cleonpack93

FlyTampa vs FSDT performance impact

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Hi all,

I'm looking to expand my collection of US airports. I have the full Flightbeam collection now which runs well on my OK-ish system as long as I don't crank the settings up. Considering my middle-of-the-road setup, would you suggest either FlyTampa or FSDT in terms of performance impact? Or another developer altogether?

Thanks!

Edited by cleonpack93

Share this post


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

Fsdreamteam is known for having sluggish performance, airports like KLAX and CYVR when they came out were a disaster for performance. 

I suspect it's something in their Couatl software that really slows things down in the sim. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Out of the two I was go with FlyTampa, there right up there with flightbeam. Corfu and EHAM are masterpieces. Boston is amazing but its not the lightest on FPS.

One of Boston i took.

web.jpg

 

Edited by Nyxx
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Someone else mentioned Turbulent Designs to me. Any comments on their performance impact?

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

You are asking a question that no one can possibly give you a concrete answer to.  Even though you say you only have a "middle of the road" computer, the REAL issue is do you know how to get your computer to perform at it's optimal level for what you are using it for AT THE TIME.  

There are flight sim users who buy top of the line hardware and still can't get it to run their flight sims without stutters, blurry textures, etc.  And there are flight sim users who CAN make a "middle of the road" computer run their flight sims better than someone with a $5000 custom built state of the art computer.

There is nothing INHERENTLY wrong with any of the addon developer's products you are asking about.  They will all "run fine" on a "middle of the road" computer...DEPENDING on what you try to DO with them at the time.  If you ask your computer...ANY computer...to do more than it is capable of doing "at the time", you will have problems.  Do regular user maintenance on your computer, know what you can and CAN'T get away with doing at the time, and you should be fine with any of the products you are asking about.  

Just don't expect MIRACLES if you have your AI set to 50%, are using a PMDG aircraft, and adding in Ultra High 4096 resolution textures for skies, clouds, autogen, etc everywhere.  There are hundreds (or more) of flight sim users who expect miracles with their flight simulator settings, then become disappointed and disillusioned when those settings don't work.  Flight simming even on state-of-the-art computers is STILL about compromise in the selection and use of addons for our flight simulators.  

Edited by FalconAF
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

They do different airports so it really depends on where you fly. FSDT is always fast off the block with compatibility, FlyTampa not so much.

Share this post


Link to post

Flytampa is the better developer in my opinion. But can’t tell you how it will perform on your system 

Share this post


Link to post

Do you like watching replays of your approach and landing?  If so, the FSDT airports aren't visible in that mode due to their Coatl engine.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

If the previews are anything to go by, FSDT Chicago OHare v2 will be the new benchmark in realism. I have a number of both and am very happy with them both, great products are provided by these developers. The posts above are totally correct, it really depends on where you want to fly to and how you manage your system.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Just try the fsdt demos, no need to speculate on performance and waste time. 

 

Fsdt stuff run perfectly fine. If it doesn’t, setup is suspect. 

Edited by kdfw__

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, cleonpack93 said:

Hi all,

I'm looking to expand my collection of US airports. I have the full Flightbeam collection now which runs well on my OK-ish system as long as I don't crank the settings up. Considering my middle-of-the-road setup, would you suggest either FlyTampa or FSDT in terms of performance impact? Or another developer altogether?

Thanks!

As someone else mentioned, they make completely different airports, aside from the upcoming Las Vegas, so if you want a specific airport like KLAX, then you’ll have only one choice.

Share this post


Link to post

Flytampa. Fullstop! I have several FSDT airports and they perform pretty poorly. KLAX is extremely poor. As Dave said earlier, Flytampa Corfu is a masterpiece.

Share this post


Link to post

I use them all, all of FB 10 FSDT airports DD airports some T2Gate and FlyTampa and 12 Aerosoft in EU and UK2000 my P3Dv4.3 is locked at 29 FPS and for me they are all about the same I don't chase FPS.

Share this post


Link to post

FlyTampa are taking forever to effectively update their products to V4 though. I know some have since been done, but for a long time there were only a bunch of patches that effectively replaced some PAPI lights.

I had hoped for better from them.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, Mitch24 said:

Fsdreamteam is known for having sluggish performance, airports like KLAX and CYVR when they came out were a disaster for performance. 

I'll correct this for you:

FSDT is known for having extremely good performances, considering they always did very large airport located in areas where the default scenery was already very crowded, so users mistakenly assumed the performances were caused by the scenery, which wasn't obviously the case, and the real issue was that, in case of CYVR especially, it was unfairly accused of bad performance and OOMs, because when it came out, everybody tried to use it with memory-hungry airplanes + OrbX PNW + Vancouver+ and the 32 bit engine of the sim simply OOM-ed.

If anything, CYVR raised the awareness that memory wasn't "infinite" on a 32 bit sim, and in 2013 there were just too many addons that could be used TOGETHER, which wasn't possible to have multiple background sceneries + a detailed addon airport + a memory-hungry airplane without risking OOMs.

 

Quote

I suspect it's something in their Couatl software that really slows things down in the sim. 

The Couatl engine is exactly what allowed FSDT to have usually better fps than other similarly detailed sceneries AND additional feature that nobody ever has. As explained so many times already, Couatl is an external .EXE so, it CANNOT "slow down the sim.". In fact, it's what especially under FSX, has saved the skin of many user, by doing a very aggressive memory optimization, saving from a crash that would have surely happened, with any other scenery that doesn't use it, and users started to assume that "Couatl cause stuttering".

Of course it did, to prevent a crash! Destroying objects when they are not needed or out of view to reclaim memory and then creating them again *will* create a small pause in the sim, but the reclaimed memory might be enough to save the sim from an OOM, if the system was already close to exhaustion. 

Here's a video showing KLAX, with a comparison with a similarly large scenery (Aerosoft EDDF) later in the video, to show how KLAX is at least as fast as that one, if not faster.

 

And another one I just made now, at CYVR, so much for the "sluggish performance"...

 

Edited by virtuali

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now