Uteman

Well to be technically accurate the nVidia article is from 2014- 2015 so Vulkan is postdating DX12 by some 4 years, your comment I would respectfully suggest should be - Vulkan sounds a bit like DX12. I also recall reading recently that an nVidia development Raytracing and its benefits in gaming is rumoured to be included in the next generation of AMD cards (remember how that feature was rubbished when the 2080Ti was released?). found the article: https://www.pcworld.com/article/3530346/amd-talks-pc-gpu-ray-tracing-as-it-looks-to-the-future-of-ryzen-and-radeon.html

GodAtum this quote "may" help. "DX12's focus is on enabling a dramatic increase in visual richness through a significant decrease in API-related CPU overhead," said Nvidia's Henry Moreton last year. (2015) "Historically, drivers and OS software have managed memory, state, and synchronization on behalf of developers. However, inefficiencies result from the imperfect understanding of an application's needs. DX12 gives the application the ability to directly manage resources and state, and perform necessary synchronization. As a result, developers of advanced applications can efficiently control the GPU, taking advantage of their intimate knowledge of the game's behavior." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ There is no doubt in the gaming world DX12 has been a boon (whilst each developer debugged a new generation of bugs) - the complexity of flight sims and their myriad plug ins has delayed the simmers entry into this world. Long overdue imo. I believe the link in the quote answers your question in more detail.

Just drop the texture setting back to 9 - I do, problem fixed ( he did say he ran it at 10)

You need to select your input source for P3D it has to be "game capture" and drill down and select specific window and then follow the prompts to point it to the P3D exe file. You can have many sources recorded as inputs just click the eye next to any source you want to turn off. The user help in OBS is good and the forums are huge. results with vary with you PC setup, I sim at 4K but I have OBS set to rescale teh recording to Full HD (1920x1080).

To each his own - that is what flight simming seems to rely on to keep the props spinning. I agree with the general sentiment that the Warthog is a great controller and have used it for a number of years now, having bought it back in 2014. For my 2 cents the T.A.R.G.E.T. software is C.R.A.P. (apologies to moderators if that upsets their sensibilities) in W10. I used the P3D controller setup UI for a while (about a year I guess) but switching back and forth when changing AC got to be a pain especially when I started adding aircraft that made full use of the Warthog (eg: weapons systems) buttons. FSUIPC stands so far out in front when setting up specific profiles there is no coming back imo. Cheers

You lost me there - as it doesn't relate to the OP post and additionally if you are a student that is why the academic license is available and why there are study level AC available in the academic P3D.

I have to agree. That is the decision of the developer and a dumb one at that imo, given there are other developers that don't take that approach with modern aircraft weapon systems they (Virtavia) clearly are 1: not interested in selling their product to the flight sim masses who like studying the aircraft in an academic sense or 2: severely limited in the marketing department or 3: have had a licensing restriction imposed upon them by the Aircraft manufacturer? All the above are speculation on my part however the outcome results in a severely limited market for the specific AC package. Back to studying my 740 page FA18E manual and flying the superbug (with weapons systems enabled).

That Time Spy result is good (excellent actually) I frankly think largely due to the the 2x 2030Ti - nice to have. As I said I dropped back in clocks because I was not comfortable with the voltage under full P3D load at 5GHZ. I followed Asus advice on not cranking the weaker cores (2) they identify in the BIOS and found that dropping all cores back the 100MHz took a full 0.175 volts off the cores and 8C at idle for a 2% loss in Geek Bench and Time Spy and no discernable difference in P3D. Having 10 Cores @ 4.8- at 36C idle in 23C room will do me for now. The only time I get stutters is when I play around with texture size bumping it up from 10 to 11 - 12 that makes things interesting (sub optimal) at 4k when you jump out of the plane and start admiring the scenery. The OP said he is running a GTX 2060 and I assume that is at 1080p I think he will be fine with a stock 3700X using PBO

OK understood cheers - yes it is a big plus for the X299 and I found using that tune-ability in conjunction with Process Lasso has balanced the load on my CPU very well. I frankly in the last year or so am the happiest I have been with P3D and the other flight sim on my system.

One of the problems I have about this sort of question is that most only ever refer to P3D flatly and not globally in other words you need to look at how many plug ins and add-ons are going to be making calls on your system and on P3D. My objective isn't to get all cores to 100% because you your system will crash if it does, in fact I look for ways to lower the load without major quality hits to the image. My target was to get a smooth sim with the add ons I use at 4K and that's why I opted for the best of both worlds - high core count (at the time) and high overclocking ability. I was lucky my CPU will actually run 6 cores at 5GHz and the rest at 4.8 ( after delidding and my cooling helps a lot) but frankly the 2% improvement I measured over what I have now 24x7 wasn't worth the voltage. I think somewhere between 8 and 12 cores is ideal however I am keen to see the difference with AMD's version of hyperthreading after a couple of bios updates-.

You have me at a loss here for what you are trying to say? Are you saying that an X299 can't overclock individual cores to different speeds? If so you are wrong the multiplier is selectable per core. I think you are also assuming Dave_YVR hasn't assigned the tasks to specific cores.

My i9-7900X uses all 10 cores very well, when it is busy in P3D they hover around 50 to 65%. I want to add some more add ons and hive them off with project Lasso to other cores as I do now on the 10 core so I am watching the 3900X with some interest. I will certainly wait till September for the 3950X reviews and also to gauge how Intel reacts with its price in the meantime.

No it shouldn't I had an issue with a 980Ti that was WC and RMAd it to the shop I bought it from no issue at all ( I did put the original cooler back on - as one would). Difficult for most reputable brands to do something like reject a claim on basis of water cooling given the top brands all have had water cooled options themselves on GPUs (eg Poseidon). CPUs also set the precedent because as we know the HEDT editions now don't even come with a cooler.

Tony, Classic shell is a great product and I used it for a good while until I discovered Winaero tweaker almost 2 years ago. It is without doubt the product for anyone who loves Win 7 and some control over the look and feel of their OS. To anyone who gripes about 10 I suggest they try this I have it on 4 Win 10 machines and have installed it countless times on OP PCs. https://winaero.com/blog/category/windows-10/

Hi Ryan thanks for asking the answer is no I didn't. Flying with the 2d pop up only at the mo. Frustrating I went through the procedure several times I would like to get the RXP pack working in the VC of the c182 as I prefer it for the low and slow flying I have uninstalled and reinstalled using the config post in the forum without success. If I don't get it working by Tuesday oz time I will leave it alone for a month as I am travelling OS. Cheers

Broadwell and Haswell seem to be the 2 problem lines. Intel from my reading have officially told everybody to stop deploying the microcode fix for the two series until they test out the perceived solution properly. Detailed here: note the recommendations dated Jan 22 halfway down the page. https://security-center.intel.com/advisory.aspx?intelid=INTEL-SA-00088&languageid=en-fr Apologies if this has been posted elsewhere.

I am only interested in the GTN750/650. I have since got it working as a pop up only will keep fiddling with the VC. Thanks

Thanks for setting me straight I did base that assumption on the dates of the two products, I should have read a bit more closely. Maybe A2A will release it sooner rather than later in 2018. I am happy to keep flying the Cheyenne + GTN750 in the meantime. Thanks again for the advice.

Thanks Jean-Luc you are probably right I hadn't considered that aspect given it was posted in Oct 2017 I assumed wrongly it applied to the latest RXP. I will compare Frank's files with Nirgal76's and see if I can work up something. Cheers

Thanks for the responses, I will give your files a try and report back over the next couple of days. I suspect the 32 vs 64 bit might be a compounding issue given the RXP GTN went through an update for v4. Cheers

Hello fellow RXP users, I have a problem (actually 2 now given the first problem seems to have created the 2nd). I purchased the RXP GTN750pack and installed a few weeks ago. I followed the instructions for installing it in the AS Cheyenne III as posted in the configuration thread for P3Dv4. That worked extremely well and I am very pleased with the way it performs and how the setup went. I since bought the A2A C182 and installed it and enjoying coming to grips with its habits. On further reading I saw the instructions posted here on putting the GTN750 into C182. Beauty I thought, I followed the instructions - though I must say the first step is the most vague for an RXP noob ie what specific instrument do you replace in the RXP setup window with the GTN750 as it gives you several options? I went through that process and then closed down v4 I backed up the original GTN.ini and the C182 panel cfg, I then went about cutting and pasting the appropriate add in to the two files, saved them and reopened the sim, no change - original/default instruments still appeared. I retraced and checked the setup and checked the entries in the cfg and ini files (they were as pasted directly -from Nirgal76's post). I decided to undo it all and start from scratch because maybe I did something wrong in the setup, so back to the original files and reversed the setup in the RXP setup window and exited the sim. I restarted the sim and went into the A2A C182 and sitting on the tarmac I selected the RXP setup tab in the menu to recommence the setup and v4 stops working and creates a Windows error file. Note that the Cheyenne is still working fine with the GTN750 in the VC, v4 only crashes when I select the RXP setup option in the C182. question 1. I assume I need to uninstall and reinstall RXP to get it working correctly again in setup mode? As I seem to have managed to corrupt something in my effort to get it installed into the C182 I am guessing that would impact the Cheyenne III install as the RXP GTN.ini file will be deleted so I will restore that specific file from the backup I made of the working Cheyenne GTX ini file. question 2. If I proceed with Q1 can someone then advise which instrument I should select in the RXP setup options of the C182 to be replaced by the GTN 750 before I modify the panel.cfg and GTX.ini files? I do have the windows error report on the v4 CTD but they are usually not very informative in situations such as this. I would really like to get the C182 working with the 750 given how good the GTN 750 is in the Cheyenne. Any and all help is appreciated.

I have read a fair bit of the reported Microsoft PR and it is general in context and detail, for example: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Windows 10 machines running older processors like Haswell “show more significant slowdowns, and we expect that some users will notice a decrease in system performance,” says Myerson. The same older Haswell machines running Windows 7 or Windows 8 will also experience slowdowns that Myerson says “most users” will notice. Windows 7 and Windows 8 will be the worst hit simply because these older operating systems have features like kernel-level font rendering that will be impacted by the Spectre and Meltdown mitigations even further than Windows 10. Regardless, Microsoft says on Skylake or newer chips “Intel has refined the instructions used to disable branch speculation to be more specific to indirect branches, reducing the overall performance penalty of the Spectre mitigation.” Windows 10 running on Skylake, Kaby Lake or newer CPU show benchmarks show “single-digit slowdowns”, but most users shouldn’t expect to see noticeable slowdowns Windows 10 running on Haswell or older CPUs “show more significant slowdowns” and “some users will notice a decrease in system performance” Windows 7 or Windows 8 running on Haswell or older CPUs means “most users will notice a decrease in system performance" ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ taken from the Verge article linked above. You can draw your own conclusions from the released PR info, I haven't made any. Until end users see and test the final/declared Intel/Microsoft fix in their own machine and I see it on my own machine I will stand by my comment - which was and I repeat - I hope Jays prediction is correct.

I am nowhere near as confident as you are, all the statements from Intel and Microsoft have said that 1. it won't affect the average user much and 2. the affect on performance is entirely based on CPU workload. That puts flight sim users who regularly see 70% plus workloads well outside the realms of the average home user who is lucky to see their CPU at 20% for more than a nanosecond. The first lot of Intel microcode is out for Linux and that should give some benchmarks for the next code release that hopefully will tackle the Microsoft issues then we will know for sure on our own machines. I hope you are right in your prediction.

I turned the update block off on Shutup 10 2 days ago and it updated - no change in performance from it but the AV was a problem for half a day had a fit challenging every activity on the web, after the AV updated it was fine. Big test on performance is when the microcode update comes possibly tomorrow. Plenty of info in the P3D forum

Knowing the scale of the problem is one thing (someone mentioned it was identified back in June - partially correct) however that knowledge only alerts me to the severity of the problem most exploit fixes by AV and software companies have a cycle of under 1 month from alert status (excluding known and active hack alerts). The other aspect is that Intel have stated existing CPUs will be affected to different degrees. Many people posting on this issue have looked at it purely from their desktop/ home use of the net and computers. The downside for the sites we visit and the cloud itself/ database managers is much much larger and potentially even more disruptive to our home activities if some black hat produces a working exploit in the cloud. I certainly would wait and live with what you have until the situation has a clear outcome.