I'm just remembering that the other day, while flying over a photogrammetry area, I thought it might be useful to have a third profile, in addition to the VFR and IFR ones, but just for those areas that demand so much. I often find myself having to manually adjust the TLOD parameters when I'm flying over these areas, while outside of them, the VFR and IFR settings work just fine for me.

8 hours ago, Reset XPDR said:

 

If you could let me know the appropriate simconnect variable, it would save me the trouble. Thanks.

 

Sure i use this one for checking the current Sim Rate. Thanks for tryint to implement it 🙂

(P:SIMULATION RATE, Enum)

20 hours ago, Maddormo said:

I'm just remembering that the other day, while flying over a photogrammetry area, I thought it might be useful to have a third profile, in addition to the VFR and IFR ones, but just for those areas that demand so much. I often find myself having to manually adjust the TLOD parameters when I'm flying over these areas, while outside of them, the VFR and IFR settings work just fine for me.

The way I have coded the two profiles is not really conducive to adding a third profile without some major rework, not to mention there is no UI real estate left around the profile options to fit a third one, unless I change the control type from radio buttons to a drop down list which then is less intuitive for non-expert users. Given all this, I'll just leave it as it is for now.

An update on progress today. I've managed to code up 9 settings to try reducing when conditions become marginal (ie. unable to achieve target FPS or VRAM overflow impending).

Bascially, when unchecked the settings are your default MSFS settings and mine are with the Ultra preset at 4K, no FG of any flavour at LVFR's KSAN with my beloved Concorde. As such, this is the before image:

Then, when checked, these settings are put to the lowest value possible, without turning them off completely for the analog settings eg. low not off and off for the digital ones eg. RTShadows and DispMap. Here's the after image with them all checked:

As you can see, the after shows an 11 FPS improvement (or 19% improvement) and VRAM has reduced by around 1.5GB (or a 7% reduction), both of which are not as large as I thought they would be, but that's possibly because my aircraft is stationary and some objects have not been fully flushed out until I move far enough away from them.

Anyway, I thought some of you might be interested on how this is going. Note that all the checkboxes at the bottom are for testing purposes only, so it is easy to turn all or individual settings down and see what happens. I just have to do a bit more regression testing to make sure I haven't broken anything putting in this test code, but otherwise it should be ready soon for a test program to see what impact these settings have on other users' systems and whether it is worth continuing with their development.

You are telling me that the Justflight Concorde works in MSFS2024 by those images?

12 minutes ago, AnkH said:

You are telling me that the Justflight Concorde works in MSFS2024 by those images?

If you mean the DC Designs one, yes it does. There are a few minor issues with it in 2024 but nothing bad enough to stop me doing full flights in it.

What happens if we have one of these new options configured as off in the sim settings? For example, RT shadows is one of the first things I turned off in the sim because it destroys my 3070. I assume the app won't modify that, right?

Hopefully this will only work in Expert mode, and we can continue to use a simple mode that just changes TLOD and OLOD depending on whether we are achieving the target FPS?

5 hours ago, Maddormo said:

What happens if we have one of these new options configured as off in the sim settings? For example, RT shadows is one of the first things I turned off in the sim because it destroys my 3070. I assume the app won't modify that, right?

If a digital setting like is configured off by default, it will not change with toggling it's respective checkbox because the choices are: checked - off, unchecked - original setting, which in your case is off. ie. always off.

As previously mentioned, this is just a test configuration for easy triggering of an effect to low/off and back to default again.  The final implementation will be automatic, activated only in the most dire of performance conditions, and will likely reduce any of these settings when required, to off if necessary, then restore them to what they were on restoration of performance or exiting the program.

4 hours ago, abennett said:

Hopefully this will only work in Expert mode, and we can continue to use a simple mode that just changes TLOD and OLOD depending on whether we are achieving the target FPS?

The test check boxes will only be visible and active in expert mode and only in the test version. If some/all of these settings appear worthwhile to deal with marginal performance conditions, I intend to have them activate automatically in both expert and non-expert modes, with possibly some configurability in the former mode. This is consistent with the design philosophy I've used for non-expert mode since the app was developed ie. a feature is enabled automatically if deemed beneficial to non-expert users.

Edited March 14, 20251 yr by Reset XPDR

27 minutes ago, Reset XPDR said:

If some/all of these settings appear worthwhile to deal with marginal performance conditions, I intend to have them activate automatically in both expert and non-expert modes, with possibly some configurability in the former mode.

I think most likely they will be useful - I can think of a number of occasions where they might be relevant. I'm anxious to start testing - I'm very curious what the performance impact of each of these parameters are. 

Edited March 14, 20251 yr by Cpt_Piett

1 hour ago, Cpt_Piett said:

I think most likely they will be useful - I can think of a number of occasions where they might be relevant. I'm anxious to start testing - I'm very curious what the performance impact of each of these parameters are. 

I'm nearly there. I am still wresting with the inconsistent way some of the settings denote an off condition, but should have it nutted out shortly.

FYI, these new test check boxes will only change the 2D, not VR, values for now as it is just a concept demonstrator and it is difficult to change such settings when in VR with a headset on anyway.

Everything is now ready for the start of the 0.4.4.8 test program. If you wish to participate, head on over to my github discussion thead here.

This release will initially aim to quantify whether 9 specific key MSFS settings have a notable improvement in FPS and/or VRAM reduction when reduced. If any or all of these prove useful for this purpose, the next phase will be to automate them when performance conditions are marginal.

As usual, this new test release will also bring some bug fixes and optimisations, the most notable in the first release being the updating of the app from .NET 7 to 8 as the former is no longer being supported by MS and as a result will potentially become vulnerable to future security issues.

Did I understand this correct: with the next update we will be able to use a VRAM Limit as defining factor if settings are dynamically reduced? Would be great for me, as this is the main reason I use AutoFPS atm. 

9 minutes ago, AnkH said:

With the next update we will be able to use a VRAM Limit as defining factor if settings are dynamically reduced?

I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. Can you please rephrase. Thanks.