FSHud Performance Latest Beta Build

[RALF9636 1,975]

28 minutes ago, threexgreen said:

Did you notice any loss/lack of traffic due to traffic injection being paused?

I have deliberately paused traffic injection by setting the balancer limit above my FPS-cap on approach on several flights now and did not notice any loss of traffic or any issues with already injected traffic.

And it did help for smoothness.

 

[Cpt_Piett 4,718]

1 hour ago, iborg1979 said:

Had the speed restriction issue on approach. Not too handicapping, but a fix will be welcome.

Same. I disregarded it after a while as I couldn’t go from 170kts to “normal speed” (which I assume means 250kts below 10,000ft) on approach. 

1 hour ago, threexgreen said:

Did you notice any loss/lack of traffic due to traffic injection being paused?

I didn’t notice it, but I assume it both freezed injection and removed, as this happened in my previous tests. I had deliberately set the parked + active amount higher than what I know my CPU can handle at these airports, to see how performance balancer worked. 

I would not set things up to be this bottlenecked by the CPU, and it did cause some stutters. But again, for testing purposes- and I was positively surprised by the CapFrameX performance test. 

38 minutes ago, RALF9636 said:

I have deliberately paused traffic injection by setting the balancer limit above my FPS-cap on approach on several flights now and did not notice any loss of traffic or any issues with already injected traffic.

And it did help for smoothness.

I went the other way and set the limit just below my FPS cap. It worked well though, and without the performance balancer it was much worse.

• FPS lock 60 using RTSS
• traffic pause 58
• traffic removal 56

Schiphol approach was so busy that I got a bit overwhelmed, as I was recording the video and talking on top of it. I probably missed some instructions 🫣

Edited April 17 by Cpt_Piett

[FSHud 213]

To clarify:

Speed instructions and vectoring instructions does require more adjustments and tuning, currently it's a bit annoying - therefore version 1.3 is still in BETA.
Therefore those issues (speed and vectoring) is our current top-priority task we're working on.

We will release next build in several days with fixes and improvements for those issues.

Thank you

[Shrek1970 5]

@FSHud can you also work on runway selection, its worse than its ever been.  Wind is 320/08 kts and FSHUD selects rwy16... 

[iborg1979 99]

2 minutes ago, Shrek1970 said:

@FSHud can you also work on runway selection, its worse than its ever been.  Wind is 320/08 kts and FSHUD selects rwy16... 

Second that. Yesterday I took off from OMAA with a 36kt tail wind. It was sporty. I heard my SLC passengers scream 😅

I was supposed to land on RW16L at OTHH... 'til I saw planes taking off in the 34 heading. Then I changed the arrival settings for a 34 visual, which was uneventful.

[FSHud 213]

1 hour ago, Shrek1970 said:

@FSHud can you also work on runway selection, its worse than its ever been.  Wind is 320/08 kts and FSHUD selects rwy16... 

It is worked as well - but we need more information.

It’s best to open a ticket from the application.

Because the logic underneath is much more complex (it’s not that it selects incorrect runways all the time) but depends on many things:

Weather forecast, METAR, airport layout and so on…

[Cpt_Piett 4,718]

Just arrived at San Diego, lots of activity, quite impressive! I tuned the settings a bit further to optimize performance. 

(increased RTSS-lock to 63 and adjusted performance balancer accordingly)

Edited April 17 by Cpt_Piett

[Tino 81]

14 hours ago, FSHud said:

To clarify:

Speed instructions and vectoring instructions does require more adjustments and tuning, currently it's a bit annoying - therefore version 1.3 is still in BETA.
Therefore those issues (speed and vectoring) is our current top-priority task we're working on.

We will release next build in several days with fixes and improvements for those issues.

Thank you

This is the only issue I currently have with the program. It takes some extra time, but I noticed If I keep my speed to the first requested selection, it seems to work out just fine. Keep up the great work and looking forward to the next beta update! 

[threexgreen 3,142]

10 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Just arrived at San Diego, lots of activity, quite impressive! I tuned the settings a bit further to optimize performance. 

(increased RTSS-lock to 63 and adjusted performance balancer accordingly)

What FPS did you get in that scenario? Also, I assume that's with frame generation. Do you know what FPS you would get without FG?

[Cpt_Piett 4,718]

2 hours ago, threexgreen said:

What FPS did you get in that scenario? Also, I assume that's with frame generation. Do you know what FPS you would get without FG?

I had locked FPS to 63 I think. So got around that throughout the flight from Las Vegas. Without FG is half of that. 

[threexgreen 3,142]

15 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

I had locked FPS to 63 I think. So got around that throughout the flight from Las Vegas. Without FG is half of that. 

Oh, I didn't think you actually achieved the locked rate of 63/32-ish in that screenshot.

That's what I'd love an airport to look like. I'm gonna have to try that with the balancer, stutters or not.

Is the display of AI aircraft GPU or CPU-bound?

Edited April 18 by threexgreen

[Nick1991 0]

Hi guys,

I'm using FSHUD and I don't have any problem on the first leg. When I start the 2nd leg a little bit of degradation and on the 3rd is dropping to 23fps. 

I have a CPU usage reaching 80%. If I use the performance balancer it remove all my traffic even with those settings.

I have a video showing that as soon I close FSHUD the fps came back to 70/71...

Using a RTX 4070 Super with frame generator on Microsoft and a CPU 12th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-12600KF   3.70 GHz

 

P.S. I think this is even worst on the long haul.

 

 

[Cpt_Piett 4,718]

On 4/18/2024 at 12:33 PM, threexgreen said:

Oh, I didn't think you actually achieved the locked rate of 63/32-ish in that screenshot.

That's what I'd love an airport to look like. I'm gonna have to try that with the balancer, stutters or not.

Is the display of AI aircraft GPU or CPU-bound?

Agree, a busy airport is always nice! My CPU can’t really deal with a packed Heathrow, but Manchester and Oslo is fine around 60 FPS.

AI traffic (+ATC) is really heavy on mainthread/CPU. Not exactly sure about GPU, haven’t really tested. Perhaps more VRAM is needed with high traffic settings.

[threexgreen 3,142]

2 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Agree, a busy airport is always nice! My CPU can’t really deal with a packed Heathrow, but Manchester and Oslo is fine around 60 FPS.

AI traffic (+ATC) is really heavy on mainthread/CPU. Not exactly sure about GPU, haven’t really tested. Perhaps more VRAM is needed with high traffic settings.

I tested at O'Hare and I can pretty much only use 30/20. Anything above that is way too heavy on performance. I also tried the balancer feature, and while it did work, it's stopping traffic injection before it ever gets near actual 30/20 based on a 30 FPS threshold. This is actually why I didn't use the balancer before. Whether I use tested settings to maintain a desired frame rate or set traffic way higher and use the balancer to honor the FPS threshold is pretty much the same thing, i. e. the amount of traffic is the same, as are FPS.

[Cpt_Piett 4,718]

16 minutes ago, threexgreen said:

I tested at O'Hare and I can pretty much only use 30/20. Anything above that is way too heavy on performance. I also tried the balancer feature, and while it did work, it's stopping traffic injection before it ever gets near actual 30/20 based on a 30 FPS threshold. This is actually why I didn't use the balancer before. Whether I use tested settings to maintain a desired frame rate or set traffic way higher and use the balancer to honor the FPS threshold is pretty much the same thing, i. e. the amount of traffic is the same, as are FPS.

Currently I use 200/200 and use performance balancer to achieve a target FPS around 60. It’s a bit similar to how AutoFPS adjusts TLOD. 

30/20 is the optimal in terms of smoothness on my rig - but using performance balancer is not bad. Of course there the popping in and out of aircraft.

Edited April 20 by Cpt_Piett