4 minutes ago, BijanStudio said:

But this above is something to worry about.

?

I hope they haven't cut too deep to get the performance increases. 
It is normally impossible to get something for nothing, or at least to get the performance increases they did, and RAM / VRAM usage reduction shown on the twitch feed, without stealing something from somewhere else. 

Jorg Neumann said in all his years in the gaming industry, he had never seen such performance gains.  
How did they do it? And has anything been sacrificed to get it to run well on Xbox?  I would guess there may be some things we might not be to happy about, but will the positives be enough to offset any grumbles?

Unless they truly are optimisation gods all of a sudden, I think I share the slight trepidation in the background that others may do.   
To balance this, I cannot see any obvious degradation in the publicity videos, and I have not heard too much grumbling leaking out from the current beta testers.
I know we aren't supposed to hear anything, but there are normally a few snippets of info out there if you look for them.

I suppose we will have all of the answers in a weeks time.  Until then, I will remain optimistic, and hope that we will not be let down. 

 

Edited July 20, 20214 yr by bobcat999

Nothing is free. it's all I am going to say.

The message I’m getting is that the initial enthusiasm among some testers has changed.

If we lose something somewhere, it might be nice if we can control some of those settings.  That way, if someone wants feature X, they can have it, at the expense of feature Y.   Whereas if some other user wants feature Y, they can have it too, but at the expense of feature X.

1 hour ago, bobcat999 said:

and I have not heard too much grumbling leaking out from the current beta testers.

To echo what BijanStudio said above, you cannot please everyone with a sweeping change, like these performance optimisations. Also, it would be wise not to trust someone who doesn't take testing seriously and thinks every single problem with the simulator is user error.

And I completely agree with Mace above, adjustability is extremely important.

1 hour ago, bobcat999 said:

I hope they haven't cut too deep to get the performance increases. 
It is normally impossible to get something for nothing, or at least to get the performance increases they did, and RAM / VRAM usage reduction shown on the twitch feed, without stealing something from somewhere else. 

Jorg Neumann said in all his years in the gaming industry, he had never seen such performance gains.  
How did they do it? And has anything been sacrificed to get it to run well on Xbox?  I would guess there may be some things we might not be to happy about, but will the positives be enough to offset any grumbles?

Unless they truly are optimisation gods all of a sudden, I think I share the slight trepidation in the background that others may do.   
To balance this, I cannot see any obvious degradation in the publicity videos, and I have not heard too much grumbling leaking out from the current beta testers.
I know we aren't supposed to hear anything, but there are normally a few snippets of info out there if you look for them.

I suppose we will have all of the answers in a weeks time.  Until then, I will remain optimistic, and hope that we will not be let down. 

 

When building software any team would tell you that if they knew exactly what the software solution was going to look like when they started, they would have built it differently. Hindsight is 20/20. I think they have gone back and rethought some approaches, given what they know now. I think some of it is based on deadlines, and there just wasn't the time to refactor the code while trying to meet release deadlines. Now they have dedicated some time to doing that. We don't necessarily have to give up anything to get improved performance, but we shall see in 1 week. It really just depends on where the optimizations are coming from. 

Here's an example, although not a great one. Let's say you are building a program that captures the zip code users enter into a table. You want to use this data in another module to provide city, state and geo coordinates for any given zip code. If the zip code is not found, you ping Google to look up the details on the fly, and then you write those results to a table. Now let's say that works really great while you are testing it, but it takes way too long when say 5000 users are entering zip codes simultaneously. You can solve this problem by deferring the lookup of the zip code for a later time (say after hours), because this data isn't really needed on the spot. So you write that new zip code into a table, set a flag that tells the system to look these up later on, and just like that you have improved visible performance. Was there a tradeoff? Yes. The new zip code isn't available this second. A batch job needs to run to do the second part. But in reality users are never going to even notice this compromise, but they will notice the new speed. 

Getting back to MSFS, this program is massive. I am sure they have hundreds if not thousands of opportunities to optimize parts big and small, and everything in between. What we are going to find out is do any of those optimizations impact things in ways we do not like? What are the tradeoffs? And in making these optimizations, what was inadvertently broken?

My expectation (based on nothing except experience building software for 20 years) is that performance will improve, some compromises we won't like, and yes, things are going to get broken. Because....software.    

4 hours ago, RobJC said:

I think people need to temper their expectations. This is being built up so much and it could lead to a huge letdown (and of course screaming). I expect some improvement. But I am going to wait and see how much. Also, what if any issues does this new build bring?

This is very good advise, but when people hear 40 - 60% gains, it's hard not to jump aboard the hype train 🙂 lol. Excuse me, I see my train coming...

We will know next week how this turns out for each of us.

1 hour ago, BijanStudio said:

That's true. Nothing is free. We will lose some. For some, the trade off is fair, for some it's not and and for some it's a disaster.  Everyone uses to sim differently.

On what areas we might expect trade off comprimise ?

I don't expect any degradation other than visuals and if it's so I see huge amount of people is going to share some sort of bad feelings. 

Can anything else give more performance with downgrading  ?

Edited July 20, 20214 yr by Tayyareci

4 hours ago, scotchegg said:

The message I’m getting is that the initial enthusiasm among some testers has changed.

That sounds about right unfortunately - we have been chasing the perfect flightsimulator forever 🙂 still pretty sweet compared to what it used to be thats for sure 

Edited July 21, 20214 yr by Richard Sennett

2 hours ago, SlowFlyer said:

This is very good advise, but when people hear 40 - 60% gains, it's hard not to jump aboard the hype train 🙂 lol. Excuse me, I see my train coming...

We will know next week how this turns out for each of us.

As mentioned, keep your expectations in check. When I see this, I assume I *may* see half this type of performance gain, so 20-25% is what I’ll be looking for. Right now I’m getting around 40 FPS and really smooth. I’m happy as is TBH, I’m hopeful they don’t fork it up. But if I’m seeing 50+ FPS with the same smoothness I have now, I’ll be thrilled. 

7 hours ago, fogboundturtle said:

Nothing is free. it's all I am going to say.

A flight sim is like beer. If you remove the bottlenecks (ie. drink from glasses), the beer (fps) can flow as fast as you want it to.

Edited July 21, 20214 yr by Greazer

What about those of us who want to have our cake and eat it too? Can't Asobo just do the impossible this one time?

Haven't really been following this, but haven't Asobo said they've fundamentally changed some of the computational coding so that it moves the emphasis between CPU/GPU?

Would that in itself not require any compromises in the sim settings if that just resulted in a performance boost? That's the impression I got from the video they released

Are we expecting they've also changed something like graphical fidelity to support that change?

1 minute ago, EGLD said:

Are we expecting they've also changed something like graphical fidelity to support that change?

It was made clear the devs have not dumbed anything down to up the fps. They have reworked the sim engine to use hardware properly. All CPUs are working and the GPU is maxed out. That's what you want to see. If you upgrade to a better GPU you will see better graphics and performance.