10 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Allright, so you're apparently not a fan of FSHud and jump at the dev at any chance you can get. 

No need to jump in and post accusations, I have absolutely never posted anything «against» FSHud. Geez, people are sensitive days... it is simply a FACT that saying something is smooth without giving a number and the settings behind is an utterly useless statement. Seen so many times here and elsewhere and it always leads to discussions. 

So it seems that it was made clear that the claim was FSHud is not lowering FPS more compared to other AI solutions, fair enough, must have missed that one, my bad.

2 minutes ago, AnkH said:

Geez, people are sensitive days...

Haha, I anticipated something like this. Not willing to admit you came across too strong you accuse me of being sensitive. Nice one, and you epitomize the spirit of Avsim and the internet in general these days. 

19 minutes ago, AnkH said:

No need to jump in and post accusations, I have absolutely never posted anything «against» FSHud. Geez, people are sensitive days... it is simply a FACT that saying something is smooth without giving a number and the settings behind is an utterly useless statement. Seen so many times here and elsewhere and it always leads to discussions. 

So it seems that it was made clear that the claim was FSHud is not lowering FPS more compared to other AI solutions, fair enough, must have missed that one, my bad.

I think there is something you don't understand,
let me ask you - which other AI Solutions?

Because currently there are only two solutions that available:
1. MSFS controlled AI Traffic - which is used by all traffic add-ons (FSLTL, AIG, FS Traffic and so on).
AIFlow, AIGround - which is also based on MSFS controlled AI Traffic by applying different modifications on it.

2. FSHud controlled AI Traffic - which is injected separately and fully controlled by FSHud.

And of course competitors presented traffic control in their video while we still have no idea how it will impact (if so) the FPS. 

Edited July 16, 20241 yr by FSHud

1 minute ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Not willing to admit you came across too strong you accuse me of being sensitive. 

I think the FSHud dev is totally capable of «defending» himself and telling me directly if I was too strong, no need for a self-proclaimed advocate jumping in for him here.

@FSHud I was referring to the AI Solution as total, including models, repaints and how the planes are handled in the sim. Means: your 30% FPS loss is comparable to what we loose using FSLTL and AIG and I missed that you made this clear. Sorry for that.

1 minute ago, AnkH said:

no need for a self-proclaimed advocate jumping in for him here.

Again with the attitude and accusations. I rest my case.

31 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Again with the attitude and accusations. I rest my case.

Everyone has it's own opinion.
At some point @AnkH is right, by the end FSHud does have FPS impact.

I think it's hard or almost impossible to prove something to someone with technical level of comparing aircraft repaint to AI Solution in general (which is basically bulk of pixels completely rendered on MSFS side).
And something like FSHud that needs to run and perform GeoSpacial calculations almost every frame just to keep the aircraft on correct path - otherwise aircraft will end up in the grass.
Or the ability to force the aircraft to land/takeoff according to ATC calculated active runway.
Or define taxi path according ATC requirements.
All those are impossible to do with MSFS AI Controlled traffic engine.

@AnkH - FSHud is not only about AI Traffic. You can turn off the traffic and use it as ATC program.

Edited July 16, 20241 yr by FSHud

22 minutes ago, FSHud said:

 - FSHud is not only about AI Traffic. You can turn off the traffic and use it as ATC program.

I am totally aware of this. Seriously, I was criticizing two points, one of which I already agreed that I was wrong (the relative FPS hit), the other one I remain stubborn, you cant say something is running "smooth" without giving numbers and specify the settings in the sim. Or at LEAST the resolution. It is simply a fact that your "smooth" might not be considered "smooth" by someone else... Basically no big deal until someone jumped in throwing totally false accusations around by blaming me to have some sort of personal battle with you... I do not, rest assured.

Looking forward to seeing this software progress. I have had no issues with it flying modern airliners on 'fully featured routes'. I am still tweaking to get MORE ai with less performance hit. For some reason if I run FSTL alone using the API key for flight direction I get 20+ planes locally flying realistic routes. Turning FSHUD on I get maybe 2 or 3 flying the same route. I DO fly remote places though.

2 features I would personally love would be 

1) In plane config you can specify performance data/runway length/ceiling/climb rate etc but NOT avionics. As I often use planes with only VOR/NDB I cannot get FSHUD to give me relevant outing unless I pick somewhere with ONLY vor/dme/ndb approaches. If I pick a VOR route using station names it is accepted in the new flight planner but once near destination I will get 'expect RNAV approach with star etc none of which I can use so I turn atc off at that point.

2) Is it possible for FSHUD to use a terrain map for guidance? I find it completely ignores terrain. For example the following route:

NZTL.29 DCT RY DCT QN DCT LLUNA DCT KCREK DCT HOMER DCT ADA DCT NZMF.11

Once over QN I was told to descend to 2400 feet by HOMER (5500 feet MSA) and expect vectors for a visual 29 approach but at no point would any of these directions have NOT led me into multiple mountains. I use VNAV guidance with the TDS Gtn750 with custom altitudes at the waypoints if I am not using atc. It would be nice though if FSHUD ATC also had minimum altitude restrictions for IFR waypoints. IRL the local controllers would know the area and guide you safely.

I like the voices and the way it integrates with FSTL.

I just want MORE is all

:D

 

2 minutes ago, AnkH said:

I am totally aware of this. Seriously, I was criticizing two points, one of which I already agreed that I was wrong (the relative FPS hit), the other one I remain stubborn, you cant say something is running "smooth" without giving numbers and specify the settings in the sim. Or at LEAST the resolution. It is simply a fact that your "smooth" might not be considered "smooth" by someone else... Basically no big deal until someone jumped in throwing totally false accusations around by blaming me to have some sort of personal battle with you... I do not, rest assured.

I agree with you regarding the "smooth".

But there are two things:
1. In our environments  - the FPS impact is almost the same  - no matter what MSFS settings or resolution you're using, you loose around 20 FPS in any case.
The environments are:

i7 8700 3.2 GHz  RTX 3060 32GB RAM - All settings are on ultra except TOD (which is on 50) DX11 and 4K monitor.
i5 13600KF RTX 4070 32GB RAM - All settings are on ultra DX12 with Frame Generation and standard monitor.

So as you can see, completely different machines with different settings gives same impact of 20 FPS - which seems like something to expect from FSHud.

Another thing is:
Some users are complaining about high FPS drop.
In some cases - users are complaining about higher than 20 FPS drop and we still don't have a solution to reproduce this problem.
Others are not providing any information by just saying "High FPS drop".

So currently I can't say the root problem cause, but I don't think it is related to MSFS settings at all.

I definitely like the look of the updates.

I'm curious though if there will be any recurring fees to use use the AI voices (allowing the use of SAPI voices instead means it's not a problem for me personally if the AI voices will have fees)

13 minutes ago, Matchstick said:

I definitely like the look of the updates.

I'm curious though if there will be any recurring fees to use use the AI voices (allowing the use of SAPI voices instead means it's not a problem for me personally if the AI voices will have fees)

As said in the video - "No additional costs or fees".
All AI Based voices will come as part of application and will be increased in next updates.

3 hours ago, FSHud said:

70 to 50

28%...not that less (just my opinion). 

I would be careful with making statements about not much or much....

It is so depending on users setup and preferences.

Why not just listen (read).....and take out the info you need to enhance the application, instead of stepping in a debate discussion about amount of cpu usage in FPS? 

🙂

 

36 minutes ago, FSHud said:

As said in the video - "No additional costs or fees".
All AI Based voices will come as part of application and will be increased in next updates.

That's cool, looking forward to seeing what comes on future videos

30 minutes ago, mpo910 said:

28%...not that less (just my opinion). 

I would be careful with making statements about not much or much....

It is so depending on users setup and preferences.

Why not just listen (read).....and take out the info you need to enhance the application, instead of stepping in a debate discussion about amount of cpu usage in FPS? 

🙂

 

It requires tight cooperation with user (like making several calls to see together how it looks like, provide custom version and so on).
Those things are not written in logs or somewhere - mostly it is under the hood of MSFS or system. And you can't measure all of that.
Besides - it can be (as you said) personal opinion or completely something else.

Until now, we've not found any enthusiasts who agree to do that (we've posted this mention in our Discord channel). 

Edited July 16, 20241 yr by FSHud

in my case  with you atc progrma is also having big problems with performance to the point that the atc addon had more cpu usage than MSFS itself i never see a addon than spend more cpu usage than the sim at was only around 15-20 ai traffic injection.

i think in the last 6 months i only use the atc few times to test updates but for now  i prefer using the  traffic injector of FSLT or AIG cause i can have 30-40 ai traffic and fps still over 30 fps and no many stutters but with your atc even with 10 ai traffic is already big stutters and fps around 17-20 so is unplayable with that performance probably if you have a high end cpu is ok but  having worse performance than the default  traffic injector when that injector is the same from FSX 2006 which was always criticized of  be outdated  and having terrible performance   and to me the point of a modern  atc addon that inject traffic  now is to have better performance  than default.