@Benjamin J Same as you, I have only have made a flight during daytime, but I have experimented on ground during night. I don't see performance impact from dynamic lights. I guess this is more of an issue with weaker GPU's, as dynamic lighting is hitting GPU. What I experience is all around lower performance that is caused by hammering the CPU. And my CPU is not weak - 9700k @ 5.4GHz.

As requested, here are my graphic settings.

https://ibb.co/pZVZyds
https://ibb.co/5R74kcV
https://ibb.co/PjX4S8B
https://ibb.co/0JmqJKY

Edited November 18, 20196 yr by Evros

That’s the same exact issue I’m having. No GPU problems for me even at night. But at odd times the CPU gets hammered. Especially on approach or taxiing after landing.

2 minutes ago, JasonPC said:

That’s the same exact issue I’m having. No GPU problems for me even at night. But at odd times the CPU gets hammered. Especially on approach or taxiing after landing.

Could that be due to AI traffic? Just pondering.

12 minutes ago, Adrian123 said:

Could that be due to AI traffic? Just pondering.

Not using any AI, only flying online. So far, I have only tested offline with not a single aircraft around. And if it was AI or any other setting, then performance would also be lower with other aircraft. This performance issue is purely related to NGXu.

And I'm not saying that something is wrong with this aircraft and something must be fixed. All I'm saying is that compared to every other aircraft that I'm using, this one performs by far the worst. It's just the way they built it, but I sure would appreciate performance optimizations even if they come at the cost of visuals.

Edited November 18, 20196 yr by Evros

14 minutes ago, Evros said:

Not using any AI, only flying online. So far, I have only tested offline with not a single aircraft around. And if it was AI or any other setting, then performance would also be lower with other aircraft. This performance issue is purely related to NGXu.

And I'm not saying that something is wrong with this aircraft and something must be fixed. All I'm saying is that compared to every other aircraft that I'm using, this one performs by far the worst. It's just the way they built it, but I sure would appreciate performance optimizations even if they come at the cost of visuals.

I dont have the NGXu but are you using Vpilot by any chance?  My CPU gets hammered with it and the FSLA320. CPU load up to 15% making FPS drop badly .

Sometimes it helps restarting the software.

Michael Moe

35 minutes ago, Adrian123 said:

Could that be due to AI traffic? Just pondering.

I was on VATSIM and the airport was pretty dead. Only 1 or 2 planes. No difference in performance when I disconnected the client. I was using swift and not vpilot it because of high cpu usage in vpilot.

15 minutes ago, Michael Moe said:

I dont have the NGXu but are you using Vpilot by any chance?  My CPU gets hammered with it and the FSLA320. CPU load up to 15% making FPS drop badly .

Sometimes it helps restarting the software.

Michael Moe

Yes, I am, but that is not the issue. As said before, if it was a setting or external issue, then this kind of behavior would present itself with any airplane. In this case, it just comes down to NGXu coding and the fact that it is very heavy addon. Anyone remember when NGX was first released for FSX? It performed so much worse than anything before that, and it was just because how this addon was built. It's the same thing here.

Autogen buildings can also cause this

12 minutes ago, rob0203 said:

Autogen buildings can also cause this

Could you explain this for me, please? I can't see how one aircraft addon can tax autogen more heavily than others. Is the aircraft itself auto generated?

Edited November 18, 20196 yr by Evros

45 minutes ago, rob0203 said:

Autogen buildings can also cause this

Hmmmmm,

 

I've tried going from, Extremely Dense to the most minimal, with Autogen on Heavy FPS hitting add-on AC, like the Flight One Citation X Mustang and it's made no difference in my FPS with that particular bird at all on my system... oddly enough! 

I don’t have problems at all with the NGXU, 

Open a ticket with PMDG, they can analyse your stats, also update is coming.

19 hours ago, Greggy_D said:

Why?  He is relaying his exact experience with the product and also his opinion.

 

17 hours ago, Swe_Richard said:

No. He should absolutely not refrain from commenting on performance. Nor should anyone else. I am one of those who suffer from this add-on running like a dog. I like the airplane but would not recommend it, because If you are one of us that suffers from performance it is $100 down the drain.

 

17 hours ago, Evros said:

Well then please tell me what is this setting or addon that cuts third of performance with this aircraft? If you are jollying around with low settings, 100 fps unlimited and suddenly drop to 70 when using NGXu, then sure, you might not see a performance issue. But if you have your system set to, for example, medium to high settings with fps locked to 40, then you can see a drastic decrease in performance. Comparing NGXu with all other PMDG products in same scenario, PMDG yields about 30-40% worse performance.

I have my system set to rather high settings and I can fly anything with fps locked to 40 and pretty much never fall below that. With NGXu, I can barely break 30 fps over the ocean with nothing in sight. Performance is a metric, and if you only go by your gut feeling, then maybe it is you who should refrain from commenting.

 

17 hours ago, JasonPC said:

Wow quite a rude bunch on this forum. First I politely ask if there’s any tips to improve performance and I’m told to get off of this forum and go search through a forum that I already looked through (didn’t even link or refer me to the thread, still don’t know which one it was). Then I’m told to shut up about my problem because someone else doesn’t have one.

I think all of you completely missed my point. The specific sentence I replied to was implying that the addon were inherently flawed in performance, which appears to be untrue. There are plenty of people, including me, who are running the NGXu with high settings without any performance issues at all. This is based on a number of concrete reports of the addon running just fine and extrapolating from the ratio of people actually reporting bad performance versus the likely overall number of customers of the addon, which means that it's probably a relatively small portion of people experiencing bad performance. The logical conclusion here is that the NGXu appears to cause performance issues in conjunction with certain addons, settings, systems and so on, but that the product itself probably isn't fundamentally flawed in terms of performance, otherwise everyone would suffer bad performance.

That being said, I didn't tell anyone to shut up about their problem or to refrain from commenting. I even specifically said that the reports of bad performance do matter. My conclusion is also not just gut feeling, but logical thinking based on the available information, as I explained twice now. You're totally free to disagree, but please read what I posted properly first.

Can anyone who has both the NGXu and the Flight One Citation X give me a comparison on FPS with their particular system?

If the NGXu runs poorly, fps wise, compared to the F1 Stang I might have to wait to buy until the NGUx is further optimized...

 

As it stands now the F1 Stang is the limit of what I can run, regarding add on AC with my system and current tweaks, while just barely maintaining a stutter free flight!

 

Thanks!

There’s a huge thread of people having performance issues on the pmdg forum. Many of them have very good hardware too. So I don’t know how you can draw that conclusion. I have the PMDG 747 which is arguably the next most recent and comparable product and I have no issues with that one whatsoever.

21 hours ago, threegreen said:

No offense but please refrain from comments like that.

Why? Maybe not all people have a 9900K@5GHz and a RTX2080ti like you and really care about performance. Hearing that it performs worse than the FSL A320 is a deal breaker for me and I would like to know this before wasting $100. Especially reports on relative performance compared to other add-ons are always usefull. Especially with weaker systems. My ancient machine for example cannot run the FSL A320 in a reasonable way. But the PMDG 777 and NGX perform nicely. So I would definitely like to know how the NGXu performs relative to other add-ons. Reports from people with beast machines like you have, are really pointless. Of course it runs well on that beast of a machine...

Edited November 19, 20196 yr by carlito777