To a small extent FSX/P3d do manage throughput, since they maintain fps whatever the performance of the fill-in around the viewer. That's one reason fps is not a good indication of performance.

Edited April 23, 20197 yr by SteveW

56 minutes ago, Noel said:

P3D, FSX and prior versions and Xplane all allow users to set sliders such that the sims become un-flyable.  This is obviously a very good thing because it accommodates hardware upgrades, while at the same time setting folks up for disappointment and frustration!  I still believe that a real-time modulator (you're only changing parameters already created and user-controlled thru sliders etc) seems doable, at least could have been had the ESP engine been created w/ this in mind.  This is what Sled appears to be asking for and not a whole lot more!  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?  

One more time itsjase,

, RobA, Luke, all of you devs answer this absolutely reasonable question as no one here has really touched it, simply put:  why the heck isn't a real-time user-configurable utility possible?

"It would be so nice to be able to configure the utility to maintain a frame rate of 30 and a CPU utilization maximum of 90% and a maximum GPU utilization of 90% at all times by modulating a palette of attributes, prioritized by the user:  shadow distance, autogen density and LOD radius, AI traffic, etc."

????????!!!!!

Thanks Noel.

Some of the others just continue to hurl insults.

They certainly don't show much ability to think laterally.

Maybe a better approach is to ask you guys to give me a list of what LM ($50billion value) has improved in the sim in their 10 years on the code?

 

Working on games design since ooh, way back. Once made a two player first person shooter, hover wars, on the UK 101, was the first multi-user game shooting projectiles from the face to the opponent that I had seen, based on an ice world each user had each end of the keyboard and split screen display. So I have experience. Other games I worked on, the CPU time spent on each character and in game mechanism was altered on the fly to keep games running the same speed. I've also done a lot of simulation work on projectiles and aircraft, and also plenty of CAD and 3D design.

There is a difference - graphics display and games display are very different. Tuning games to stay at a given speed is way over-complicated with more recent technology games, and would take too much resource to maintain the balance. But it is do-able it is just code.

We can use an emulator to run an older game at a constant speed by regulating the emulation when the system is far more powerful than the game was originally designed for.

LM in 10 years :

Adjustable bloom

Adjustable brightness

Adjustable saruration

Lots of different shadows + cast/receive

Moved shadows from CPU to GPU

Improved water settings

Autogen adjustable for buildings abd trees seperately

Adjustable weather visibility

Improved multicore support

Tesselation

Continuesly improved Shaders

Dynamic lighting

etc etc

And improvements with each update...

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 23, 20197 yr by GSalden

I still don't think you have really understood what I am suggesting.

There are a bunch of settings in the sim which affect graphics performance to a greater or lesser extent, dependent on current scenario.

We all run the sim, then we decide the performance was either acceptable or not to us.

Then we have the choice to move those sliders/settings to up/down the content/performance to our liking.

Why can't the computer move those sliders, based on problems or wasted overhead?

It's not such a demanding request.

 

9 minutes ago, SledDriver said:

I still don't think you have really understood what I am suggesting.

There are a bunch of settings in the sim which affect graphics performance to a greater or lesser extent, dependent on current scenario.

We all run the sim, then we decide the performance was either acceptable or not to us.

Then we have the choice to move those sliders/settings to up/down the content/performance to our liking.

Why can't the computer move those sliders, based on problems or wasted overhead?

It's not such a demanding request.

 

For some a lot of AG is important . For others lots of AI Traffic.

I do not want that at one moment I have more AG and the other moment less. I prefer the same look.

BTW : FSPS FFTF Dynamic can help maintaining your fps by adjusting your FFTF....

Kind of forgot:

- 64 bit

- Autofading autogen 

 

1 hour ago, SledDriver said:

I still don't think you have really understood what I am suggesting.

There are a bunch of settings in the sim which affect graphics performance to a greater or lesser extent, dependent on current scenario.

We all run the sim, then we decide the performance was either acceptable or not to us.

Then we have the choice to move those sliders/settings to up/down the content/performance to our liking.

Why can't the computer move those sliders, based on problems or wasted overhead?

It's not such a demanding request.

 

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.

1 hour ago, SledDriver said:

I still don't think you have really understood what I am suggesting.

There are a bunch of settings in the sim which affect graphics performance to a greater or lesser extent, dependent on current scenario.

We all run the sim, then we decide the performance was either acceptable or not to us.

Then we have the choice to move those sliders/settings to up/down the content/performance to our liking.

Why can't the computer move those sliders, based on problems or wasted overhead?

It's not such a demanding request.

 

I've posted this challenge many many times over the years and instead you simply get tangential responses, like this:  "For some a lot of AG is important . For others lots of AI Traffic."  Of course!  Here's the argument for the umpteenth time:

It's possible to achieve very smooth video once you learn how and provided you don't get too close to 100% CPU and/or 100% GPU utilization, yes?  Why sure, many or most have figured it out, and that includes learning to live w/in your hardware budget as we all very well understand by now.  Parameters exist in the sim that impact CPU/GPU utilization.  CPU & GPU utilization can be reported and sensed in near realtime.  If these statement are true which they are why then can't the sim use a utility (internal dialogue, or 3rd party utility) to sense CPU/GPU load and let the USER weight attributes according to importance, and as well set CPU/GPU thresholds (dial up and down attributes to never exceed a CPU/GPU utilization of X%.  For me video starts suffering as I get around 95% on either, overall.  90% is better because you have a little more headroom.  Sled is absolutely correct: we STOP the sim, and do this manually if we misestimated where our flight plan will put us relative to how we set sliders at the start.  Why then can't this be managed by a utility, internal or 3rd party?  My guess is simply this:  no one has tried to do it.  It's also possible because of the LM-tweaked ESP architecture this is simply not an option.   I'd love to know the answer to this question and so far no one has provided one!

Edited April 23, 20197 yr by Noel

So rather, it would be handy if the sliders and controls in the sim don't adjust in what we want.

Instead they denote the importance of what we desire to be prioritised when deciding on what to keep in and out of the scene to maintain performance.

26 minutes ago, SteveW said:

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.

There you go.  SteveW: make this app and I have to think if done well would be coveted by all of the P3D users out there.  LM *should* be doing it, and who knows maybe they're trying.  I'd happily pay $50 for it myself!

30 minutes ago, Noel said:

I've posted this challenge many many times over the years and instead you simply get tangential responses, like this:  "For some a lot of AG is important . For others lots of AI Traffic."  Of course!  Here's the argument for the umpteenth time:

It's possible to achieve very smooth video once you learn how and provided you don't get too close to 100% CPU and/or 100% GPU utilization, yes?  Why sure, many or most have figured it out, and that includes learning to live w/in your hardware budget as we all very well understand by now.  Parameters exist in the sim that impact CPU/GPU utilization.  CPU & GPU utilization can be reported and sensed in near realtime.  If these statement are true which they are why then can't the sim use a utility (internal dialogue, or 3rd party utility) to sense CPU/GPU load and let the USER weight attributes according to importance, and as well set CPU/GPU thresholds (dial up and down attributes to never exceed a CPU/GPU utilization of X%.  For me video starts suffering as I get around 95% on either, overall.  90% is better because you have a little more headroom.  Sled is absolutely correct: we STOP the sim, and do this manually if we misestimated where our flight plan will put us relative to how we set sliders at the start.  Why then can't this be managed by a utility, internal or 3rd party?  My guess is simply this:  no one has tried to do it.  It's also possible because of the LM-tweaked ESP architecture this is simply not an option.   I'd love to know the answer to this question and so far no one has provided one!

Exactly. I would only add one more thing to that.

This would be an 'AutoTweak Mode' (better name needed 😉 ).

The user could enable this mode if they have no interest in manual tweaking.

If the user is an expert and prefers manual control, then they would obviously not use this mode.

 

So, for me, I love all the lovely graphics, VFR sceneries, autogen, traffic, etc. All lovely.

But I would never choose them over smooth performance at all times, especially when on approach.

So I would set the smooth video slider high, and the other things a bit lower priority.

It just seems like it would work better for many people.

2 hours ago, Noel said:

There you go.  SteveW: make this app and I have to think if done well would be coveted by all of the P3D users out there.  LM *should* be doing it, and who knows maybe they're trying.  I'd happily pay $50 for it myself!

Seconded.

5 hours ago, SledDriver said:

Some of the others just continue to hurl insults. They certainly don't show much ability to think laterally.

Maybe a better approach is to ask you guys to give me a list of what LM ($50billion value) has improved in the sim in their 10 years on the code?

What was that you were saying about hurling insults?

Cheers!