26 minutes ago, AnkH said:

What I still do not really get is this display thing: the Fenix app tells me that GPU is not recommended on a single GPU system, yet my 8700K is already struggling with the sim alone. So what should I do? I have plenty of headroom on my 6900XT, so I guess it would still be better to run the displays on the GPU, although the app tells me that it is not recommended, right?

Install your CPU GPU and run it off that.  Works well here with my 3 year old system.

Edited June 3, 20224 yr by VBHB

4 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Hold on a second. Is that true? My understanding is that they've re-used code from P3D and certainly not rewritten the code for MSFS.

I understood this to mean that they built the model from the ground up to take advantage of the capability of MSFS; but the code is the same C++ code underlying and driving the P3D version. I think they spent most of the 2 years working out how to use this legacy code with WASM and not so much how they could adopt more innovative approaches.  Part of this is because they want to sell on X-Box while Fenix simply ruled that out from the start and adopted a more innovative approach and it paid off -- at least for me. I shelved the 737 largely because I just could not go back to navigating all those menus in the FMC to handle ground services, etc; and the lack of Sim Brief integration and connectivity. They are small things, I agree, but I found they made a world of difference in my enjoyment of flying the aircraft.

 

4 minutes ago, Cognita said:

They are small things, I agree, but I found they made a world of difference in my enjoyment of flying the aircraft.

 

Agree.  Everything is just integrated into the aircraft.  Plus being able to choose how to set your performance is the icing on the cake.

3 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

The A 320 has seven computers to handle all the FBW functions. This is not happening in the 737...

Wasnt it back in the 80`s where Commodore 64 was also the king  😃 . Joke a side i believe its amazing a 2022 PC can run all the complexity of those 50-55 computers there is installed in a real A320 .

And again we put us on the moon on quite few bites/bits as well.

Who knows what systems takes more power from each of those vs B737 . Any way i am still amazed by both.

Michael Moe

 

9 minutes ago, Cognita said:

lack of Sim Brief integration and connectivity.

SimBrief is integrated, you just have to download the file, which can be automated.

If you have the SimBrief Downloader installed and point it to your PMDG flightplans directory, the integration is no more complicated than it is using the EFB in the Fenix.

9 minutes ago, VBHB said:

Agree.  Everything is just integrated into the aircraft.  Plus being able to choose how to set your performance is the icing on the cake.

Yes, that's actually what impresses me the most: Being able to basically gain up to 10 FPS when you need it by just clicking twice midflight without pause menu etc. Really useful on Vatsim when you will be otherweise be yelled at when you pause on approach 😄

21 minutes ago, Cognita said:

I shelved the 737 largely because I just could not go back to navigating all those menus in the FMC to handle ground services, etc; and the lack of Sim Brief integration and connectivity. They are small things, I agree, but I found they made a world of difference in my enjoyment of flying the aircraft.

 

There is full Simbrief compatibility with the 737. 
 

It was made very clear from the start that the core aircraft would be released and a new EFB would follow shortly after including all of the wonderful quality of life features similar to the Fenix. What you bought was a beta - a bit like how DCS release aircraft. Sounds like you didn’t quite get that if you’ve shelved it already. 

Edited June 3, 20224 yr by CrashEd

3 minutes ago, Tom Wright said:

SimBrief is integrated, you just have to download the file, which can be automated.

If you have the SimBrief Downloader installed and point it to your PMDG flightplans directory, the integration is no more complicated than it is using the EFB in the Fenix.

That's true, but what's really annoying and not "2022"-like is the need to ALT+TAB to the browser to read the VATSIM ATIS or get a simple metar. That's a big plus on the Fenix, you can do it all on the EFB. Really another level of immersion, esp. again on VATSIM.

11 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

That's true, but what's really annoying and not "2022"-like is the need to ALT+TAB to the browser to read the VATSIM ATIS or get a simple metar. That's a big plus on the Fenix, you can do it all on the EFB. Really another level of immersion, esp. again on VATSIM.

I just use my phone or tablet..

I also use the Navigraph toolbar/panel so don't have to tab out of the sim for anything.

I do get it, it is more polished in the Fenix. But these things really aren't that big of a deal for me and I don't think PMDG deserve half the flack they get for it. They've made one of the best aircraft there is for the sim right now, as have Fenix.

Edited June 3, 20224 yr by Tom Wright

59 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

The fly by wire tech, which in the real aircraft takes a total of 7 computers to run

But on the other hand,  those computers have clockspeeds of less than 20hz (not mega or giga, just hertz). Extremely jurassic by todays standards.

Similar CPU (Motorola 68000) that powers the Sega Genesis gaming console from late 80's.

8 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

But on the other hand,  those computers have clockspeeds of less than 20hz (not mega or giga, just hertz). Extremely jurassic by todays standards.

Similar CPU (Motorola 68000) that powers the Sega Genesis gaming console from late 80's.

Correct. Those 68000 are used for reliability, not for high speed complex calculations. They run autopilot logic. There’s a lot of them for redundancy, not horsepower.  
 

And yes the A320 is a more complex plane than the 737, fact, but not that much more complicated in sim terms. 

Edited June 3, 20224 yr by CrashEd

28 minutes ago, CrashEd said:

It was made very clear from the start that the core aircraft would be released and a new EFB would follow shortly after including all of the wonderful quality of life features similar to the Fenix. What you bought was a beta - a bit like how DCS release aircraft. Sounds like you didn’t quite get that if you’ve shelved it already. 

I think Mr. Randazzo and his team will be hard pressed to come up with something more elegant and feature-rich than @KatiePilot's EFB. The thing is simply a gem! The FBW one is also very very good. So there's fierce competition at place here 🙂 And it's never been a better time to be a simmer 😁

9 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

I think Mr. Randazzo and his team will be hard pressed to come up with something more elegant and feature-rich than @KatiePilot's EFB. The thing is simply a gem! The FBW one is also very very good. So there's fierce competition at place here 🙂 And it's never been a better time to be a simmer 😁

Couldn’t agree more mate, we are very lucky at the moment! 
 

But let’s see. PMDG have been at it for a long time and they’ve promised some nice new features in what will be a brand new EFB that will be used across the whole line in MSFS, so let’s see. I agree though, the Fenix EFB is incredible and it will take some beating!

3 hours ago, CrashEd said:

Sounds like you didn’t quite get that if you’ve shelved it already.

Yea, I got that. I have basically put the 737 in the hanger until those things come and then I am sure I will fly the 737 a great deal more. As I said they are small things, but they make a difference.

4 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

By the way I'm thinking of writing up a little guide with useful MSFS performance tips and tricks in a separate thread. I don't know how much people are tweaking their settings (I could probably spend less time tweaking lol). But if someone would find it useful I might do it on my next medium-haul flight. I'm planning for Cologne-Skiathos as we speak 🙂

The more guides the better. And if you know thing about how to stop FPS loss during flights it would be amazing to hear it. Did a flight from Trondheim to Munich earlier, 47 fps at top of climb, by the time got to top of descent struggling to make 30. I have no idea where these almost 20 frames went other than the fact that manipulators and main thread usage were very high. By the time I landed in Munich was struggling for 25 frames. Load back into to Munich immediately after with the same time and weather (live) and I have 45 frames at exactly the same spot. Very odd,