There was a time when 12 GB of GFX card memory was considered such a huge amount that it could never be used.

Indeed I thought I'd never manage to max it all out yet that's just what's happened.

Better start putting the $$ aside for the new 4000 series NVidia cards 😉

Cheers

With P3Dv4.5? Something must be terribly wrong with your hardware setup.

No nothing at all is wrong, I'm just running with pretty much maximum settings and then some.

Think sliders all the way to the right and many custom settings in the config to drive the display to the max.

Like texture size, shadows, autogen and reflections at max config settings beyond the slider limits and a draw distance also beyond that achieveable just via the sliders.

All about TTD (Test To Destruction), not literally though 🙂

Just to the point of knowing the max that can be achieved with the current hardware as it helps to learn the limitations for enabling a tighter software to hardware tune.

Kinda like a dyno tune.

Cheers

Well the easy thing to do, just move a few of your slider's to the left. Problem solved.I wish we knew something about the future of p3d. I have slowly moved tp x-plane and MSFS, The future of P3D, seems to be going down the toilet.

Edited October 5, 20223 yr by Patriot3810

So far I am running P3D just fine on a nVidia GTX 960 with 4 GB of VRAM. That is not to say I wouldn't like to upgrade to somewhere in the new nVidia 4000 range...

Jorgen

8 hours ago, Patriot3810 said:

Well the easy thing to do, just move a few of your slider's to the left. Problem solved.I wish we knew something about the future of p3d. I have slowly moved tp x-plane and MSFS, The future of P3D, seems to be going down the toilet.

Actually sliders to the left is not going to reduce the GFX ram use in this instance, the majority of use is from customisations in the prepar3d.cfg as well as the custom cloud shader in use. I've terrain textures set at 1024 x1024 via TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10 and draw distances of 40000.000000 and 64000.000000.

Anyway, it's not about the ram used, it's about maxing out as far as can be achieved, then winding back as needed for smooth perfomance while maximising hardware use.

And I wouldn't say P3D is going down the toilet, LM have never publicly stated a release until they release.

Yeah it's a bit on the pain side for enthusiasts, but we're not the target market, although doesn't mean that they shouldn't try harder as they still need development support, which no doubt they are getting, only we just don't hear about it.

If you can afford to purchase and run one of these @ ~40 million, then you should consider yourself the target market, where you'd also be running image generators with whatever scenery is current plus a ton or two of custom development programming.

Otherwise chillout and have a Virtual Beer is what I say, it's never been better for choices.

Cheers

 

2 hours ago, jorgensandersen said:

So far I am running P3D just fine on a nVidia GTX 960 with 4 GB of VRAM. That is not to say I wouldn't like to upgrade to somewhere in the new nVidia 4000 range...

Jorgen

Yes 🙂 a 4000 series with a rumoured 80% more perfomance than a 3000 series.

Sounds too good to be true but I hope it is.

Cheers

I know it won't happen, but it would be amazing if the next P3D had streaming scenery like MSFS,I bet people would come back to p3d. I haven't given up on p3d, i have spent alot of money that i don't want wasted.

11 hours ago, Patriot3810 said:

I know it won't happen

I don't see a reason why it couldn't happen...

It isn't going to happen, and here's why:

P3D is tailored and marketed to corporate, military and other government organizations. Many of these are highly secure and sensitive installations, where a routine online connection is, shall we say, somewhat frowned upon (and that is to put it mildly). Streaming scenery will require such an online connection.

And personally, the requirement for an online connection is one of the things that makes MSFS2020 a no-go for me. I want to fly around when it suits me, not when it suits my online provider. Granted, my provider is very, very stable, but still...

Jorgen

The servers with the scenery data could (and probably would) be set up somewhere else than those highly secure and sensitive installations.

19 minutes ago, jorgensandersen said:

And personally, the requirement for an online connection is one of the things that makes MSFS2020 a no-go for me. I want to fly around when it suits me, not when it suits my online provider. Granted, my provider is very, very stable, but still...

Agreed. It’s not just your own ISP but the Microsoft servers. On more than one occasion they have gone offline. P3D may not have the stunning scenery of MSFS but as long as your computer boots up you can fly.

And there actually ARE developers of sceneries that you can download and install...  🙂

Jorgen

I just hope something new comes along for p3d, P3DV5.4/ V6, It seems like developer's are dumping p3d left and right. Thankfully most of the airports i wanted actually became payware. I plan on staying with p3d for a good while. I have x-plane and MSFS installed as well, each sim has it's own good and bad.

14 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Agreed. It’s not just your own ISP but the Microsoft servers. On more than one occasion they have gone offline. P3D may not have the stunning scenery of MSFS but as long as your computer boots up you can fly.

Ray -- speaking of scenery -- I am a Megascenery (for US) and VORMexico (for Mexico/Central America) photosccenery user. Do you (or others) know how MSFS scenery compares to P3D with Megascenery? I am not interested in changing sims, just curious.

Have a great weekend all!

Edited October 6, 20223 yr by pgde