Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
JU108

Flythemaddog vs PMDG 737 performance?

Recommended Posts

Wondering if I should buy the Maddog, but how heavy is the Maddog on the performance vs PMDG 737? 
 

PMDG is running beautifully on my machine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The PMDG 737 is much heavier on frames than the Maddog.

The Maddog is the least taxing in performance out of all the releases lately.

BAe 146, PMDG 737, Fenix A320

FROM MY EXPERIENCE & HARDWARE

Edited by blueshark747

Asus Maximus X Hero Z370/ Windows 10
MSI Gaming X 1080Ti (2100 mhz OC Watercooled)
8700k (4.7ghz OC Watercooled)
32GB DDR4 3000 Ram
500GB SAMSUNG 860 EVO SERIES SSD M.2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of three new tubes with the pc specs listed in the signature at 4k, the best is the 737. The Maddog is a close second by a couple of frames. Very similar but the PMDG does win it out by like 2-3fps.

The worst is easily the Fenix. Still playable but noticeably worse in fps performance.


Nick Silver

http://www.youtube.com/user/socalf1fan

Ryzen 7 5800x, 32gb ddr4 3200mhz ram, RTX 3080 FE, HP Reverb G2 v2, 4K Tv Monitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that you‘ve heard two opposing opinions, I‘ll finish that up with: on my system 737 and Maddog perform equally.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get PMDG 737 no doubt. Performance aside, the quality of texturing and modeling of PMDG 737 is top notch and cheaper 

Edited by omarsmak30
  • Like 3

AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D, 64GB DDR5 6000MHZ RAM, RTX 2080Super 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, omarsmak30 said:

Get PMDG 737 no doubt.

The OP didn't asked which one to buy, since he said he already has the PMDG 737. He asked if he should get the Maddog as well, but was worried about performances.

I'd said if the PMDG run "beautifully" on his system, I'm sure he won't have any issues with the Maddog as well, their both perform good, and any fps differences are really minor.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have all of them and havent spent so much time on MSFS before they were released. I dont know why but i found performance to be almost different day by day. Maybe the constant online thing is pushing performance? 

I7-4770K@4,5 HT  GTX1080TI ,32GB RAM.

Best performance on my system

1 PMDG737

2 MADDOGX (-3%)

3 Fenix (-5-10%)

Michael Moe 

Edited by Michael Moe
  • Like 2

Michael Moe

 

fs2crew_747_banner1.png

Banner_FS2Crew_Emergency.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Michael Moe said:

I have all of them and havent spent so much time on MSFS before they were released. I dont know why but i found performance to be almost different day by day. Maybe the constant online thing is pushing performance? 

I7-4770K@4,5 HT  GTX1080TI ,32GB RAM.

Best performance on my system

1 PMDG737

2 MADDOGX (-3%)

3 Fenix (-5-10%)

Michael Moe 

Nope, the Maddog and to a greater extent the Fenix have deeper system modelling than the PMDG aircraft. PMDG aircraft have modelled almost every system, but as a boolean system (= condition is either ON (1) or OFF (0), or something like this), while the other two have simulated the systems themselves, so that different systems can also interact, e.g. on failures. Pretty hard to explain, but anyway those calculations use more CPU power. (That's not the only reason for different performance, of course.)
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Maddog just needs some texture and sound work, other than that its up there with Fenix and PMDG as far as simulation, too bad its not flown in the Real Word much anymore due to being a old bird.

Edited by jbdbow1970

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

Nope, the Maddog and to a greater extent the Fenix have deeper system modelling than the PMDG aircraft. PMDG aircraft have modelled almost every system, but as a boolean system (= condition is either ON (1) or OFF (0), or something like this), while the other two have simulated the systems themselves, so that different systems can also interact, e.g. on failures. Pretty hard to explain, but anyway those calculations use more CPU power. (That's not the only reason for different performance, of course.)
 

Nope? What do you meen by that?

First part of my message is about MSFS itself and the performance on that platform which changes .

Second part is facts about the performance between airliners.

Michael Moe 


Michael Moe

 

fs2crew_747_banner1.png

Banner_FS2Crew_Emergency.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both and really not notice anyone worse then the other, but I do like the MD80 since it is 'old school'.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

but as a boolean system

How do they get parameters like voltages, pressures, quantities, etc., out of boolean systems? Unless one has access to the source code, how does one know which systems are more deeply simulated?

Thanks.


John Wiesenfeld KPBI | FAA PPL/SEL/IFR in a galaxy long ago and far away | VATSIM PILOT P2

i7-11700K, 32 GB DDR4 3.6 GHz, MSI RTX 3070ti, Dell 4K monitor

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Michael Moe said:

Nope? What do you meen by that?

First part of my message is about MSFS itself and the performance on that platform which changes .

Second part is facts about the performance between airliners.

Michael Moe 

Uh yes sorry, I accidentally skipped parts of your post while reading. I thought you were connecting performance of those airliners to the Fenix being "online" (metars, simbrief etc.) and the others not. I need to read better next time...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, starstream707 said:

I have both and really not notice anyone worse then the other, but I do like the MD80 since it is 'old school'.

Yeah, same. It's the perfect blend of old and new. It has an FMS and can follow a flight plan by fixes rather than the pain in the butt that is VOR to VOR navigation, but you still have to manually handle a lot of systems that are automated in the newer birds. Just a fun plane to fly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course the MD80 has the least performance since it is a direct port from P3D.  No great textures or sound to process.  It was a waste of money for me, but you may like low quality textures and sound ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...