Wish for better terrain and graphics engine, or at least a scenery shift to the GPU.

As many, I'm waiting for MSFS and whatever it offers, but I'll stay loyal to P3D for many years to come.

29 minutes ago, RamonB said:

or at least a scenery shift to the GPU.

Do you know this is already the case? lots of stuff already are bound to GPU.. a easy way to find a relation is by understanding that anything that has a "Shader" is bound to GPU not CPU.

So even effects are now GPU bound..

S.

I voted for new Graphics Rendering Engine. Whilst I would like backwards compatibility with my existing P3D add-ons, Lockheed Martin need to show that they can significantly enhance the overall quality of the default graphics engine, and also improve performance. I guess that a new terrain rendering engine would also be nice, but not if they just drape the same boring textures and autogen over the top.

Edited February 27, 20206 yr by Christopher Low

To me, all I really miss is a functional ATC integration. I know I could fly online, but still... Along with this, maybe also an up to date navaid and airport database, this is really really out of date now. 

Seriously improved performance. At least 50% better than it is now. No more scenery loading pauses. I want 60fps at the same settings that currently deliver 30fps on my system. I'd settle for 50fps and I want them in VR too. LM should continue to maintain backwards compatibility. The last thing we need is two cutting edge sims neither of which support the thousands of addons we already have.

I any case when and if its released I will be waiting a few months before I make a decision as to weather to buy it or not. P3D V4 is a fantastic Flight sim. IMO currently the best one by a mile. Notwithstanding in some limited ways XP11 is seriously superior. V4.5hf2 is runnings beautifully on my system at 30fps with setting beyond any I could achieve with previous versions and in the soup too at 6am or 9pm with shadows. It takes 6 cores at 5.3ghz and a 2080ti at 2150mhz to do that.

I'm optimistic about V5 unless LM throw in the towel but I doubt it at this stage if V5 is immanent. But if MSFS wipes the floor with V5 out of the box then I'd hazard a guess that we won't see Prepar3D V6. Heck we might not see Prepar3D V5.1.

It will be interesting to see who's out the gate first. LM or MS. I beat LM have someone in the Microsoft Flight Simulator Alpha testing. Probably someone at the CIA🤣😒

Edited February 27, 20206 yr by Avidean

27 minutes ago, simbol said:

Do you know this is already the case? lots of stuff already are bound to GPU.. a easy way to find a relation is by understanding that anything that has a "Shader" is bound to GPU not CPU.

So even effects are now GPU bound..

S.

Hello, thanks for the exp.

Perhaps I should have worded more clearly what I meant by "or at least a scenery shift to the GPU. "
Voted for new graphics engine, Wishing LM moves most graphic processing to the GPU, thus freeing the CPU.

Using High End settings (not all sliders right) in P3D. My CPUs are pegged at 100% while my GPU's on 2 PC are barely scratching 35-50% usage, even with ORBX True Earth.

4770K & GTX980TI SC, 32 Gb.
8770K & RTX2070 Super, 32 Gb.

2 minutes ago, RamonB said:

Hello, thanks for the exp.

Perhaps I should have worded more clearly what I meant by "or at least a scenery shift to the GPU. "
Voted for new graphics engine, Wishing LM moves most graphic processing to the GPU, thus freeing the CPU.

Using High End settings (not all sliders right) in P3D. My CPUs are pegged at 100% while my GPU's on 2 PC are barely scratching 35-50% usage, even with ORBX True Earth.

4770K & GTX980TI SC, 32 Gb.
8770K & RTX2070 Super, 32 Gb.

Check your VRAM usage (GPU RAM), when certain settings are high it will starve the GPU from VRAM forcing the GPU to switch to use Normal RAM. When this situation occurs there will be a high intensive task handling in order to allocate resources between normal RAM and GPU (VRAM) and as a result your CPU load will heavily increase since it cannot keep up with the requirements from your high speed video card and it is when "stutters" will start to occur.

P3D is heavily bound to GPU, however it does requires plenty of VRAM to be available.. Some experiments done by many people has shown that using 4K and most sliders to the right will require more than 12GB of VRAM in order to ensure the CPU stays low in usage so It is more important to have more VRAM than CUDA Cores available.. this means an Nvidia 980TI with 6GB of VRAM will work better than a nvidia 1050 with 4GB of VRAM.

This issue does not only occurs with P3D, other simulators also suffer from this problem, remember flight simulators need to load the entire world at once instead of an scene as normal video games, this challenge is what makes VRAM starvation an issue..

Two video examples below:

P3D: 

 

Xplane:

 

Regards,

Simbol

Thanks @simbol can't comment about...., but:
I will make adjustments to my P3D settings today.

Cheers.

Edited February 27, 20206 yr by RamonB

What we want - new graphics engine and better performance 

What V5 will actually have - one new drone added to the selection of default vehicles 

2 hours ago, simbol said:

Do you know this is already the case? lots of stuff already are bound to GPU.. a easy way to find a relation is by understanding that anything that has a "Shader" is bound to GPU not CPU.

So even effects are now GPU bound..

S.

...except for the wave controller fx.   :)  

That is one I'd like to see moved off the cpu.   It's probably not a simple task as the waves follow the vector scenery lines.

Are you talking about waves in the open sea, or those ridiculous shoreline waves?

Edited February 27, 20206 yr by Christopher Low

Unfortunately, like many of us, I spent thousands of dollars since the first version of P3D came on the market (I purchased a full fixed B 747 cockpit, with the PMDG aircraft. Aircraft that I fly for a living, not a hobby). Absolutely my choice!

Every paid or upgrade left me unhappy with very slow improvements and performance issues. On my PC specs, I shouldn't have any issues at all especially when I'm not running all

the sliders to the right.

Bottom line is that it is not properly optimized, I know there are people that think otherwise, unfortunately, there is a high number of customers complaining about performance and optimization of different aspects of the software.

After so many years since the year, 2013 being on the market and the number of people having these issues in the year 2020 not being able to optimize it properly is no surprise for me that people are ready for a change to MSFS.

To be honest, I hate to say this but after so many years with this product, I'm not willing to take another chance with them and pay for another new version and based on facts and previous releases to find out again that they concentrated on other eye-candy features versus performance and optimization.

Now, based on what I see (so far) there is a very strong possibility to keep this P3D version (for obvious reasons)  and try first the MSFS.

 

It's interesting how many surveys like this the sim community had and how little P3D took into consideration.

3 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

Are you talking about waves in the open sea, or those ridiculous shoreline waves?

Heh.  I am indeed talking about the rsw (ridiculous shoreline waves).  Tiny-brained eaters of other people's cpu's.

A better feeling of being airborne. It's the only thing I really liked about X-Plane when I tried it.

a more integrated "runway assignment" adjusting in sim to allow not only downwind operations but can also use different runways at night (simulate real noise abatement procedures) along as weather suits.