FPS higher with 747-8 than 747-400 on the Ground

[LecLightning56 33]

Just an observation on my part but one which surprised me is that, on the ground at the default airfield of Eglin AFB in P3D v4.4, the 747-8 has up to 10 frames more than the 747-400.

The cockpit settings are exactly the same in both aircraft.

Does anyone have any words of wisdom to explain this phenomenon? Personally I might have expected less frames with the 747-8 than the 747-400 on account of its sophistication comparatively.

Edited February 5, 2019 by LecLightning56

[vc10man 732]

Hate to beg the question, as I fly both, but what is more imperative, a set of figures such as FPS numbers, or a smooth looking actual display on your monitor?  It's akin to 'My Ferrari does 175mph yet I am only getting 15mph/gal'.

I can never comprehend this obsession simmers have with FPS.

[LecLightning56 33]

6 minutes ago, vc10man said:

Hate to beg the question, as I fly both, but what is more imperative, a set of figures such as FPS numbers, or a smooth looking actual display on your monitor?  It's akin to 'My Ferrari does 175mph yet I am only getting 15mph/gal'.

I can never comprehend this obsession simmers have with FPS.

I agree wholeheartedly that there is an obsession with FPS, I am merely expressing a surprise on my part through observation.

That said, I can think of a number of products where lack of FPS may well lead to anything but smooth performance and kudos indeed to PMDG for going the extra mile to ensure that those of us with less than state-of-the-art megabucks computers can enjoy their products and expect smooth performance under the most challenging of conditions, as I myself can vouch for (without the megabucks input).

Anyway, if someone can elucidate any further on why perhaps the excellent 747-8 surpasses the 747-400 in this respect then it is of interest to me personally and hence the thread.

[vc10man 732]

No sweat, that was just MHO only.🤣

[ObeseDuck55 0]

On 2/5/2019 at 1:14 PM, vc10man said:

Hate to beg the question, as I fly both, but what is more imperative, a set of figures such as FPS numbers, or a smooth looking actual display on your monitor?  It's akin to 'My Ferrari does 175mph yet I am only getting 15mph/gal'.

I can never comprehend this obsession simmers have with FPS.

What? Maybe I have misunderstood but your frame-rate is *Literarly* The smoothness you per-sieve the information happening on your computer by giving your brain a more frequent graphical update. I'd say more than half the community are probably playing with less than 30fps (50% of the average 1080p 60hz monitor) which means while that is still smooth any dips or changes can put you flying off. A jump from 25-30 is % relatively larger than 30-35 and you will feel it more possibly causing over or under-controlling of the plane as you may keep the pressure on for slightly longer while your eye waits to see the response, or vice versa.

While I don't think people are chasing FPS up to 60 like first person shooters or combat flight sims the frame-rates are important every-frame helps especially with larger addons like the 747 which typically depending on where you live will be flying in to very busy dense scenery like EGLL, KJFK and such especially when online with Vatsim.

This was a long time ago but I had to see if I'm misunderstanding as I would like to know how the 747 is especially when i'm going to be flying it to the airports listed above. The main reason as stated above is that frame drops are relatively larger at lower average FPS meaning that while 20 is playable coming into a busy airport and loading in local objects may cause 5fps drop which is a huge 25% of your frames compared to 5 fps drop 30-25. I am lucky that I have been able to upgrade an now play on 40fps in fslabs but before this upgrade before buying a module how badly it performed did impact my choices.

[vc10man 732]

1 hour ago, ObeseDuck55 said:

What? Maybe I have misunderstood but your frame-rate is *Literarly* The smoothness you per-sieve the information happening on your computer by giving your brain a more frequent graphical update. I'd say more than half the community are probably playing with less than 30fps (50% of the average 1080p 60hz monitor) which means while that is still smooth any dips or changes can put you flying off. A jump from 25-30 is % relatively larger than 30-35 and you will feel it more possibly causing over or under-controlling of the plane as you may keep the pressure on for slightly longer while your eye waits to see the response, or vice versa.

While I don't think people are chasing FPS up to 60 like first person shooters or combat flight sims the frame-rates are important every-frame helps especially with larger addons like the 747 which typically depending on where you live will be flying in to very busy dense scenery like EGLL, KJFK and such especially when online with Vatsim.

This was a long time ago but I had to see if I'm misunderstanding as I would like to know how the 747 is especially when i'm going to be flying it to the airports listed above. The main reason as stated above is that frame drops are relatively larger at lower average FPS meaning that while 20 is playable coming into a busy airport and loading in local objects may cause 5fps drop which is a huge 25% of your frames compared to 5 fps drop 30-25. I am lucky that I have been able to upgrade an now play on 40fps in fslabs but before this upgrade before buying a module how badly it performed did impact my choices.

Alas, this has long gone past its sell-by-date..........................move on, next...............

[ObeseDuck55 0]

18 hours ago, vc10man said:

Alas, this has long gone past its sell-by-date..........................move on, next...............

onward and upwards...