XP12 system requirements

[fogboundturtle 2,708]

2 minutes ago, GCBraun said:

Well, I am running MSFS @ 4K/Ultra/60 fps almost constantly nowadays, whereas I have re-installed XP11 and the performance is considerably worse on similar conditions. Let´s hope that XP12 can catch up...

this. x1000000000. This is all XP11 user are asking. Modern rendering pipeline for modern hardware. If they can deliver on that, I would be an happy camper.

[mSparks 2,086]

1 minute ago, GCBraun said:

Well, I am running MSFS @ 4K/Ultra/60 fps almost constantly nowadays, whereas I have re-installed XP11 and the performance is worse on similar conditions. Let´s hope that XP12 can catch up...

I run XP11 at 500fps, in VR.

I did say I was only semi joking about the garbage windows kernel.

[GCBraun 2,390]

9 minutes ago, mSparks said:

I run XP11 at 500fps, in VR.

I did say I was only semi joking about the garbage windows kernel.

Great, now show me what kind of FPS you get on the flight-deck of the inibuilds A300 at EDDF/EGLL/KJFK with ortho scenery, traffic, ultra settings, 4K resolution and the volumetric clouds mod.

Edited September 14, 2021 by GCBraun

[mSparks 2,086]

1 hour ago, GCBraun said:

Great, now show me what kind of FPS you get on the flight-deck of the inibuilds A300 at EDDF/EGLL/KJFK with ortho scenery, traffic, ultra settings, 4K resolution and the volumetric clouds mod.

110fps is par for the course for that on decent hardware in the sparky744, even on windows.

most of the stuff that LR have demod for XP12 is "free" or almost free in terms of fps - as long as you actually have the silicon to run it on. 4K just needs enough vram.

most of that really started with the nvidia 10 series cards and cuda, then nvidia took some time out to sell tesla cards at $10000 a pop, the less hardware specific spec is opencl - which is why there are cards that run dx12 but not vulkan (i believe - could be something else to) 

rdna2 technically has that support, its no nvidia 3000 series hardware, isnt great on windows, and its drivers need work across operating systems, but it also doesnt cost $1500 plus.

msfs is still dx11 btw. Ive been talking about this for a while, really looking forward to LR showing off what it really means with something of visual substance rather than headless compute, even if there are a lot of unanswered questions still.

Edited September 14, 2021 by mSparks

[GCBraun 2,390]

12 minutes ago, mSparks said:

110fps is par for the course for that on decent hardware in the sparky744, even on windows.

most of the stuff that LR have demod for XP12 is "free" or almost free in terms of fps - as long as you actually have the silicon to run it on. 4K just needs enough vram.

most of that really started with the nvidia 10 series cards and cuda, then nvidia took some time out to sell tesla cards at $10000 a pop, the less hardware specific spec is opencl - which is why there are cards that run dx12 but not vulkan (i believe - could be something else to) 

rdna2 technically has that support, its no nvidia 3000 series hardware, isnt great on windows, and its drivers need work across operating systems, but it also doesnt cost $1500 plus.

msfs is still dx11 btw. Ive been talking about this for a while, really looking forward to LR showing off what it really means with something of visual substance rather than headless compute, even if there are a lot of unanswered questions still.

110 fps with what looks a default aircraft, low settings and a sparsely populated scenario is easily achievable here as well, thanks.

I am comparing XP11 with MSFS in situations such as:

Volumetric clouds in overcast weather:

Complex IFR approaches with traffic/ortho-scenery:

Edited September 14, 2021 by GCBraun

[Janov 2,383]

Lol, mSparks found new victims 😅.

You guys will also learn not to argue with him...as we all have 😉

 

[fogboundturtle 2,708]

16 minutes ago, Janov said:

Lol, mSparks found new victims 😅.

You guys will also learn not to argue with him...as we all have 😉

 

Finally something we can agree on. 

[mSparks 2,086]

50 minutes ago, GCBraun said:

110 fps with what looks a default aircraft, low settings and a sparsely populated scenario is easily achievable here as well, thanks.

I am comparing XP11 with MSFS in situations such as:

Volumetric clouds in overcast weather:

Complex IFR approaches with traffic/ortho-scenery:

 

yes, ec for volumetric clouds and autoatc for traffic.

autoatc still the only traffic plugin that is xp12 ready afaik.

110fps is pretty much mins for me, i vsync it for VR.

and the 744 is systems complete, only failures left to add now. that seems to make Janov mad, presumably because I/we give away for free a better aircraft than he is charging $70 or whatever a pop for.

Edited September 14, 2021 by mSparks

[Janov 2,383]

10 minutes ago, mSparks said:

that seems to make Janov mad, presumably because I/we give away for free a better aircraft than he is charging $70 or whatever a pop for.

No, that doesn´t make me mad at all (it is 74.95$, to be precise 😉). I haven´t tried your 744 yet but may well do so when I start my training in a few months to transfer from A320s to the 744 (and 748) again.

[fogboundturtle 2,708]

so I ran a test. I disable every single custom scenery I had in XP11, I gain about 9-10fps.  I guess I rather take the hit in FPS than let go of all my meshes and orthos.  Hopefully, XP12 will scale better in terms of multithreading so that the hit to FPS when adding mods is not as hard. The IniSimulation A300 aircraft per exemple is an aircraf that is almost impossible to run above 30fps at all time. 

[Janov 2,383]

If you want to get a feel for how much the aircraft hurts the performance it is best to run a test at a remote island (like TXKF) and first load up the default C172 and then the aircraft in question. This pretty much isolates the effect the aircraft has on performance. Make sure to select clear skies, the clouds will absolutely kill your FPS in XP11.

Also consider the VRAM size you run - a lot of aircraft have large texture sizes and that can blow you over the edge of your available VRAM...at that point the framerate is going to by abysmal. Reducing texture resolution is also a good test to see if this is an issue.

Cheers, Jan

 

[GCBraun 2,390]

29 minutes ago, mSparks said:

and the 744 is systems complete, only failures left to add now. that seems to make Janov mad, presumably because I/we give away for free a better aircraft than he is charging $70 or whatever a pop for.

The A300/310 are pretty much complete from a systems point of view as well and, hopefully the 737 will be one day.

In any case, the immersion provided by IXEG, Inibuilds, etc. are worth the money as textures and sounds are also part of the simulation  and those are hardly matched in such freeware projects (Zibo/WT/FBW aside).

[fogboundturtle 2,708]

10 minutes ago, Janov said:

If you want to get a feel for how much the aircraft hurts the performance it is best to run a test at a remote island (like TXKF) and first load up the default C172 and then the aircraft in question. This pretty much isolates the effect the aircraft has on performance. Make sure to select clear skies, the clouds will absolutely kill your FPS in XP11.

Also consider the VRAM size you run - a lot of aircraft have large texture sizes and that can blow you over the edge of your available VRAM...at that point the framerate is going to by abysmal. Reducing texture resolution is also a good test to see if this is an issue.

Cheers, Jan

 

32gb RAM/  3080Ti with 12GB VRAM. I am sure memory is not my issue. If you look at the plugin performance data, the IniSimulation A300 cost around 4 FPS and the SALS plugins is taking 14% of the processing power. The issue seems to me a SDK single threaded issue. This is an issue that was also plaguing MSFS until Asobo finally moved avionics to a different threads. Now glass cockpit no longer impact your FPS.  This is what I am expecting out of XP12. Let my plugins runs and do what they need to do without having to compete with rendering time.  

[mSparks 2,086]

15 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

A300 aircraft per exemple is an aircraf that is almost impossible to run above 30fps at all time. 

There are a lot like that, its a hang over from aircraft devs not having access to multithreaded sdk tools, which is fine for the default C172 which has all its systems multithreaded in default xplane but game over for any kind of complex plane that needs to simulate a lot of additional systems while the plane runs.

The story for the 744 really started here:

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

you can grab the latest here

But the general status quo remains unless complex ac devs adopt that or something equivalent, regardless of sim.

doing multithreaded by hand is "words developers use to describe computers"

2 minutes ago, GCBraun said:

In any case, the immersion provided by

Oh I agree - now - before the 744 I had very little time for tubers, helo guy myself, and tbh nothing beats atc telling you not above 50m. But something about the queen just makes me happy.

 

[mjrhealth 820]

3 hours ago, mSparks said:

yes, ec for volumetric clouds and autoatc for traffic.

autoatc still the only traffic plugin that is xp12 ready afaik.

110fps is pretty much mins for me, i vsync it for VR.

and the 744 is systems complete, only failures left to add now. that seems to make Janov mad, presumably because I/we give away for free a better aircraft than he is charging $70 or whatever a pop for.

is this a discussion or an argument, seem to throw a lot of trash around. Im still not sure of the point to these discussions. MSParks loves linux and hates windows we get it. I dont think much of MS I have Ubuntu running on 3 laptops, but il never use it for fligt simming