21 hours ago, mauri2007 said:

It's not about how many lines of code P3d5 shares with FS9. It´s about that the P3Dv3 graphics engine is the same as the FSX graphics engine. Exactly the same. I know what I am talking about, although I am not a "guru".

Sorry, no sale.  Tessellation and HDR options that were never FSX features first appeared in P3Dv3 via DX11.  Tessellation, in particular, as it is implemented in the P3D graphics engine, would have brought even the best early FSX-era GPUs (e.g. GeForce 6800, GTX280/480) straight to their knees. 

 

On 4/10/2020 at 3:56 PM, tolip2 said:

And this is the problem with those "gurus". They are sometimes totally wrong and people who even try to question some of their "truths" are immediately attacked by a huge fan base.

If you ever see someone say:

"all flight simulators would always be very much dependent on a single thread performance"

My recommendation is to downgrade that person's guru status immediately.

There sure are some bad legacy software that, in their current state, would never benefit much from multiple cores without being rewritten from scratch. This is absolute not the same thing as "all flight simulators would always ...". Still, this "truth" among others is repeated over and over almost daily in all those never ending core0/hyperthreading/affinitymask threads.

You're just talking about some bad legacy software and other speculative reasoning etc.

If I recall it right a single core performance (not necessarily Core0 or Core1 etc) is essential for any simulator because you can not distribute the workload of building an output frame that contains all the physics of the simulated world and a lot of other stuff among different cores. This each output frame is fetched by a single core only. Therefore its performance is essential for what we finally see on the screen and for the process of simulation in itself time wise. The rest of the cores feed necessary data to that single core, if an application is properly built that way. Something along these lines from what I can remember. I'm not trying to speculate here, I took it from one of the discussions here on avsim.com. Just a food for thought. 

Cheers,

Edited April 11, 20206 yr by Dirk98

For folks who are paranoid about the first Core utilized by P3D running at 100%... simply download any Nvidia GPU driver 442.19 or later, set the framerate (to something like 30 FPS), and then your first Core usage will drop dramatically.  Of course, the sim will still run the same even after you've resolved your 100% first Core usage...

Greg

1 hour ago, w6kd said:

Sorry, no sale.  Tessellation and HDR options that were never FSX features first appeared in P3Dv3 via DX11.  Tessellation, in particular, as it is implemented in the P3D graphics engine, would have brought even the best early FSX-era GPUs (e.g. GeForce 6800, GTX280/480) straight to their knees. 

 

I completely agree with you that "Tessellation, in particular, as it is implemented in the P3D graphics engine, would have brought even the best early FSX-era GPUs (eg GeForce 6800, GTX280 / 480) straight to their knees". But Tesellation has been around since DX9. However, at Aces Studios, they never considered using the corresponding API's due to the high computational cost that they would have had. But even though P3Dv3 incorporated tesselation, the problem is exactly the same as FSX: A multi-threaded, single-core graphics engine. The reason is the one I have been exposing for several posts: They are the same graphics engine. Or that is what I suspect, because I really have no evidence or argument for this.

What I am convinced of is that if the current hadware were used, the quality of the graphics and the performance of the simulators would be much better than what we have. And that is applicable not only to P3D but also to DCS and X-PLANE.

But, as I am tired of all this, if you all prefer to think that P3D has developed new graphics engines with each new version ... of course, you can do it. I don´t do it. However, I enjoy this home flight simulation much because it´s the only we have.

Bye.
M.

43 minutes ago, mauri2007 said:

I completely agree with you that "Tessellation, in particular, as it is implemented in the P3D graphics engine, would have brought even the best early FSX-era GPUs (eg GeForce 6800, GTX280 / 480) straight to their knees". But Tesellation has been around since DX9. However, at Aces Studios, they never considered using the corresponding API's due to the high computational cost that they would have had. But even though P3Dv3 incorporated tesselation, the problem is exactly the same as FSX: A multi-threaded, single-core graphics engine. The reason is the one I have been exposing for several posts: They are the same graphics engine. Or that is what I suspect, because I really have no evidence or argument for this.

On one hand, you acknowledge that P3D's graphics engine incorporates capabilities that FSX did not, and on the other you claim that P3D's engine is "exactly the same" as in FSX.  Both cannot be true...the two positions are mutually exclusive.

It's simply not the case that the evolution from the FSX DX9/DX10 graphics subsystem to the P3Dv3 DX11 version only required changing a few API calls.  If you'd ever done any of this sort of programming, you would know that.  And if you "...really have no evidence or argument...", why make the speculative accusation? 

We know from what Phil Taylor wrote as FSX SP1 and SP2 were released, that ACES were re-coding to take advantage of multi-processor parallelism that first started to appear with the Conroe-series CPUs.  Though FSX was originally coded for single-processor CPUs, a thorough review of the history will reveal that much of the work put into the service packs was designed to leverage the emergence of multi-processor CPUs.  FSX, as ACES finally left it, was already adapted to a multi-processor environment--and most of the parallel threads were, in fact, handling graphics work--terrain and texture fusion in particular.  P3D has further advanced the use of parallelism, and again, mostly for graphics-related workload.

 

I´m here again....

After seeing this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=Y0u1tedlZu8&feature=emb_logo

I must admit that I was completely wrong. The P3Dv5 graphics engine is not the same as the FSX. The P3Dv5 graphics engine is the same as FS2002 graphic engine. Compare them, please:

 

 

I hope FSelite is playing a joke on us.😁😁😁

13 minutes ago, mauri2007 said:

I´m here again....

After seeing this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=Y0u1tedlZu8&feature=emb_logo

I must admit that I was completely wrong. The P3Dv5 graphics engine is not the same as the FSX. The P3Dv5 graphics engine is the same as FS2002 graphic engine. Compare them, please:

 

I hope FSelite is playing a joke on us.😁😁😁

And I hope you're not trolling 

Edited April 11, 20206 yr by Dirk98

38 minutes ago, Dirk98 said:

And I hope you're not trolling 

Sorry if I seem to be trolling 😟, but I was very amazed with that video Prepar3D v5 Night Lighting: The FSElite First Look. I really hope it's a joke. 🙄

On the other hand, although I am sure that FSX and P3Dv1-4 have the same graphics engine, despite all my complaints, despite W6KD's precise explanations, I know that I am going to buy P3Dv5. I know. I think it will be worth it. If only because of the new effects of water.

But I will continue to claim that the FSX and P3D graphics engines are.... blah blah blah ...😁

1 hour ago, mauri2007 said:

But I will continue to claim that the FSX and P3D graphics engines are.... blah blah blah ...😁

And you will be just as wrong in the future as you are now and have been.

1 hour ago, mauri2007 said:

Sorry if I seem to be trolling 😟, but I was very amazed with that video Prepar3D v5 Night Lighting: The FSElite First Look. I really hope it's a joke. 🙄

On the other hand, although I am sure that FSX and P3Dv1-4 have the same graphics engine, despite all my complaints, despite W6KD's precise explanations, I know that I am going to buy P3Dv5. I know. I think it will be worth it. If only because of the new effects of water.

But I will continue to claim that the FSX and P3D graphics engines are.... blah blah blah ...😁

Please, go fly FSX as in your opinion they are using the same graphics engine.

And as FSX will deliver higher FPS then that is the flightsim for you.

So this is the wrong forum to be ... 

👋

46 minutes ago, n4gix said:

And you will be just as wrong in the future as you are now and have been.

Let me smile while I really, really know things about FSX source code. Let me smile...

PT knows them too.

33 minutes ago, GSalden said:

Please, go fly FSX as in your opinion they are using the same graphics engine.

And as FSX will deliver higher FPS then that is the flightsim for you.

So this is the wrong forum to be ... 

👋

Nah, he was just venting out, it's quarantine toll. Mauri will be flying same P3Dv5 like you, Gerard.

49 minutes ago, Dirk98 said:

Nah, he was just venting out, it's quarantine toll. Mauri will be flying same P3Dv5 like you, Gerard.

I know.... no one wants to be left behind ..

”The biggest complainers buy the most” 

46 minutes ago, Dirk98 said:

Nah, he was just venting out, it's quarantine toll. Mauri will be flying same P3Dv5 like you, Gerard.

Like you said: I will be flying same P3Dv5 like you. 

 

Why do you think I hate P3D? Surely I have flown it more than most of you and will continue to fly. And I will not go back to FSX. I have only highlighted something that is evident to me. And that is neither good nor bad. Could the P3D graphics engine have improved much more than it has been? Yes, but not by me, I am happily retired. Well, even if I wasn't, I couldn't either. Not for 5000 other guys.

Have you been part of a former development team? Did you write some line of a source code related with flight simulation?

Sometimes it happens that someone who was in one of those teams (noooooot meeeeeee) tells you things that seem to contradict what you think you know about the world of simulation. The things that the current license owners tell you. And they can do it. They must. It is marketing. And it may or may not be true.

Fortunately I am not venting. I hadn't had that much fun in 15 years.

1 hour ago, mauri2007 said:

Let me smile while I really, really know things about FSX source code. Let me smile..

Unless you are an ex-MS/ACES employee, you can't know any more that anyone else about the "source code."  Is there still some "DNA" from FSX/ESP carried over to P3D?  Most likely there is, but I'll not try to claim sure and certain knowledge to such a surmise.