SledDriver

P3D multicore usage anomoly

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Bert Pieke said:

FSPS FFTF Dynamic is the current offering..

Caution, it appears to not work in P3DV4.5.

 

How did you find out that it is not running ?

On both my  pc’s I have it running in V4.5...

 

Share this post


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

1 hour ago, GSalden said:

How did you find out that it is not running ?

On both my  pc’s I have it running in V4.5...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

No issues here...

Working fine on both pc’s

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, GSalden said:

No issues here...

Working fine on both pc’s

Same here start at EGLL and AI 100% FPS locked at 30 FPS at 23-25 start FFTF see the FPS go up, 

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, itsjase said:

Have you ever changed any of those settings and noticed a loading screen?

You can't just "remove" or "add" some autogen during flight.

SteveW has (correctly) explained things to you guys multiple times but you keep insisting that what you want should be possible.

Everyone here fully understands the screen has to repaint IN THE CURRENT ITERATION when you change scenery sliders.  FWIW, that is not the case w/ some or all of the lighting sliders.  It's certainly conceivable if LM decided something like this was very desirable code could be reengineered to insure CPU/GPU utilization were considered in what is rendered, and turn over prioritization according to user-selected criteria.  The main unknown by anyone here is what that would cost to do.

SteveW:  "I think I understand what you want. You would need to perhaps set a scale of preferences, say you might put clouds at the top of the list as most important. Those items in the list are diminished in detail to enable performance to continue uninterrupted. It's do-able as I said, just awkward and costly, maybe not."     READ:  he admits he really doesn't know how doable and at what cost, but at least he understands the challenge.

GSalden:  "At this moment adding or lowering AG in realtime is not even possible"  Noel:  "This has been my concern and why I say it is LM who would need to develop this feature/utility...."

Noel:  "All of you folks out there including SteveW and itsjase:  do you understand why something like this is out of the question?  Is tweaked ESP engine simply unable for technical reasons we don't appreciate?"   NO ONE answered this except SteveW gave an honest response which proves at least he understood the question and did not come back w/ the judgmental polarizing knee-jerk reaction you did.

 

Edited by Noel

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, Noel said:

"All of you folks out there including SteveW and itsjase:  do you understand why something like this is out of the question?  Is tweaked ESP engine simply unable for technical reasons we don't appreciate?"   NO ONE answered this except SteveW gave an honest response which proves at least he understood the question and did not come back w/ the judgmental polarizing knee-jerk reaction you did.

Without going on a long winded explanation, it's a very difficult thing to do, and not worth the development time, when it only takes a few minutes to manually adjust settings.

There's plenty of information out there on why this is so difficult, if you want to google it.

More recently some engines have introduced dynamic settings for some settings such as resolution, but these are in an attempt to lower GPU usage, not CPU. In P3D it is usually the CPU usage that is the issue, and the settings that affect cpu usage are much harder to change "on-the-fly".

And for those that can be changed, there's already FFTF Dynamic as mentioned in previous posts.

Edited by itsjase

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, itsjase said:

Without going on a long winded explanation, it's a very difficult thing to do, and not worth the development time, when it only takes a few minutes to manually adjust settings.

Oh come on, humor us and go into that long winded explanation we're all ears to learn exactly why the ESP engine can't be modified to accommodate user-selected prioritization of CPU/GPU related demand.  And not worth the development time because it only takes a few minutes to stop and manually adjust settings?  That is the point now isn't it, to eliminate the need to disrupt the suspension of disbelief to do something manually so you can make it all the way to touchdown?

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, itsjase said:

Without going on a long winded explanation, it's a very difficult thing to do, and not worth the development time, when it only takes a few minutes to manually adjust settings.

> not worth the development time

I can't accept that. That is just head-in-the-sand stuff.

So you are happy that you spend, and continue to spend, possibly thousands to get hardware on which you then run a sim which you have to tweak to far below its ability for 98% of your flight just so it continues to deliver good results for the other 2% of the flight?

And your accepted response to when you see something like a microstutter in a heavily loaded situation is to turn the entire sim down yet more for the entire flight.

Surely, for example, it would be better if the sim could do things like dynamically reducing the autogen/cloud draw distance as you approach a complex airport? And no, I'm not saying that is possible with present code...

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, SledDriver said:

> not worth the development time

I can't accept that. That is just head-in-the-sand stuff.

So you are happy that you spend, and continue to spend, possibly thousands to get hardware on which you then run a sim which you have to tweak to far below its ability for 98% of your flight just so it continues to deliver good results for the other 2% of the flight?

Whether we are happy with it is not the point. It's obvious you aren't happy with it.

Every software development team has a pipeline of feature requests, prioritized based on customer demand (hint: neither of us are LM's target customers), ease of implementation and overall product benefit. Given what I've seen of commercial flight simulators, it is plausible that LM's other customers may place less importance on graphics quality and more on SimDirector or other features. They don't care about a few stutters compared to other features.

Cheers!

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