1 hour ago, Capt Pugwash said:

Here is Rob’s Performance comparison video...it includes both TrueEarth and JF VFR next gen...what is immediately apparent is you can adjust autogen levels for trees and buidling in JF VFR and not ‘fully adjustable’ in TEGB...

2

JV reply to Rob, and one about people reporting performance problems.

"Hi Rob,

Thanks for posting up the comparison video. Whilst it contravenes our forum rules, I will leave it up for now.

It will certainly help people decide which landscape they prefer. I expect that not many will want to fly over the visuals you show from 10:30 - 14:15. You would be asking a lot from our customers to expect them to accept that view from their aircraft as immersive and realistic, I'm sorry to say.

The main difference between the two products is that JF's product is using purely autogen buildings (only square or rectangular shapes) which don't match the ortho imagery footprints at all, but do scale performance based on the autogen density sliders. It's easy to get performance that way but it's not what TE is about.

TE uses custom 3D building models which are generated by an in-house toolset. In many cases large parts of a city are a single model. To link this model to autogen or scenery density sliders would be folly, since it would be an all or nothing choice. The buildings were generated by a different toolset that what was used for TE Netherlands, so you cannot make comparisons to that region. Additionally we have added hundreds of bespoke 3D POI models, and many of these are in central London.

To address the lack of scalability with these 3D models, we are currently working on a comprehensive control panel option to tune the number of 3D objects and other aspects of the region. This will be published within a week or so.

In the meantime I have posted settings which will provide more than acceptable performance in most types of aircraft over London. Some people report even better performance with my settings if they lock fps to 20 or 30:

Feedback from someone who used my settings on a modest PC:

 

  Quote

I have a less powerful pc than JV's  specs. But since using all his settings I am achieving an average of 25 FPS over London. This is virtually the same as I get in Xplane TE South.

Over the more rural areas I am getting in excess of 45 FPS. I am also using REX Soft Clouds. The sim is pretty well stutter free too.Not quite as good as Xplane but better than the old days of FSX.

Basically my specs are 

Windows 10 Home 64 bit

Intel Core i5 7400 @3.00 Ghz with turbo boost up to 3.5 Ghz

16 GB ram

GeForce GTX 1060 6GB

 

I was pleasantly surprised after all the negative feedback I have read. 

Try JV's settings.

"You are absolutely correct Andy. The number of people posting about performance issues is very small compared to the number of people who bought TE GB South and are just using it. Only a tiny percentage of people who buy our products post on forums at all, and rarely not when everything is working well for them; they are mostly just enjoying the scenery."

 

/facepalm 

So guys if that PC can run it well then why do all you guys have a problem?......./rolls eyes

Edited February 13, 20197 yr by Nyxx

Well there you go.. they designed the Scenary that way.. but of course it is all Lockheed Martin fault.

facepalm indeed, let's hope a patch improve things a bit for the sake of the overall goodness of end users who always deserve the best.

S.

 

13 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

So guys if that PC can run it well then why do all you guys have a problem?......./rolls eyes

Are you trolling or joking.. not sure! I assume you are!

My PC is considerably faster than both of their machines and I get awful stuttering over London and tskeoff at EGLL. Andy is either lying (it does happen) or is parked on a runway where you do get constant FPS.

Parked at EGLC with JVs settings I get nearly 60fps. Do people not wonder why he refused to post a video of flying about over London?

Edited February 13, 20197 yr by DellyPilot

6 minutes ago, DellyPilot said:

 

Are you trolling or joking.. not sure!

My PC is considerably faster than both of their machines and I get awful stuttering over London and tskeoff at EGLL. Andy is either lying (it does happen) or is parked on a runway where you do get constant FPS.

Parked at EGLC with JVs settings I get nearly 60fps. Ok. Please stop peddling this nonsense. Do you not wonder why he refused to post a video of flying about over London?

He is joking 😉

1 hour ago, DellyPilot said:

My 2080TI has no FPS loss at 4xssaa. 

From my testing P3D is totally CPU limited as far as I can see with a 2080TI and I9-9900K

Use a higher resolution , higher AA setting and all shadows on and maxed. Those are all GPU dependent.

You are lucky using a 2080Ti ...

On a side note...Aimee posted a notice about the first TrueEarth North airport for Xplane 11 (EGPB Sumburgh). The aerial view at the start of the thread included some odd blue colourations in various locations around the airport. I commented on this, and then also pointed out that this was not the case in the P3D version (with the added bonus of stating that I had got the airport working with Horizon VFR Photographic Scenery)

I have just checked out that thread again, and the first screenshot has been changed to one of the apron. Oh, and my posts (and probably one or two others) have vanished.

Splendid.

3 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

I have just checked out that thread again, and the first screenshot has been changed to one of the apron. Oh, and my posts (and probably one or two others) have vanished.

Splendid.

Typical... 

S.

I did a check with a friend of my with his TE GB South for Xplane11 (not my choice for a simulator and I can't get used of the "hazy" not vibrant overall colours of the landscape) but performance wise I say a big YES compared to P3D.... In XP11 it's performing well even on my old 4.5Ghz 2600K with 1060 GTX I can run very smooth with high settings... BUT... I'm not a Londoner and it has been a while since I was there but for me it's the same story as TE The Netherlands... Missing Major Landmarks and POI's. I made a tourist fly over the River Thames and Oh my Boy... What a mess and missing critical Landmarks. Speed Yachts are sitting in Bridges, The Tower Bridge (All the bridges are funny things there by the way in TE) is an apartment complex, Trees in the water and hé... where is the London Eye (?/!)... One of the biggest landmarks for VFR flights in that area...

ORBX TE GB South  is a NoGo for me even tough TE The Netherlands is running very well on my antique system but GB South... No Thanks... 

18 minutes ago, simba_nl said:

I did a check with a friend of my with his TE GB South for Xplane11 (not my choice for a simulator and I can't get used of the "hazy" not vibrant overall colours of the landscape) but performance wise I say a big YES compared to P3D.... In XP11 it's performing well even on my old 4.5Ghz 2600K with 1060 GTX I can run very smooth with high settings... BUT... I'm not a Londoner and it has been a while since I was there but for me it's the same story as TE The Netherlands... Missing Major Landmarks and POI's. I made a tourist fly over the River Thames and Oh my Boy... What a mess and missing critical Landmarks. Speed Yachts are sitting in Bridges, The Tower Bridge (All the bridges are funny things there by the way in TE) is an apartment complex, Trees in the water and hé... where is the London Eye (?/!)... One of the biggest landmarks for VFR flights in that area...

ORBX TE GB South  is a NoGo for me even tough TE The Netherlands is running very well on my antique system but GB South... No Thanks... 

Well I have installed for both simulators, was curious about the performance after the debacle of P3D (my main sim)
Performance difference is night and day very smooth in XP and that's because the draw distance (LOD) of the 3d object are in P3D much higher as in XP...

And there lies the problem with TEGB in P3D... (just a bad port over from a XP implementation)
Despite the high frame rates in P3D, still stutters/long frames, that's why when the scenery complexity slider is reduced to low people see better performance (read less objects)
Which obvious should have been realized with a reduced drawing distance (read the autogen draw distance slider has no effect here since it's no autogen stuff ;-))

I would say form a technical point of view back to drawing board for ORBX... the approach now is asking for a lot of problems and ridicules low settings with high end systems...

Edited February 13, 20197 yr by awf

2 hours ago, DellyPilot said:

 

Are you trolling or joking.. not sure! I assume you are!

My PC is considerably faster than both of their machines and I get awful stuttering over London and tskeoff at EGLL. Andy is either lying (it does happen) or is parked on a runway where you do get constant FPS.

Parked at EGLC with JVs settings I get nearly 60fps. Do people not wonder why he refused to post a video of flying about over London?

It was a joke. As it is a big "joke" Hence the /rolleyes. Also, note my /facepalm for JV posts. 

I read your posts (think they were yours)over there and JV warning you to stop posting till after the patch.....I mean......really!  You have every right to voice your problems with the great PC you have but then again......not over there. You have been warned.....lol.

Here you can voice your problems and share your finding. We can all see Rob and you should not have any problems running TE GB South. 

-------------------

TE GB South does look stunning but it does need to work with EGLL/FSL etc or it should be made clear its a GA users only addon. I would love to use it to fly into and out of EGLL with FSL, but until I see a "normal" PC running it with medium sliders in a video at 26 FPS+ Then like I say it should be warned its a VFR GA addon. Nothing more.

At the moment Orbx OLC gives a great performance with Simwings EGLL, flying out and into London with FSL is no problem. I would be happy to lose some building to be able to use the looks of TE. 

Edited February 13, 20197 yr by Nyxx

Interesting to read the quote in the reply to the comparison video:
"I expect that not many will want to fly over the visuals you show from 10:30 - 14:15. You would be asking a lot from our customers to expect them to accept that view from their aircraft as immersive and realistic, I'm sorry to say."
 

The lighting settings for the first scenery shown in the video wouldn't suit the other scenery - one should really adjust the lighting to suit the product otherwise one will look unnaturally bleached out when compared to another. With the lighting set right I am sure "many would want to fly over that scenery rather... than... watch... the... immersive.... buildings.... flicking.... by....."

38 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

On a side note...Aimee posted a notice about the first TrueEarth North airport for Xplane 11 (EGPB Sumburgh). The aerial view at the start of the thread included some odd blue colourations in various locations around the airport. I commented on this, and then also pointed out that this was not the case in the P3D version (with the added bonus of stating that I had got the airport working with Horizon VFR Photographic Scenery)

I have just checked out that thread again, and the first screenshot has been changed to one of the apron. Oh, and my posts (and probably one or two others) have vanished.

Splendid.

Q: Are you surprised? You shouldn't be.

33 minutes ago, simbol said:

Typical... 

S.

 Perfect. 🙂 

30 minutes ago, simba_nl said:

I made a tourist fly over the River Thames and Oh my Boy... What a mess and missing critical Landmarks. Speed Yachts are sitting in Bridges, The Tower Bridge (All the bridges are funny things there by the way in TE) is an apartment complex, Trees in the water and hé... where is the London Eye (?/!)... One of the biggest landmarks for VFR flights in that area...

Strange. I think something must have gone wrong with the install on your system. I tried TE GB yesterday. Tower Bridge looked okay, and even the Millennium Bridge looked okay. Didn't notice any 'speed yachts', and certainly no trees in the water.

BUT I saw TWO London Eyes! I can only think there's an error in the Exclude file in TE GBS. And I don't like all those huge long white buildings all over the place in London. I don't know what they are supposed to be. Maybe there are the odd huge office complexes like that, but never that many!

Anyway, I certainly can't use the product on my 737NG cockpit system, but I may do on my VFR setup (Piper Arrow III), once the perfrmance can be improved by scaling.

Pete

 

 

 

In my experience critical discussions of ORBX products in their forums are not well tolerated, particularly when it comes to performance problems. I still buy many of their products (except TE SE until now) but I rarely post in their forums.

Edited February 13, 20197 yr by Nemo

1 hour ago, Pete Dowson said:

Strange. I think something must have gone wrong with the install on your system. I tried TE GB yesterday. Tower Bridge looked okay, and even the Millennium Bridge looked okay. Didn't notice any 'speed yachts', and certainly no trees in the water.

BUT I saw TWO London Eyes! I can only think there's an error in the Exclude file in TE GBS. And I don't like all those huge long white buildings all over the place in London. I don't know what they are supposed to be. Maybe there are the odd huge office complexes like that, but never that many!

Anyway, I certainly can't use the product on my 737NG cockpit system, but I may do on my VFR setup (Piper Arrow III), once the perfrmance can be improved by scaling.

Pete

 

 

 

JF Next Gen Part 1 + Prealsoft London might be your solution

I use the “old” VFR scenery + custom AG + Prealsoft London and I can do sightseeing with my 737 over London ..

Edited February 13, 20197 yr by GSalden