FEX Update is Released !!

[JSkorna 137]

And Danny wait until you change certain settings in FSX and have this revert back to 1024. Then what???? It won't be nonsense then!Jimhttp://www.hifisim.com/banners/hifi-community-sigbanner.jpghttp://www.hifisim.com/

[triton 0]

>And Danny wait until you change certain settings in FSX and>have this revert back to 1024. Then what???? It won't be>nonsense then!>>Jim>>Hmm..... Well Jim, then what?Will there be a big problem, will the world end?No... Will you need to do some horribly complicated stuff to fix fsx or your computer...No...Just run fex, it's that simple..so in summary:run fex launch fsx Enjoy stunning clouds with performance better than before..now, I spend too much time on the forums, I'm off to fly :)

[rich135 0]

>>> I haven't noticed anyone else reporting a performance hit and I'm certainly not getting any additional stutters or issues.My experience is identical to Nick's. At 4096, performance can drop to 6-10 FPS on a high-end optimized system under heavy weather. I am using GEX as well, but usually see 30 FPS locked outside of these weather conditions.Regards,Rich

[Guest danny68]

You should contact FSGS and talk to Michael.He's set my system up and I'm not experiencing this problem you are reporting. I've done a lot of testing and just not getting that problem.I'm not using GEX though. I'm using FTX and not seeing any performance issues at all. But all that said, if you are locking to 30fps that's way too high to avoid performance problems. You are simply not giving your system enough time to recover and keep head room. 20 fps is smooth video so if you lock to 30 and it drops by 6fps then this is still giving you 24 fps.Think about it. 24 fps in heavy clouds with 4096 cloud textures.For me that's BRILLIANT.Michale could explain this much better tnan me.Bottom line though is you are getting a whopping 24fps in heavy thunder clouds. And with 4096 textures.You TV runs 25 fps. That's smooth. Cinema runs at just 24 fps and that's flicker free.You've nail it if you are getting 24 fps.BRAVO

[JSkorna 137]

Will people remember to do this? If "yes", then great !! If not, then 1024 clouds it will be!!!Jimhttp://www.hifisim.com/banners/hifi-community-sigbanner.jpghttp://www.hifisim.com/

[GHarrall 494]

"Bottom line though is you are getting a whopping 24fps in heavy thunder clouds. And with 4096 textures.You TV runs 25 fps. That's smooth. Cinema runs at just 24 fps and that's flicker free.You've nail it if you are getting 24 fps."Oh no, not this again.24 FPS on a rendered graphic image is NOT the same as 24FPS in a movie!I'm not going to go into the technical details here again but just do some research.For a 'game' 60 FPS is the magic number. That's when 'graphics' take on the same speed and appearance as 'movies'.

[Dirk98 354]

>You should contact FSGS and talk to Michael.I'd recommend you to talk to Glenn a few posts below instead.

[Guest PPSFA]

>Will people remember to do this? If "yes", then great !! If>not, then 1024 clouds it will be!!!>>JimAnd if they don't, 4096 clouds rendered at 1024 stil are magnitudes better than 1024 clouds rendered at 1024 :-)XP Pro SP2-FSX SP2AMD FX60-8800GTS-2 Gigs RAMFEX-GEX-UTUSA-FSGenesis-and a bunch of other stuffComputer optomized by www.fs-gs.com

[Guest danny68]

With respect Dirk,www.fs-gs.com and Michale is the only way to go IMHO. I was just talking today to a friend of mine who just took up Michales service and he's absolutely thrilled by the results.People pay for FS-GS and they don't ask for their money back. They tell other people to use that service. Think about that.This guy said he had been using the various tweaks and fixes provided by various experts for example and this guy discovered these tweaks were in fact slowing his system down. These experts are the ones who jump on these kind of threads and give free advice. That advice can cost a lot.Michale does this for a living and knows exactly how to set things up for FSX and FS9.After running the 3 hours FS-GS service it took to get his computer going, and removing the various free tweaks on his system it is now running much faster.The 6pfs cost of frames is probably more like 2-3 fps if the system is set right and that's on a high end machine with fps in the higher end. On a low to medium spec machine that's more like 1-2 fps when in heavy overcast.Honestly, I would rather trust Michale on this one. No disrespect.

[rich135 0]

>>> My experience is identical to Nick's. At 4096, performance can drop to 6-10 FPS on a high-end optimized system under heavy weather. I am using GEX as well, but usually see 30 FPS locked outside of these weather conditions.UPDATE: I was using nHancer to set AA and AS in the nVidia driver. After defaulting back to "application control" and setting AA + AS in FSX, I no longer see the perf hit; I went from 6 FPS to 30 FPS in same weather scenario. I suspect setting application controlled in the driver allows FSX to apply AA and/or AS to certain objects, whereas setting in driver forces the GPU to process AA and/or AS on all objects (confirm?). In any event, this made a huge difference for me.Regards,Rich

[Guest Nick_N]

With Respect 'DannyI know what I am doing with FSX and why I set my system and the application up the way I did and nothing anyone can say is going to make it work better the way I want to use the system or the software.If I wish to make the higher res work better I probably can but in order to do so I will be removing or changing things I have no intension of changing just to satisfy a add-on in overcast/urban when the system runs smooth and flat out fast/clear otherwise. Part of that has to do with the AA settings I use to reduce AG tree shimmer and increase the quality of the image and its contrast. On the subject of FPS I can relay a few things about 24FPS in a game. Its not the frames, it's the frame transitions and there is a reason why Disney and Pixar or ILM for CGI will many times shoot @ 60FPS and above when it comes to animation or generated art. I am by no means saying FSX must run that high but I am saying a properly configured system has better frame transitions than one which is not configured correctly. 30FPS is in line with my TFT refresh rate and since I use Vsync lock, 30 locked is correct for my hardware as 24 throws the visual transition from frame to frame off making it appear less fluid.I would be quite surprised to learn someone is suggesting "one value works for all systems" in FSX. The frame lock can vary and its an area one must experiment with. Some may find 24 best where others may find 26, 28, 30, etc delivers the visual appeal and best result.YMMY is more in line with FSX tuning.

[Guest Nick_N]

yes Rich, that can have an affect on the performance with clouds. If you are satisfied with the image quality and you do not see tree or AG shimmer that annoys you, then the option to use the app for AA control is OK.It all comes down to what works for you!;-)

[Mace 1,902]

>>If there is anyone else who wishes to jump in on the>performance subject and toot a horn, please read what I posted>and clarified very clearly first.>I'll jump in on the performance subject. What driver ver are you running?It has been reported by C. Norris that an older nVidia driver (he didn't specify which one) had issues with the 4096 textures. He then stated that a newer driver (again, no specificity) exhibited no problems.Just in case, I am going to download the latest WHQL'sRhettFS box: E8500 (@ 3.80 ghz), AC Freezer 7 Pro, ASUS P5E3 Premium, BFG 8800GTX 756 (nVidia 169 WHQL), 4gb DDR3 1600 Patriot Cas7 7-7-7-20 (2T), PC Power 750, WD 150gb 10000rpm Raptor, Seagate 500gb, Silverstone TJ09 case, Vista Ultimate 64ASX Client: AMD 3700+ (@ 2.6 ghz), 7800GT

[Guest Nick_N]

174.74 beta is still the best performer/looker on my system.I usually test them well before WHQL

[Dirk98 354]

>With respect Dirk,C'mon Danny, with all due respect. I was one of the first curious customers, maybe even in the first dozen, who used the service. The most I could say looking back: it was fun with Michael online. Most of the tweaks Michael ordered me (lol) to execute during the 5 hour seesion had been known and/or listed in my past notes. And honestly those tweaks applied mostly to small propeller planes at 1600x1200 res (I had a good system back then) and mostly in the outside views of which I did not care so much. Did I benefit from that service? Oh yes, I did, but for me those tweaks were honestly no miracles. I learnt a few practical ways to change things in OS/FS9. Anyway, a few days later I was back to my FPS-hungry airliners at my usual settings with a few additions I learnt from Michael, quite a happy satisfied customer. Will I use the service in FSX - No. But I'll meticulously heed recomendations and tons of useful suggestions offered by Nick_N, which I did already. And btw I confirm, 24fps of the rendered GFX image is not the same viaual quality as 24fps you get in the movie, by far. Who gave you that, I don't think it was Michael?