Cruachan

Hi Oliver, My interpretation of Adam’s response to the question was that LM saw no driver for change and that there was a tacit acceptance of the current situation.....whatever that might be. Probably best to avoid discussing this any further in case the Moderators of this forum become fidgety! Best regards, Mike

Hi Rick, Oliver You both make very good points and I readily concede that I am not the expert here, which is why I’m grateful for your involvement in this conversation. It’s all too easy to become caught up in the hyperbole rooted in enthusiasm for a notion which might, for some, turn out to be too expensive in terms of implementation, using currently available resources, and impractical when the end result hardly justified the effort and time involved. However, I am reading that actual API changes are, in fact, afoot in the digital gaming world so it’s more than just a gut feeling. Also, and despite the often careless usage of the word ‘Game’ as applied to Prepar3D, I am sensing a shift in the stance taken hitherto by LM who are becoming much more accepting of the wider adoption and appeal of their flight simulation project extending far beyond their prioritised commercial and military commitments and, of course, this is very welcome. Nevertheless, and perish the thought, if there was a renewed hardening of this softer attitude and the direction of future development shifted away from engaging the enthusiastic ‘hobbyist’ then, and very quickly, the stagnation scenario could become the reality that pushes students of flight simulation and third party developers towards other platforms. Regards, Mike

Hi Oliver, Thanks for joining in. It’s about time we heard from those, like yourself, with the hands on knowledge and experience and are able, and willing, to present a different perspective on this topic. What you are stating is undoubtedly true. However, I do believe LM may be approaching, if not already reached, a crossroad in the further development of Prepar3D. How often do we hear of users complain about the performance of the sim and who are quick to attribute their woes to an antiquated engine that must also be presenting ever increasing development problems for LM? What they have achieved to date is quite remarkable, but there continued reliance on aging and inefficient coding is also risky. How much more can they accomplish before further development begins to stagnate? In the face of competition, how much longer can they hang on without risking having to shelve the project? I think we can all accept that these eventualities would be in no one’s interest. Commercially the survival of the project may be a moot point, but this is changing with the acceptance that their sim has a much wider appeal and this is owed, in the main, to the involvement of legions of third party Addon Developers. If this was Microsoft then it is likely, as has happened previously, that those that hold the purse strings would be ruling the day. Microsoft have their own headaches regarding the burgeoning numbers of Vulkan adopters. I don’t know whether it is technically possible, but I wouldn’t mind betting that, right now, they are exploring the possibility of making DirectX 12 available to Windows 7/8.1 users in an attempt to preserve their market share. I won’t be holding my breath on that one, but you never know! I suspect, like many others do, that in ‘VULKAN we are glimpsing a much brighter and hopeful future. Doubtless technical difficulties will abound during such a transition but, at some point, I feel certain that such difficult decisions must be made to ensure the future viability and success of this simulator. My feeling is that LM are in this for the long haul and wish to push advances towards their logical conclusion. To ignore the possibilities offered by embracing this remarkably innovative API, which has future-proofing written to its core, would be extremely shortsighted and might even be considered as being foolish. There is really no reason why work on versions 4.x and 5 can not proceed in tandem since it seems unlikely that LM are exposed to the same financial constraints as, say, Microsoft. I suspect that the ongoing development of Prepar3D represents a very small slice of their overall budget and, in any case, the undoubted solid belief in their project is what really matters to all of us. Regards, Mike

Hi Everyone, Truly, it just gets better and better! Read this article posted on 3 July: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/03/vulkan-1-1-adds-multi-gpu-directx-compatibility-as-khronos-looks-to-the-future/ In particular, look at the content of paragraph 6. There seems little remaining doubt in my mind that Vulkan has achieved parity with DirectX 12 and it’s cross-platform compatibility makes it the more attractive API for present day Developers. It appears to have huge support and that support is growing by the day. They can’t all be wrong! Regards, Mike

IMHO Windows 7 was/is the jewel in the crown. Shame they won't continue limited support alongside Windows 10 for those (and there are many) who continue to prefer it. Anyway, that's all by the by. Bob, Thanks for your help and while I can now display the frame rate counter in AF2, for some reason it still won't appear on a ShadowPlay recording. Here's one I made earlier. Short and sweet - ShadowPlay creates huge files and my upload speeds to YouTube rarely approach 1Mbps. This is just a quick flight over New York City at 4.00pm in Aerofly FS2 using the new Vulkan (beta!) API instead of OpenGL. Everything graphically speaking was maxed out. Frame rates were sustained throughout at around 120fps!! You'll have to take my word for that, I'm afraid. https://youtu.be/ghwi-HU70EM Regards, Mike

Hi Bob, Could be related to your NVidia drivers. I’m on their latest official WHQL drivers for Windows 7 64bit (see sig) which, I’m assuming, support Vulkan. I note that there are more recent Beta versions available: https://developer.nvidia.com/vulkan-driver Interesting info regarding GeForce Experience and the frame rate counter. How do I enable it? Edit: Another thought occurred to me: This may be a complete red herring but I’m wondering whether this is simply a case of Windows 10’s security arm blocking unusual or unexpected driver activity? If Rob is following this thread perhaps he can shed some light. Regards, Mike

Hi Ed, Thanks for the clarification and, yes, I could have expressed this better. There is little doubt in my mind that with each minor revision of Prepar3D v4 there have been in improvements in multi-threaded capability. Currently, under v4.3, I have disabled my previous Affinity Mask setting and am running very smoothly without stutters or extended pauses (suspecting the latter are ORBX related) with HT=ON. This is with a stripped down P3D (for 3rd Party testing purposes) that approaches that of a default installation. I was referring to the heavy loading of core 0 by Prepar3D and the appearance of stutters when the loading approaches or achieves 100%. My understanding is that this will change under Vulkan and also, presumably, DirectX 12 where there will be less use of the CPU and a better distribution of the workload across all the available cores. Please feel free to correct me if this is incorrect. Regards, Mike

Broadly based on the excellence that was/is Windows 7 🤓 Regards, Mike

Hi Ian, Okay, fair comment. However, if the Vulkan API proves to be a roaring success then perhaps this will be the catalyst that prompts the appearance of a ‘V’ box (sponsored by STEAM, maybe?) in direct competition with the Xbox! Regards, Mike

Hi Ian, In fact, I was referring to Microsoft’s Xbox. I very much doubt they are as interested financially in those who prefer to game/sim on desktop PCs. Regards, Mike

.....and the common denominator is DirectX (up to and including DirectX 11) and having to run the main thread on a single core. This is all about to change with either the move up to DirectX 12 and/or the adoption of Vulkan. Both cover the same bases but, again, Vulkan is cross-platform compatible thus potentially attracting a much wider user base. Regards, Mike

Hi Mike, Well, it’s starting to happen already - I refer you back to that Wikipedia entry. Many highly-respected software houses appear convinced that this is the way to go. It seems very likely that more will follow. VULKAN has been around for a while and is now at the point of reaching maturity. There is no reason why both APIs (Vulkan and DirectX 12) should not be present on the same system. However, and as I have stated previously, Vulkan is cross-platform compatible and delivers everything, and more, provided by DirectX 12, The latter currently locks us into using Windows 10. Also, it is debatable as to what extent Microsoft are genuinely supportive of the Desktop PC gaming community. Regards, Mike

Hi Dave, Doubtless the decision has been made and, at this stage, there will be little we can do to influence it. We are left to speculate, cross our fingers and toes and hope for the best outcome. This move towards the adoption of the VULKAN API will have implications regarding the levelling of the competitive playing field between NVIDIA and AMD. This is long overdue and we, as customers, surely must benefit. As with MICROSOFT, NVIDIA’s domination in the market is coming under threat and both will need to react positively to maintain their respective user base and fiscal shares. In addition, there may be very good grounds to expect a slowing down of that invariably premature and irresistible recurring compulsion to replace hardware that is far from being obsolete since VULKAN, quite demonstrably, is unleashing the true capabilities of the currently available GPUs (in single and multiple configurations) while lowering CPU usage. Dare we anticipate exciting and thrifty times ahead? Regards, Mike

That’s perfectly fine by me so long as they can make the correct decision 😉 The competition is growing stronger by the day and moving to Vulkan could turn out to be the vital ingredient that helps ensure the long term popularity of Prepar3D and the legions of 3rd Party Product Developer support. Also, harking back to Rob’s superlative demo videos, we can’t ignore the fact that ORBX is already on board. Sweet! Regards, Mike

Hi, After watching Rob’s amazing videos demonstrating the power of the Vulkan API in Aerofly FS2 I felt compelled to investigate and learn more about this worthy ‘successor’ to OpenGL. It seems we may be on the brink of a revolution in Graphics rendering technology and also the prospect of a welcome release from Microsoft’s stranglehold on users of their operating systems. Not only does Vulkan offer everything currently supported by DirectX 12 but it is cross-platform compatible unlike the competition which is restricted to the Xbox (‘X’ from DirectX) cash cow and Windows 10. Any doubters need to read this Wikipedia entry: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulkan_(API) Look at the list of video games and rendering engines currently supporting Vulkan. I fired up Steam this morning to update my Aerofly FS2 installation only to find that somehow it had happened already! I can now make a choice between OpenGL and Vulkan (beta!). All Graphics and Quality settings hard right and I went for a flight over New York. Those of you who have flown over the Big Apple under OpenGL will know that, despite the incredible density of the scenery below, the performance is pretty good. Under Vulkan it’s outstanding! I climbed into the F-15E Strike Eagle and wound up those twin turbofans until I was hurtling alone at >800kts. Smooth as silk throughout and not a single stutter! Surely this must be the future. Yes, there is still a lot to add to the AF2 simulator before it can be said to be complete. I have no idea what the frame rates were during my flights. FRAPS wasn’t displaying the frame rate counter for some reason but my gut feeling is that this sim, as it stands, has plenty overhead available to cope with future enhancements. This brings me back to the question asked in the thread title. The attractiveness of switching to this API must now be beyond doubt. I, for one, am hoping that LM will be giving this serious consideration as they decide on the desired architecture of their new engine which, I’m assuming, will be driving Prepar3D v5. This could be the holy grail that banishes all those performance issues experienced with a fully loaded v4.x. Also, those of us who elected to remain on Windows 7, at least until EOL Support in January 2020, can relax in the knowledge that Vulkan is fully compatible and the feature set matches, if not exceeds, those currently provided by DirectX 12. I noted after testing that my GPU (1080Ti) usage rose to and maintained a max of 99% for an extended period whereas the temp (air cooled) never exceeded 62C. I must say that all this is making me wonder whether we will be needing the 1100 GPU series, certainly not in the short term. Regards, Mike