FENIX A320 RELEASED!

[dikkeduif 56]

2 minutes ago, michael8 said:

how i make that the integrated gpu show on the fenix settings options? i can only see the cpu  and my external gpu  but not my integrated  and is enable on the bios of the motherboard

Check in your windows device manager, it's possible you turned it on in your bios, but you don't have drivers for it installed yet.

[Carts85 1,203]

1 hour ago, Matchstick said:

For the moment I have the left reverser switch mapped to the standard Reverse Thrust Hold command - seems to work OKish but not idea.

Thanks that’s worked as a temporary workaround… Did you have any issues with the switches just above the throttles? I use them for external lights strobe/beacon etc. None of them are working even though they are mapped.

[2reds2whites 827]

6 hours ago, somiller said:

Ah, NO. 4790k is pretty much on-par performance-wise with my 6th gen 6700k. The 4790k was a great performer, especially for it's day, and it's kinda like a 1080ti, still a great piece of kit, just not up to some of the challenges in MSFS without judicious selection of settings. And a 1080ti blows my 1070 out of the water, but I still get pretty good performance with modest settings - runs the PMDG 737 and Aerosoft CRJ quite well - all better than in P3D v4.2.

It was a great performer, it definitely isn't now.

The 4790K is beaten by a 2 year old intel i3;

https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX8070110100F-i3-10100F-3-6GHz-LGA1200/dp/B08LKJPR5X/?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_w=y5Wdy&pf_rd_p=bbb6bbd8-d236-47cb-b42f-734cb0cacc1f&pf_rd_r=539DNNJB9Q94AQ9RC56R&pd_rd_r=66a95f71-1f19-4a3c-baec-fad246480053&pd_rd_wg=ASBZW&ref_=pd_gw_ci_mcx_mi

A current gen base model i3 (the 12100) almost doubles the performance of the 4790K. The absolute bargain basement, base model i3 doubles the performance!

A current gen i7 almost quadruples the performance.

It was a good CPU in its day but it is absolutely obsolete. The 1080ti is still a good card but it's not going to do well with the CPU bottleneck.

 

[Makinen11 184]

OK I am back after some A to B to A testing. Also tried the latest FBW experimental for comparison:

Interestingly enough, it gets better for my system with the displays on the CPU rather than the integrated graphics; this is a bit baffling, but I guess every system is different. Bear in mind the quick comparison is done when stationary with panel state ready for take off selected, on RWY 03R at LGAV. AI traffic is off as I only fly on VATSIM. System specs are a 7700K o/c @4.8GHz all core, HT on, 32 GB RAM and a GTX 1080Ti running at 3400 X 1440 ultrawide. OIn a side note, I observe that the Fenix loads faster than any other plane I have had until now in MSFS, as fast as a default actually, maybe because most of it runs outside the sim? Anyway here are the results:

FlyByWire experimental

Fenix running on the 1080Ti

Fenix running on the CPU

Fenix running on the intel integrated graphics.

For all of these I am running the latest Intel & Nvidia drivers. Bear in mind this is just a static test with systems running, but it is not indicative of smoothness and FPS consistency in flight which is more important. It could be that while the CPU option gives the best FPS (in fact as much as the FBW bird for those afraid of performance) it might be less smooth if clouds, scenery loading etc is happening at the same time. I will continue testing and report back. But there you go if you were afraid of performance, on an old system like mine, with all the setting at ultra and unchanged from all the other addons. By the way, the Fenix display quality setting is set to quality, I haven't tried the lower settings and what they look like and how much performance they give back.

 

Edited May 20, 2022 by Makinen11

[2reds2whites 827]

4 hours ago, Johnny19 said:

I’ve read through 15 pages of new posts from last night, and your post is, in lack of a better word, rude and completely unnecessary. Have it every crossed your mind that some people have 4 or more yrs old hardware because they can’t afford newer one? 

Don't be such a snowflake.

People can have whatever hardware they want, for whatever reason - that's no issue whatsoever.

But you can't expect and complain about poor performance on a modern product if you have old and obsolete hardware. It doesn't matter if I can't afford a new rig, there's no good complaining that I'm not getting good frames if I'm trying to run MSFS on a 2002 Intel Celeron with 2gb Ram. 

It I were Fenix, I would be incredibly frustrated that rumours are circulating of poor performance. If you're trying to run the most complex home-simulated aircraft in flight simulator history on a processor which is less than half the performance of the absolute entry model current processors then you are not going to do very well, and that should not be a surprise.

It's like me entering a Formula 1 race in a Toyota Corolla then complaining that I can't keep up. 

Edited May 20, 2022 by 2reds2whites

[SAS443 1,711]

1 hour ago, MarioDonick said:

I assume the external Fenix app which is doing all the system calculations and display rendering does this regardless of MSFS view mode.

IIRC the i9-9900K has a builtin internal GPU; if you switch that on in BIOS, you can select it in the app just for the display rendering, so your CPU and main GPU are not that burdened; have you tried that and if yes, did it help?

Thank you

This seems to do the trick. Enabled the built-in gpu and FPS are now steady at 30fps at gate 15 ESSA.

[ckyliu 1,749]

1 hour ago, Makinen11 said:

I wonder if this is the tipping point for any flight simmer that is looking at a 5800X3D which is stellar in MSFS otherwise and the default option right now. As it does NOT have integrated graphics, would it still be faster than a 12700K for example with the displays on the Intel graphics when running the Fenix?

4 hours ago, omarsmak30 said:

Wild question, for those with KS CPUs that don’t have onboard GPU, doesn’t make sense to get a second cheap GPU to offload the displays rendering? 🤔

Have you seen how much GPUs are, even the most basic!? Also how many people have a spare PCI-E x16 slot to do this? I have an F series i5 12th gen with no onboard graphics, I just get the CPU to render the displays (in performance quality) since I am heavily GPU bound anyway (like most people). CPU only hits 65% load. Too much is being made of this iGPU thing, you can just get the displays to render on the CPU with similar benefits.

53 minutes ago, Seth2021 said:

Which is the best GPU option for rendering displays ?  Integrated of Nvidia GPU? I have 11900k with  RTX3090. Also i dont know if its good to have 2 graphic cards enabled as possibly could cause some conflicts

See my above text. Also https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/619233-fenix-a320-released/?do=findComment&comment=4778008 found better performance using CPU for the displays then the CPU onboard graphics.

6 hours ago, Richard Sennett said:

Is there a flood light overhead is very dark ?  - got it off the ground but have to wait for new yoke and throttle to be delivered to get setup properly - helps to reboot after install dah

Yep, it has BRT and DIM positions, you'll find the toggle switch just up and right of the seatbelt and no smoking signs. Most other flightdeck lights are on white rotary knobs, the lighting is very controllable.

Edited May 20, 2022 by ckyliu

[bendead 1,085]

My landing gear is stuck during climb, not sure if I pressed G twice by mistake or if the failure are on. Yet the ECAM is telling what to do and expect, awesome

[MarkW 1,490]

15 minutes ago, bendead said:

My landing gear is stuck during climb, not sure if I pressed G twice by mistake or if the failure are on. Yet the ECAM is telling what to do and expect, awesome

Airbus landing gear will not retract above 250 knots so you may need to slow down to get them retracted.

[ZKOKQ 984]

8 hours ago, Arklight1 said:

The streams I saw focused on the cockpit/efb mainly. Not many spent time on the externals. Maybe thats why? lol

320Simpilot did an extensive external walk around. Check him out on YT. Real A320 Pilot His videos are gold standard

[Johnny19 341]

1 hour ago, 2reds2whites said:

Don't be such a snowflake.

People can have whatever hardware they want, for whatever reason - that's no issue whatsoever.

But you can't expect and complain about poor performance on a modern product if you have old and obsolete hardware. It doesn't matter if I can't afford a new rig, there's no good complaining that I'm not getting good frames if I'm trying to run MSFS on a 2002 Intel Celeron with 2gb Ram. 

It I were Fenix, I would be incredibly frustrated that rumours are circulating of poor performance. If you're trying to run the most complex home-simulated aircraft in flight simulator history on a processor which is less than half the performance of the absolute entry model current processors then you are not going to do very well, and that should not be a surprise.

It's like me entering a Formula 1 race in a Toyota Corolla then complaining that I can't keep up. 

You missed a whole football, but never mind

[Zangoose 1,631]

FPS seems to be around 30fps (sometimes dips to the high 20s) - Seems to be mainly limited by MainThread with the current specs of my system:

Ryzen 7 3700X, 32GB DDR4, RTX3080 - I do wonder if an upgrade of the CPU would help boost the FPS even further but with AM5 coming out at some point in the near future may not even be worth it. Although that would be a new build in terms of CPU/Motherboard and Ram.

I've really enjoyed what I have seen so far and can't wait to do further flights later on. 

Edit: To add on, I currently have the displays being rendered by the GPU. 

Edited May 20, 2022 by Zangoose

[regis9 3,999]

I’d like to try running the displays using my onboard GPU.  I think my i9 10900k should have one, but I couldn’t find any way to turn it on in the bios (using an Asus motherboard).  Anyone have better luck?

[Makinen11 184]

OK, more testing as I am on the way to LGTS from LGIR. While parked if I run my displays on the CPU as shown in my screenshots I get the best FPS. As I suspected, once I was on the take off roll and all the systems and physics started hammering the CPU it got beat to death. I switched displays on the fly to the integrated intel graphics and I am back to smoothness. Tried using the main graphics card, it is less smooth but still smoother than CPU (despite CPU showing as recommended).

One interesting thing I am observing while climbing now, if I switch back and forth to the CPU the FPS is not much different but the smoothness on the displays when on CPU is a lot worse. So I think for anyone with similar setup as mine sticking with the intel onboard graphics is indeed the best option after all and absolutely smooth. It is comparable to FBW for me performance wise, and that says a lot as the FBW has a lot less system complexity (at the moment).

[Ixoye 1,812]

I'm happy for all of you heavy jet supporters, now MFSF is starting to take off for real 👍