New Machine for X Plane 11?

[turnandbank 243]

+1 to at least 8GB of VRAM. 

[Will273 23]

So how do guys think the computer I mentioned...the one for $1,600 would run X Plane 10 and using add-on aircraft like Carenado's Baron or Saratoga? Think I could run it at high settings using FS GRW in real downloaded weather with nasty stormy conditions over NYC without any panning stutters  when I look left and right in the cockpit? I'm thinking just high settings...above medium but below ultra high max settings? It's the panning stutters that get me now with what I have.

Edited June 19, 2019 by Will273

[Will273 23]

6 minutes ago, turnandbank said:

+1 to at least 8GB of VRAM. 

Got it...yea...I'll need the VRAM. Thanks Turnandbank.

[Colonel X 1,430]

2 hours ago, Will273 said:

So how do guys think the computer I mentioned...the one for $1,600 would run X Plane 10 and using add-on aircraft like Carenado's Baron or Saratoga? Think I could run it at high settings using FS GRW in real downloaded weather with nasty stormy conditions over NYC without any panning stutters  when I look left and right in the cockpit? I'm thinking just high settings...above medium but below ultra high max settings? It's the panning stutters that get me now with what I have.

"High Settings" is not very precise. 

GPU = There are three factors. Resolution, slider setting (HDR or SSAO) and AA. Very easy to find a sweet spot, and a modern, fast GPU (1080, 2060, 2080 ect.) should be able to handle it nicely, meaning full slider, 1080p+ and some AA - remember in X-Plane, AA is never perfect, and Ben seems too lazy to advance the slider to offer better AA (I have personally requested that many times). I'd def. recommend decreasing resolution to allow 8x AA (if you have to) because a clean image is the most natural replication of the world. Personally, I believe 4K is pointless is X-Plane and just a way to make your sim creep. But some people would object.

CPU = It's complicated. First of all, the slider should be on the far right (maxed), otherwise you will get patches with missing Autogen and that just looks bad. So, that puts some strain on that CPU, but luckily, there are a few super useful hacks to take load off the CPU without making it look much worse.

1. Draw distance. Slider maxed means all the Autogen, but it also sets the Autogen draw distance to "1" = very high. You can access the dataref (LOD_bias) and set it to 2, 2.5 or 3 to dial back on the draw distance without losing any of the actual density of the Autogen.

2. Reflections. By all means, that slider needs to be FULL LEFT. It's the most pointless slider in the history of X-Plane. It doesn't even look better maxed out, but it will fry your CPU. However, there's more to it: use the dataref to limit the water reflection setting to "1", that way, only clouds will reflect in the water, a nice sweet spot, especially since terrain reflections in X-Plane have been buggy for a decade now. Plus, it takes load off the CPU.

3. Cars. Use the dataref to set car density to "1", there's still plenty, so that's a no brainer.

4. Scenery shadows. This should be off, as it hammers the CPU. On the other hand, it's the one setting that really adds realism to the visuals. So you might want to experiment with that in combination with draw distance to find a sweet spot. Ultimately, I think shadows are reserved for high end CPU's such as overclocked single core performance monsters (like 9900K).

I'm not on my sim machine otherwise I would post all the relevant datarefs.

Edited June 19, 2019 by Colonel X

[Will273 23]

1 hour ago, Colonel X said:

"High Settings" is not very precise. 

GPU = There are three factors. Resolution, slider setting (HDR or SSAO) and AA. Very easy to find a sweet spot, and a modern, fast GPU (1080, 2060, 2080 ect.) should be able to handle it nicely, meaning full slider, 1080p+ and some AA - remember in X-Plane, AA is never perfect, and Ben seems too lazy to advance the slider to offer better AA (I have personally requested that many times). I'd def. recommend decreasing resolution to allow 8x AA (if you have to) because a clean image is the most natural replication of the world. Personally, I believe 4K is pointless is X-Plane and just a way to make your sim creep. But some people would object.

CPU = It's complicated. First of all, the slider should be on the far right (maxed), otherwise you will get patches with missing Autogen and that just looks bad. So, that puts some strain on that CPU, but luckily, there are a few super useful hacks to take load off the CPU without making it look much worse.

1. Draw distance. Slider maxed means all the Autogen, but it also sets the Autogen draw distance to "1" = very high. You can access the dataref (LOD_bias) and set it to 2, 2.5 or 3 to dial back on the draw distance without losing any of the actual density of the Autogen.

2. Reflections. By all means, that slider needs to be FULL LEFT. It's the most pointless slider in the history of X-Plane. It doesn't even look better maxed out, but it will fry your CPU. However, there's more to it: use the dataref to limit the water reflection setting to "1", that way, only clouds will reflect in the water, a nice sweet spot, especially since terrain reflections in X-Plane have been buggy for a decade now. Plus, it takes load off the CPU.

3. Cars. Use the dataref to set car density to "1", there's still plenty, so that's a no brainer.

4. Scenery shadows. This should be off, as it hammers the CPU. On the other hand, it's the one setting that really adds realism to the visuals. So you might want to experiment with that in combination with draw distance to find a sweet spot. Ultimately, I think shadows are reserved for high end CPU's such as overclocked single core performance monsters (like 9900K).

I'm not on my sim machine otherwise I would post all the relevant datarefs.

OK...monitor is a 36 inch ultra wide and resolution is 2560 x 1080. HDR I can do with or without and shadows I can do without....AA is set at 4...works good and don't really need it higher. So you think that machine will run add-ons like Carenado's with no problems then? Generally speaking...I'm talking about the preset settings...Minimal, Low, Medium, High and Ultra High settings...tweaked of course...the High Preset is what I'm aiming for...but more than the  Medium Preset. Thanks Colonel.

[Will273 23]

9 hours ago, Greazer said:

Yea I built a new PC last year, it's pretty high end.  But even with that you cannot go crazy in the settings and turn everything up.  Especially reflections, it kills performance.

Yea...I totally understand about not maxxing everything out...can't be done. Now I'm thinking about staying with X Plane 10 if I can run add-on aircraft at high settings rather than medium and use real world weather in large urban areas and not worry about panning stutters and FPS with that machine I'm looking at. Thanks for the input Greazer and let me know what you think...if that machine will do the job.

[Greazer 1,320]

I wouldn't go XP 10 now. The add-on aircraft for XP 10 is much more limited and older.  It also doesn't have proper HDR and all the improvements in 11. XP 11.35 is very stable. The other thing, you need to get the XP Realistic plugin, it's a Must.

[Colonel X 1,430]

54 minutes ago, Will273 said:

Yea...I totally understand about not maxxing everything out...can't be done. Now I'm thinking about staying with X Plane 10 if I can run add-on aircraft at high settings rather than medium and use real world weather in large urban areas and not worry about panning stutters and FPS with that machine I'm looking at. Thanks for the input Greazer and let me know what you think...if that machine will do the job.

X-Plane 10 is not any faster than X-Plane 11. More the opposite. It's old code and it all depends on settings. 

[Colonel X 1,430]

3 minutes ago, Greazer said:

I wouldn't go XP 10 now. The add-on aircraft for XP 10 is much more limited and older.  It also doesn't have proper HDR and all the improvements in 11. XP 11.35 is very stable. The other thing, you need to get the XP Realistic plugin, it's a Must.

There's this talk now that XP-Realistic causes stutters.

[Will273 23]

47 minutes ago, Colonel X said:

X-Plane 10 is not any faster than X-Plane 11. More the opposite. It's old code and it all depends on settings. 

I was thinking with a faster more powerful computer I'd be able to crank the settings up to the preset high instead of the preset medium and get close to the FPS I'm getting now.

[Will273 23]

50 minutes ago, Colonel X said:

There's this talk now that XP-Realistic causes stutters.

I already have X Plane 10...that's what I'm using now and thought a faster machine would let me run higher settings with the add-ons I already have....the defaults run fine at medium but would like to use the High settings with add-ons I already have and get the same FPS results I'm getting now...around 30 - 50 FPS over NYC is stormy weather.

[Greazer 1,320]

2 hours ago, Colonel X said:

X-Plane 10 is not any faster than X-Plane 11. More the opposite. It's old code and it all depends on settings. 

XP 10 should get more fps out of the box with similar level settings, but the graphics won't look as good.

Edited June 19, 2019 by Greazer

[Greazer 1,320]

2 hours ago, Colonel X said:

There's this talk now that XP-Realistic causes stutters.

 

If you buy it and install it, there is screen shaking when you hold the brakes.  Pretty bad bug. But in the forums they have a newer "beta" version which fixes this issue. Strange that the release version doesn't have the fix though.

[Colonel X 1,430]

I don't mean the brake-shake... this can be mostly avoided by turning off "Cinéma Vérité" in X-Plane.

I have read that it causes microstutters in an otherwise smooth sim setup. I have some of those, and will test if they remain when XPR is not installed later today.

[Will273 23]

38 minutes ago, Greazer said:

XP 10 should get more fps out of the box with similar level settings, but the graphics won't look as good.

LOL...took a look at the video you linked...you got a new subscriber. This morning I tried cranking the rendering settings to Extreme just to see what it looks like on X Plane 10...knowing full well it wouldn't run good but wanted to see what it looked like. It changed my life....even with all the shimmering and jagged edges it blew me away and that's at 15 FPS...yes it looks that good. It really brings the sim to another level...never gave to much thought about the high scenery until now...seeing it in person on a wide screen monitor. It changed my whole outlook on flying...so much more realistic seeing everything. I could be happy with  a new computer and X Plane 10 cranking the rendering settings up. Tried the preset High setting and it was close to the Extreme setting...still mind boggling....compared to the Preset Medium setting. Xforce has another computer for about $2,700...still considering that one and X Plane 11...haven't decided yet.

Edited June 19, 2019 by Will273