Core 0: Core Sim state

Core 1: Aircraft systems 

Core 2: Aircraft flight model

Core 3: Weather loading and transition  smoother 

Core 4: Airport and Scenery loader 

Core 5: AI aircraft tracker

Core 6: ATC, multi user, networking

Core 7: Environment, sounds, etc

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 13, 20214 yr by Greazer

just install the sparky744 and autoatc. everything you just asked for right there.

Actually uses two cores for aircraft systems, one for the autopilot and another for the NDs

Edited July 13, 20214 yr by mSparks

18 hours ago, mSparks said:

just install the sparky744 and autoatc. everything you just asked for right there.

Can you influence this from the aircraft model itself as opposed to XP handling this (which I assumed would be the case)?

I just pulled the sparky744 from Github, the PMDG 747 is the only reason i have P3D so it'd be nice if I could focus on one simulator again 🙂

48 minutes ago, Dozo said:

Can you influence this from the aircraft model itself as opposed to XP handling this (which I assumed would be the case)?

For the aircraft systems, 

https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/forums/topic/209883-xtlua-parallel-lua-for-complex-aircraft-systems/

That thread dates back to the initial build, So the OP is a "lets do this" rather than "it done", All the 744 systems are now ported over, improved and built on a lot since then.

So "Autopilot on one, NDs on another" is the XTLua and XTLua_keysystems folders in

https://github.com/mSparks43/747-400/tree/master/plugins

For AI aircraft/ATC, AutoATC already used it (In fact AutoATC goes one step further, because a lot of its compute is shifted to distributed compute, rather than just cores on your sim machine).

___

Tech talk out the way:

48 minutes ago, Dozo said:

the PMDG 747 is the only reason

It's not quite to PMDG or PSX levels yet, aiming for that level of detail is planned for the third release, and its just in the final throws of testing for the second release

milestones here

https://github.com/mSparks43/747-400/milestones

All closed/fixed issues so far listed here:

https://github.com/mSparks43/747-400/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aclosed

 

Edited July 14, 20214 yr by mSparks

Greazer must develop his own perfect flight sim. Problem solved.

I only do specs. The year is 2021, well beyond time for this.

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

For AI aircraft/ATC, AutoATC already used it (In fact AutoATC goes one step further, because a lot of its compute is shifted to distributed compute, rather than just cores on your sim machine).

Thanks for clarifying all that, interesting - as I knew XP isn't particularly optimized for multi-core.

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

It's not quite to PMDG or PSX levels yet, aiming for that level of detail is planned for the third release, and its just in the final throws of testing for the second release

I wouldn't expect it to be that good yet, but this is good info too! Would you say it's capable of doing long haul flights as it is now? I'm just asking to know what to expect, so no judgement here - to be clear about that 😉

39 minutes ago, Dozo said:

as I knew XP isn't particularly optimized for multi-core.

XP is, and as part of 11.50+ we got some nice tools to see if/where the problems are.

Developer->show microprofiler

Only thing I see there is it looks like they need to get Panel rendering and 3D scenery off the same thread since they shouldn't need to be done sequentially, that would probably shave 2ms off the frame times there. (But dont quote me on that/could be wrong)

and plugins->plugin admin for plugins

The issue now is that are as a general rule aircraft themselves are not and its a lot easier for devs to insist 20fps is enough for anyone than to fix their whoopsies.

Vs

For example. (11fps cost with a 20fps result will probably be in the realm of 18000us spent on "Flight factor A320" - its time per frame rather than fps which matters here)

45 minutes ago, Dozo said:

Would you say it's capable of doing long haul flights as it is now?

So I would say yes, there have been a couple of reports like:

https://github.com/mSparks43/747-400/issues/618

So unintended failure simulations [bugs] may still exist, but I've not had any I could recreate or do any kind of crash investigation on for a while.

 

Thanks for the elaborate post, I didn't know about the microprofiler. I have been using the plugin admin performance window to troubleshoot resources.

I think I'm going for a multicore AMD CPU next, I've had enough of the 4 in my i5 🙂

37 minutes ago, mSparks said:

So I would say yes, there have been a couple of reports like:

https://github.com/mSparks43/747-400/issues/618

So unintended failure simulations [bugs] may still exist, but I've not had any I could recreate or do any kind of crash investigation on for a while.

Thanks, I'll sure have a look at those videos!

Edited July 14, 20214 yr by Dozo
Videos = plural

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

XP is, and as part of 11.50+ we got some nice tools to see if/where the problems are.

Developer->show microprofiler

Only thing I see there is it looks like they need to get Panel rendering and 3D scenery off the same thread since they shouldn't need to be done sequentially, that would probably shave 2ms off the frame times there. (But dont quote me on that/could be wrong)

and plugins->plugin admin for plugins

The issue now is that are as a general rule aircraft themselves are not and its a lot easier for devs to insist 20fps is enough for anyone than to fix their whoopsies.

Vs

For example. (11fps cost with a 20fps result will probably be in the realm of 18000us spent on "Flight factor A320" - its time per frame rather than fps which matters here)

So I would say yes, there have been a couple of reports like:

https://github.com/mSparks43/747-400/issues/618

So unintended failure simulations [bugs] may still exist, but I've not had any I could recreate or do any kind of crash investigation on for a while.

 

Very off topic but could I ask you a question?
 

The worst frame rates I get are sitting at a gate looking through the cockpit windows at a few terminal windows straight in front of the parked plane and filling the whole view. I cant understand why? It's the simplest scene to render I would have thought? As soon as I leave the gate the frame rates recover even though the scene required to be rendered is far more complex?

Edited July 14, 20214 yr by jarmstro

Does this problem affect all airports or only some?
Some scenes (e.g. DD) had this problem with the type of lighting at the terminals. The FPS has been able to reach 1 digit values.

13 minutes ago, Bulva said:

Does this problem affect all airports or only some?
Some scenes (e.g. DD) had this problem with the type of lighting at the terminals. The FPS has been able to reach 1 digit values.

I'll have to check to be sure but I think it's pretty universal. If the facade of an airport terminal is filling the view the frame rates are terrible.

38 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

Very off topic

depends on the cause 😛

38 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

he worst frame rates I get are sitting at a gate looking through the cockpit windows at a few terminal windows straight in front of the parked plane and filling the whole view. I cant understand why? It's the simplest scene to render I would have thought? As soon as I leave the gate the frame rates recover even though the scene required to be rendered is far more complex?

So there are now the tools to actually answer this one.

Compare the microprofiler and plugin admin near gate and away from gate.

That should let you know if its a plugin or something internal to XP that is eating the frametime. If its a plugin, its time will increase in plugin admin, if its something internal to XP the related bar in the microprofiler will be longer.

Non plugin guesses would be:

Something is very screwy in the Aerosoft sceneries bundled with some XP installs - I disabled them

XP11 lighting is all kinds of borken, up close to buildings XP will spend more time rendering shadows - SSAO, AA and shadows on scenery are all potential culprits (and note some require a complete restart of XP to actually take effect).

Some scenery level of detail are waaaay to high when close to them.

_____

I guess really the answer you are looking for is "is there hope to fix it":

Just did a gate start

shadows on scenery on

shadows on scenery off

Looks to me to be borken lighting related, XP waiting for 6ms doing something on the CPU LR currently don't measure properly when scenery shadows is enabled.

 

13 minutes ago, mSparks said:

depends on the cause 😛

So there are now the tools to actually answer this one.

Compare the microprofiler and plugin admin near gate and away from gate.

That should let you know if its a plugin or something internal to XP that is eating the frametime. If its a plugin, its time will increase in plugin admin, if its something internal to XP the related bar in the microprofiler will be longer.

Non plugin guesses would be:

Something is very screwy in the Aerosoft sceneries bundled with some XP installs - I disabled them

XP11 lighting is all kinds of borken, up close to buildings XP will spend more time rendering shadows - SSAO, AA and shadows on scenery are all potential culprits (and note some require a complete restart of XP to actually take effect).

Some scenery level of detail are waaaay to high when close to them.

_____

I guess really the answer you are looking for is "is there hope to fix it":

Just did a gate start

shadows on scenery on

shadows on scenery off

Looks to me to be borken lighting related, XP waiting for 6ms doing something on the CPU LR currently don't measure properly when scenery shadows is enabled.

 

Yeah could be. I do have shadows enabled. I'll try without. I'm surprised no one else has noticed this. Simplest thing to render and the worst frame rates.

Look at this guy actually believing that multithreading will yield exorbitant performance gains!