11 minutes ago, mtaxp said:

Sorry you totaly lost me since you talk about garmin? MFD? ehat does this has to do with the rendering engine?

Rewriting the rendering engine to work on Vulkan from opengl, is a much harder thing to than introducing new graphics, in fact in Vulkan they can do that MUCH faster and in earnest

Have you tried x-plane 11.50? Shadows and reflections are cpu bound, so in Vulkan less cpu bound I have no noticeable fps hit. I have ryzen3600x, clearly not a top range cpu rather a med-end modern one with enough cores. I also run max objects and flying LAX with a custom scenery with 45 fps.

Yes, I was using the beta right up to MSFS's release.  You make my point.  Even with Vulcan you cant match MSFS's performance if you bring Xplanes' imagery up to match.  The base scenery in X is no where close to msfs.  If that's your comparison, then set up MSFS with low settings and compare your fps because then its a fair match.

2 minutes ago, tweekz said:

There is visual fidelity that doesn't rely on graphics APIs, like scenery streaming. MS can stream in orthos or just update the whole planet. This is a huge advantage in terms of flexibility.

Sure XP will look great with version 12, but it will be too late to the party. I guess within a year the MSFS addon eco system will start rolling. Furthermore MS plays on a different level in terms of public marketing. The market shift is already in progress and that affects what platform 3PDs focus on.

I think XP can do what it wants, it will not continue the growth of the past two years, where it was on a path to becoming #1 sim.

No such thing as "too late" in tech, better things are always introduce.

I understand where your concern about xp is coming from, as a user, you didn't get to see any new graphical features during the v11, all of this while msfs began to show their stuff.

But in fact this the logical way; no new graphical features while you are moving to a new api, this should come after you have a new fast and stable rendering engine. After thay new graphics can be introduced in earnest.

As for orthos, please no, they are ugly and a shame for 2020 graphics IMO, low res, aetifacts, yuck. I prefer a good data based autogen system with a complete high res PBR scene.

Just now, VFXSimmer said:

Yes, I was using the beta right up to MSFS's release.  You make my point.  Even with Vulcan you cant match MSFS's performance if you bring Xplanes' imagery up to match.  The base scenery in X is no where close to msfs.  If that's your comparison, then set up MSFS with low settings and compare your fps because then its a fair comparison.

Besides, when I load overcast weather in XP the frames go from 60fps in CAVOK to 30. With 2D billboard clouds... 😄

11 minutes ago, tweekz said:

I think XP can do what it wants, it will not continue the growth of the past two years, where it was on a path of becoming #1 sim

The evidence for this seems to be mounting up already. On steam charts it shows x-plane usage on steam is down nearly 50% from earlier in the year. I know its only on steam and with lockdowns ending in summer in many places the usage probably would decrease some what anyway but still it seems significant.

Edited September 23, 20205 yr by sanh

7 minutes ago, mtaxp said:

As for orthos, please no, they are ugly and a shame for 2020 graphics IMO, low res, aetifacts, yuck. I prefer a good data based autogen system with a complete high res PBR scene.

Well, there we clearly differ in taste. 😉

I think MSFS does a great job of blending in scenery objects (like the grass or trees) with the ortho imagery. IMO no procedural generated field can look as authentic as a real one. There are some flaws, but there are other cases where color mismatches are handled very well. So this will probably still improve.

The other thing is that they can also update things like buidlings by regeneration and pushin it on the servers.

My main concern with XP is the small team size. Any major step takes ages. I don't expect XP12 within the next two years.

Edited September 23, 20205 yr by tweekz

5 minutes ago, VFXSimmer said:

Yes, I was using the beta right up to MSFS's release.  You make my point.  Even with Vulcan you cant match MSFS's performance if you bring Xplanes' imagery up to match.  The base scenery in X is no where close to msfs.  If that's your comparison, then set up MSFS with low settings and compare your fps because then its a fair match.

Frankly, you are one of the very few cases where i see somebody claims to have better fps and smoothness in msfs vs x-plane (Vulkan)

All cases that I saw, including mine, including every Vulkan vs dx11 in every other games, Vulkan is just second to none.

2 minutes ago, tweekz said:

Well, there we clearly differ in taste. 😉

I think MSFS does a great job of blending in scenery objects (like the grass or trees) with the ortho imagery. IMO no procedural generated field can look as authentic than a real one. There are some flaws, but there are other cases where color mismatches are handled very well. So this will probably still improve.

The other thing is that they can also update things like buidlings by regeneration and pushin it on the servers.

My main concern with XP is the small team size. Any major step takes ages. I don't expect XP12 within the next two years.

I expect to see x-plane 12 news before the end of this year, maybe a bet? Austin already said he is looking at demo tech of the new version and revealed some nice stuff, this is called teasing for a soon major news IMO.

5 hours ago, Novation said:

Yawn.....  the P3D guys are really on a mission 🤣

Haven't they got better things to do 🤪

Yes, those "old" sims are really past it. V5 is, oh, at least a few months old. Out with the old fashioned stuff. New is always better. I'm throwing out all my Mozart and Bach recordings. Several hundred years old that music. I've got better things to do. Chucked away my renaissance art books too. They're even older. Doesn't matter if these things are any good or not. What matters is that they are old, past it, expired, and as I am only allowed to own one item in any category, the old stuff had to go, even though I liked some qualities in all of them.

Edited September 23, 20205 yr by robert young

This thread:

I regret expending any physical effort to click on the link...
 

14 minutes ago, tweekz said:

Besides, when I load overcast weather in XP the frames go from 60fps in CAVOK to 30. With 2D billboard clouds... 😄

I actually gave the exact same example in my previous comment.

10 years ago, hardware was better at 2d clouds, now it is better with voxel clouds, tech evolves proof #3737363

3 minutes ago, mtaxp said:

Frankly, you are one of the very few cases where i see somebody claims to have better fps and smoothness in msfs vs x-plane (Vulkan)

All cases that I saw, including mine, including every Vulkan vs dx11 in every other games, Vulkan is just second to none.

I guess you dont read the forums very much then?  I was on xplane.org earlier today and I see a lot of complaints about performance tanking versus opengl.  Quite often it comes down to user error, but I hardly think I'm alone in my assessment.

I can run my machine on full ultra here at 3440x1440 and get a pretty steady 40-50fps and with that I get shadows, reflections, clouds, and full world data coming in off their servers.  With Xplane I was happy with just a bit shy over 30 on xplane and that was with 3jfps culling back detail.  This was of course because I wanted shadows and reflections, orthos, etc... (basically the same stuff i AM getting in MSFS).  Same machine, nothing else special adjusted.

11 minutes ago, VFXSimmer said:

I guess you dont read the forums very much then?  I was on xplane.org earlier today and I see a lot of complaints about performance tanking versus opengl.  Quite often it comes down to user error, but I hardly think I'm alone in my assessment.

I can run my machine on full ultra here at 3440x1440 and get a pretty steady 40-50fps and with that I get shadows, reflections, clouds, and full world data coming in off their servers.  With Xplane I was happy with just a bit shy over 30 on xplane and that was with 3jfps culling back detail.  This was of course because I wanted shadows and reflections, orthos, etc... (basically the same stuff i AM getting in MSFS).  Same machine, nothing else special adjusted.

Some plugins, mainly legacy ones, does not behave well in the new Vulkan x-plane. Most of those org threads are all caused by weird plugin behaviors.

Some are x-plane bugs that did not make it to 11.50, hence a small 11.51 will be released.

Some are plugins that will ned to be updated.

This includes CTD.

Since x-plane currently looks dull people also like to hack art controls which is a big no no if you want a future proof addon.

I compared a new x-plane 11.50 install, only Vulkan ready addons, in major cities (sfo, lax, and nyc), msx settings both in msfs and x-plane..please 🙂

and yeah msfs looks better, please refer to my previous comments on why new graphic features does not always mean less fps, clouds are a great example.

Edited September 23, 20205 yr by mtaxp

21 minutes ago, mtaxp said:

I expect to see x-plane 12 news before the end of this year, maybe a bet? Austin already said he is looking at demo tech of the new version and revealed some nice stuff, this is called teasing for a soon major news IMO.

News may be coming, but considering how long everything takes with LR better don't expect XP12 in 2021.

The other point I stated was, that while it may be competitive from a technical point of view, the market share is a totally different story. The "wow-effect" is long gone by then. More fps won't change that.

XP managed to attract a lot of P3D converts over the past years. But that's most probably over now. Along with that I also expect a less flourishing payware addon market.

I had a great time with XP11. But I am looking for a more inclusive overall experience (although MSFS is by far not perfect yet) without having to wait ages and be at the mercy of whatever Austins priorities are. 🙂

Edited September 23, 20205 yr by tweekz

I love this kind of threads.  We are here again in a mudslinging and I have become wiser, looking back at the history, the wars in our beloved last century, the wars in the middle age, there is no need think far ahead, when reasons why people killed each other might be found for example here.

 

What I like are statements that X-Plane is a fly on a rail sim, but FS is the ultimate simulation experience. In the middle age humans also believed the world is a disc.

 

I personally like the visuals of P3D very much.

Edited September 23, 20205 yr by BigDee

10 minutes ago, mtaxp said:

and yeah msfs looks better, please refer to my previous comments on why new graphic features does not always mean less fps, clouds are a great example.

As mentioned earlier - XPs clouds eat half of my frames in overcast conditions. 😄

Edited September 23, 20205 yr by tweekz