If I go from P3D 2.5 to P3D 4.5 what can I expect ?

[CFIJose 5,485]

16 hours ago, jfri said:

If we have CTD in P3D4 should it not be for other reasons than out of memory ?

Mainly incompatible add-ons.

[ryanbatc 12,775]

@jfri they have a 30 day trial period...why not just give it a shot?  You can have 4,5 installed with 2.5 no issues.

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

22 hours ago, jfri said:

 

If we have CTD in P3D4 should it not be for other reasons than out of memory ?

A GTX 1070 seem to expensive for me. So I don't see any reason to upgrade that now. I already use SSDs.

V4.5. Uses the video card more..and your 4GB vram is going to limit you, I am afraid..

[Ray Proudfoot 8,924]

@jfri should familiarise himself with the minimum and recommended specs for P3D v4.

https://www.prepar3d.com/system-requirements/

[Bob Scott 7,714]

1 hour ago, Bert Pieke said:

V4.5. Uses the video card more..and your 4GB vram is going to limit you, I am afraid..

Maybe, but much depends on the video settings and resolution in use.  4GB is enough if running HD (1920x1080) or even SHD (2560x1440) as long as the settings are managed properly.  Heck, I've even been able to keep VRAM usage below 4GB at 4K res (3840x2160) with low levels of AA and LOD distance pulled back (and without high res terrain textures).

That said, a 970 is still pretty anemic as video cards go today.

Regards

[Ray Proudfoot 8,924]

The comparison between the 970 and 1070 is stark as shown here. https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-970-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1070/2577vs3609

Go up to the 1070Ti and the difference is pretty small... https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1070-Ti-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1070/3943vs3609

So the OP should consider the 1070 as it gives a significant boost to performance for not much more.

[jfri 42]

6 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

@jfri should familiarise himself with the minimum and recommended specs for P3D v4.

https://www.prepar3d.com/system-requirements/

I have done that and know that I am clearly above the minimum requirements but not up to the recommended

[jfri 42]

6 hours ago, Bert Pieke said:

V4.5. Uses the video card more..and your 4GB vram is going to limit you, I am afraid..

Question is in what way will I be limited ?

[jfri 42]

4 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

The comparison between the 970 and 1070 is stark as shown here. https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-970-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1070/2577vs3609

Go up to the 1070Ti and the difference is pretty small... https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1070-Ti-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1070/3943vs3609

So the OP should consider the 1070 as it gives a significant boost to performance for not much more.

No doubt a 1070 would be good for P3D4. But I will have to wait for prices to sink or another similarly card comes at a better price.

For example when I built mt current system (six years ago) a 780 card was the given choice hands down for video card. The price ruled that out and I got a 770 instead. Later I sold the 770 and bought my current 970 for a better price than the 780 back then. I must think something like this approach

[Ray Proudfoot 8,924]

@jfri, you have been given plenty of good advice here. I appreciate funds are limited but flight sim is not a cheap hobby. The 1070 is an excellent compromise card that doesn't cost a fortune. Check the prices of the 2080Ti if you want to spend a fortune.

I had the 780 in a new system six years ago. It was good in its day. But technology moves quickly. Your 970 will just about work in P3D but you'll need to keep the sliders well to the left to keep performance reasonable.

[MarkW 1,490]

On 6/5/2019 at 11:47 AM, Ray Proudfoot said:

The words h e l l and freeze spring to mind. 😁

Not when P3D v5 forces the issue and they no choice.  Let hope....I am looking at you PMDG and ORBX.

[MarkW 1,490]

2 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

@jfri, you have been given plenty of good advice here. I appreciate funds are limited but flight sim is not a cheap hobby. The 1070 is an excellent compromise card that doesn't cost a fortune. Check the prices of the 2080Ti if you want to spend a fortune.

I had the 780 in a new system six years ago. It was good in its day. But technology moves quickly. Your 970 will just about work in P3D but you'll need to keep the sliders well to the left to keep performance reasonable.

I would not say flight sim is cheap but relative to almost any other hobby you can think of it is very inexpensive.  Try golf with annual club fees that would exceed a new build every year....or cycling....my bike cost me more than 2 builds and that is before new wheel set ($2000), power meter ($1000), clothing (#1000), bike computer ($500), professional bike fit ($1000), smart trainer ($1500), etc., etc, etc.....and forget about it if you have a coach....some guys I know are spending $500 a month on a coach to train for the Ironman.  Its nuts what people are spending on hobbies relative to Flight Sim.

Edited June 7, 2019 by MarkW

[eslader 1,777]

And plus, it's pretty bloody cheap compared to actual aviation. The cost of my current build would get me a little under an hour flight time in a small private jet, assuming all I was paying for was fuel. 😉

OP, I'm sure you know this but just in case, the thing about minimum specs vs recommended is that usually, minimum specs are just that. Bare minimum. i.e., "it will run, but it will suck." I remember when the minimum specs for Windows meant "minimum specs to run Windows, without actually running any programs once Windows is running." That got a lot of people very angry with Microsoft in the 90's. Even in best case scenario, "minimum" specs usually point to a recipe for disappointment.

 

[jfri 42]

2 hours ago, eslader said:

OP, I'm sure you know this but just in case, the thing about minimum specs vs recommended is that usually, minimum specs are just that. Bare minimum. i.e., "it will run, but it will suck." I remember when the minimum specs for Windows meant "minimum specs to run Windows, without actually running any programs once Windows is running." That got a lot of people very angry with Microsoft in the 90's. Even in best case scenario, "minimum" specs usually point to a recipe for disappointment.

Yes but I am clearly above minimum requirements for P3D 4

[fluffyflops 1,845]

I find after the fun and games I had of tweaking 4.5 hf1. It runs better than any version before. 

Alas I went through hell and back with the non hot fixed 4.5.

If you can get it to run nice it's a pleasure to fly. 

The only thing I can't do is get rid of the stuttering using uk2000 Egkk.  When arriving into it. 

I long for the day I can take that gash dull unoptimsed junk off my system