So I thought about firing up P3D and/or XP last night...

[mtaxp 666]

4 hours ago, tweekz said:

Other sims mostly focus on one thing at a time. We have seen that throughout the past years. And that's the biggest benefit of MSFS - the "real gap" if you will.

XP10 (a decade ago, only 3 developers)

-New scenery system

-New weather and clouds

-HDR

-64 bit

-global lightning

-new atc and ai system

-atmospheric scattering 

-New water

 

[tweekz 2,165]

49 minutes ago, mtaxp said:

XP10 (a decade ago, only 3 developers)

-New scenery system

-New weather and clouds

-HDR

-64 bit

-global lightning

-new atc and ai system

-atmospheric scattering 

-New water

That's exactly how it looks like. Talented 3 devs tho.

Are you actually listing those billboard clouds and 3 layer wind and weather modeling with instant transitions as noteworthy improvements?

Or the scenery with billboard trees and edgy streets? The ATC? The AI? Last two aren't perfect with MSFS neither - that's why no one uses it as positive example...

And now they've spent the past 3 years to add Vulkan and tweak the flight model. And it's still looking like a modded FSX from 2006.

If it was not for the community, XP would still have 2D airports on most locations.

I'm outta here. 😄

Edited September 25, 2020 by tweekz

[MrBitstFlyer 3,896]

3 hours ago, DJJose said:

How did you do this?

UserCfg.opt file

}
    {Terrain
        LoDFactor 5.000000
    }
    {ObjectsLoD
        LoDFactor 5.000000
    }

[mtaxp 666]

1 hour ago, tweekz said:

That's exactly how it looks like. Talented 3 devs tho.

Are you actually listing those billboard clouds and 3 layer wind and weather modeling with instant transitions as noteworthy improvements?

Or the scenery with billboard trees and edgy streets? The ATC? The AI? Last two aren't perfect with MSFS neither - that's why no one uses it as positive example...

And now they've spent the past 3 years to add Vulkan and tweak the flight model. And it's still looking like a modded FSX from 2006.

If it was not for the community, XP would still have 2D airports on most locations.

I'm outta here. 😄

You had a claim, that they cant add multiple stuff and only focus on one feature at a time.

I proved it wrong, FACT.

You also chose to ignore the FACT that only 2 developers are working on Vulkan, the other 10 or so + new hired art team are working on other stuff to ship with v12, and it was mentioned before, you still ignore and repeat thise claims.

Implementing new next gen features within v11 will change minimun specs needed, means customers who paid for V11 can't use it, not so smart..

Last thing, if you want to discuss, read what the other side writes, dont ignore answers and then repeat the same and then say im out, this is not a discussion that one can sustain.

Have a nice weekend, done.

 

 

 

Edited September 25, 2020 by mtaxp

[Ianrivaldosmith 5,317]

2 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Water cooling ... chiller wasn't being used during that video.

File is located here:  C:\Users\[YourUserName]\AppData\Local\Packages\Microsoft.FlightSimulator_8wekyb3d8bbwe\LocalCache
Values of 9.000000 are about equal to P3D V5 Ultra settings you set via UI.  Be aware if you change graphics settings in MSFS and hit save/apply, the value will revert back to whatever value is set in the MSFS UI (2 or lower).

VRAM and RAM usage will increase, I hit 21GB VRAM and 27GB RAM at peak (I'm running Titan RTX with 24GB currently so another reason to get the 3090 24GB).  It does look considerably better and makes MSFS much more enjoyable for me, but it can also impact FPS especially when moving out of an area that might already be in the Rolling Cache (I'd advise making a much larger rolling cache) as MSFS servers will trigger low FPS 7 FPS as the data demand increases ... but once you have everything cached it should smooth out ... at least that has been my experience.  I'd like to run a higher Render Scaling but 110 is the highest I can go without major FPS issues.

Cheers, Rob.

Does that not cause stutters for you? Or is it gpu limited? 

[Slides 1,552]

2 hours ago, mtaxp said:

XP10 (a decade ago, only 3 developers)

-New scenery system

-New weather and clouds

-HDR

-64 bit

-global lightning

-new atc and ai system

-atmospheric scattering 

-New water

 

We can tell from the end results that only 3 developers worked on these "features".

[Ianrivaldosmith 5,317]

2 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Depends on location, out of EDDT (from Gaya Simulations via Orbx distribution) it's not too bad and only 19.4GB VRAM max (LoDFactor = 9 in UserCfg.opt) ... other locations and I've seen over 21GB VRAM:

If you skip ahead to the 1:48 min mark in the video, you can see FPS dropping drastically and lots of long frames (stutters) ... BUT, notice the CPU and GPU load is relatively low which indicates to me the long frames are caused by streaming data not being provided in time, MS server side.

In this test, everything maxed out except Rendering Scaling = 110, Depth of Field = Medium (and of course the LoDFactor tweak).

Cheers, Rob.

 

Ill try this when the 3090 lands on my doorstep...

[FlyIce 354]

Rob, what is the CPU/GPU configuration in this video? Those frame rates look outstanding considering such a huge LOD.

 

[sanh 823]

I dont think the comparison between x-plane and p3d and msfs in their current state matters. Msfs is churning out the updates and the Japan update coming out next week looks fantastic. A "meaningful update" per month for msfs seems to be vastly ahead of what the other sims are doing where several months is normally the wait for a fairly minor update.

[L3m0n 56]

12 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Depends on location, out of EDDT (from Gaya Simulations via Orbx distribution) it's not too bad and only 19.4GB VRAM max (LoDFactor = 9 in UserCfg.opt) ... other locations and I've seen over 21GB VRAM:

If you skip ahead to the 1:48 min mark in the video, you can see FPS dropping drastically and lots of long frames (stutters) ... BUT, notice the CPU and GPU load is relatively low which indicates to me the long frames are caused by streaming data not being provided in time, MS server side.

In this test, everything maxed out except Rendering Scaling = 110, Depth of Field = Medium (and of course the LoDFactor tweak).

Cheers, Rob.

 

Use the in-game FPS display for finding out how much VRAM is actually in use. Afterburner doesn't show how much vram is really being used, just how much the program has asked to be allocated.

[Richard Sennett 2,499]

YT post - video is terrible but heres what his thoughts are on 3000 series cards in MSFS 2020 

Last week, I showed this game running with the ASUS 3080, now I am testing the ASUS TUF RTX 3090 with 24 GB Of Vrram. I got a small bump in FPS over the 3080, and it looks like it uses about 11 GB of Allocated Vram with the 3090. Still no quite 60 fps but, anything over 30 fps in more than playable with a flight simulator

[mtaxp 666]

2 hours ago, Slides said:

We can tell from the end results that only 3 developers worked on these "features".

A tech from a decade ago, and many of those features were first brought to flight simulation by those guys.

I frankly really hope for microsoft that they are not underestimating their competetion, would be really foolish of them.

Edited September 25, 2020 by mtaxp

[FlyBaby 659]

30 minutes ago, mtaxp said:

A tech from a decade ago, and many of those features were first brought to flight simulation by those guys.

I frankly really hope for microsoft that they are not underestimating their competetion, would be really foolish of them.

Underestimate???

Have you seen MSFS? Seems like Microsoft far exceeded their competition.

Prior to MSFS, there was no real competition, just older tech sims surviving on 3P clouds, terrain etc. to survive. These Dev did not push the barrier....MSFS did.

MSFS has a better chance at fixing bugs and getting better 3PD planes than LR / LM has at closing the wide gap to compete with MSFS.

Where are the new sales going? Where are the 3P Devs going? ...to the future of flight simming.

[VFXSimmer 1,310]

On 9/24/2020 at 10:38 AM, mtaxp said:

@VFXSimmerYou can't compare msfs to x-plane 11 graphic wise since the latter was released many years ago, most x-plane users did not have hardware for that.

No denial here about that, msfs looks visually much better.

Some of you seem to take it as msfs vs xp, Im merely excited about the near future of flight simming. Better stuff will come, and then, better stuff will come again, it's just finally flight sims are doing huge steps graphics wise and not looking at AAA games with some sadness about why we cant enjoy both simulation and good graphics, well it's getting there.

 

Quote

 

A tech from a decade ago, and many of those features were first brought to flight simulation by those guys.

I frankly really hope for microsoft that they are not underestimating their competetion, would be really foolish of them.

 

I thought you werent about making this a MSFS vs XP discussion? 

[L3m0n 56]

34 minutes ago, mtaxp said:

A tech from a decade ago, and many of those features were first brought to flight simulation by those guys.

I frankly really hope for microsoft that they are not underestimating their competetion, would be really foolish of them.

Cliffs of Dover did precomputed atmospheric scattering before any other sim. And that is assuming you consider xplane to be doing proper atmospheric scattering.... which it isn't. The game is just using a texture for the sky and then a bit of mie scattering for the bloom around the sun, hardly anything close to cutting edge for 2011.

Rise of Flight had 3d water before any other sim. 

I'm really struggling to see any feature in that list that was a first by xplane besides atc and ai stuff.