No textures cause black areas where they've not loaded at all. The blurries I see are not nearby but further away, and more evident (or only evident) when higher, as in cruise.

The problem I get on approaching a heavy busy airport is more the sudden popping up of the airport buildings, causing stutters. But that is another subject altogether.

Pete

 

 

Edited March 29, 2018 by Pete Dowson

[Ted Striker 338]

20 hours ago, SteveW said:

You're completely missing the point here.

The graph results from a test to demonstrate that FFTF changes the sim loading speed in the way the manual described and quoted earlier in the thread. I don't fly with Unlimited and no VSync just like you. But you can't see inside that way..

The sim has to apportion time to loading and time for assembly (FFTF)  irrespective of your settings.

I miss a lot but it is slowly sinking in! I am glad to hear that some are finding the tool helpful.

Thanks Steve.

[SteveW 1,792]

7 hours ago, Nyxx said:

I wish you would run the same test will just FPS locked at 24 (as you have done and I also use locked at 24) and a FFTF put in your config of 0.01

Lets see how that works out. v the app.

Because unless you have texture loading problems I see no reason to use it.

FFTF set at 0.01 FPS locked at 24 job done for me.

To see that in the same test would show if the app is really needed. Because the best looking one of them charts is the one with 0.05, well 0.01 should be even better.

 

If you think about it, the initial test I used was coming in from the sea, over land to EHAM. So if I use FFTF=0.05 fixed in the cfg, that's not a concern over the sea, and then becomes useful as I get lower toward the scenery. So the graphs look similar. What's to note is that there is little if no apparent interruption from the FFTF app and this will bring back up the FFTF as we get higher and faster and pull in data quicker when we approach more tiles at a rate.

Further testing will take place.

 

[FlightSimDimm 16]

Looks like a really good utility and I my purchase soon depending on how it working with unlimited frames, 30hz monitor, Triple buffer and Vsync set to on.

I would like to understand if FFTF is the only setting that can be dynamically set why the simulator is running.

Does this open up for the possibility to change other setting like shadows, HDR, reflections, etc during flight variables like time of day, altitude, frame rates, etc.

[Dirk98 354]

1 hour ago, FlightSimDimm said:

Looks like a really good utility and I my purchase soon depending on how it working with unlimited frames, 30hz monitor, Triple buffer and Vsync set to on.

Will it make sense and work at all with these settings??

Thanks.

[SteveW 1,792]

30vsync+tb+fspsFFTFd gives a slightly straighter line in certain tests but not high fps. Low fps and low core count is best.

[FalconAF 213]

I'm just gonna add something to this thread, 'cos I'm surprised no one else has yet.

The concept of setting your "monitor" to 30Hz just isn't going to be feasible for some people, even if their "monitor" is capable of it.  I'm currently using my 65" 4K UHD Curved Samsung TV as my "monitor" (recovering from massive neck surgery due to getting run over on my motorcycle by a lady texting on her cell phone while driving her pickup truck, so turning my head/neck left and right to see a 3-wide monitor setup is problematic for me right now).  30Hz refresh rate on a 65" screen...even at 4K resolution...is gonna give most people headaches.  Most people would notice the "vibration" of the screen presentation at 30Hz on a large(er) "monitor" like that.  But then I don't have any "loading problems" at 60Hz already, so for me it's a non-issue to begin with

[Dirk98 354]

2 hours ago, SteveW said:

Low fps and low core count is best.

For FFTF use you meant? Otherwise I'm at a loss, 'is best' for what or why?

Thanks,

Edited April 2, 2018 by Dirk98

[SteveW 1,792]

10 hours ago, Dirk98 said:

For FFTF use you meant? Otherwise I'm at a loss, 'is best' for what or why?

Thanks,

Helps to read the post in its entirety:

"30vsync+tb+fspsFFTFd gives a slightly straighter line in certain tests but not high fps. Low fps and low core count is best."

[SteveW 1,792]

12 hours ago, FalconAF said:

... (recovering from massive neck surgery due to getting run over on my motorcycle by a lady texting on her cell phone while driving her pickup truck, so turning my head/neck left and right to see a 3-wide monitor setup is problematic for me right now)...

Damned car drivers. Get better soon Rick.

[Dirk98 354]

1 hour ago, SteveW said:

Helps to read the post in its entirety:

"30vsync+tb+fspsFFTFd gives a slightly straighter line in certain tests but not high fps. Low fps and low core count is best."

Low core count is best for what? For the straighter line? 

Anybody?

Thanks