gheeD

Tested the demo, on my beefy computer with hand tweaked fsx i did not like it, but sure I did see some fps improvement in situations, but that improvement was on the account of increased blurries, and that's not good. I'm sure such dynamic tweaking can be great for those who want simple option for smooth fps without much worry of the scenery, but personally i'll just set my tweaks myself to get smooth fps thank you. But kudos for the demo, nice gesture and helped me to decide.

Would be true, sadly fraction of the user base on Finnish FS forum uses xplane, most are on fsx. 8-10 years ago finnish fs addon development was blooming, there was a freeware scenery for heavy majority of the bigger airports (not that big on international scale). Since then the guys who were making those have retired from FS, due to real life stuff and the FS9 stuff was made with pretty innovative fs9 tech, which was awesome but also meant that basically none of the stuff would be able to convert to FSX. For longest time there wasn't really any new scenery for FSX, now there are a few, but not even close compared to what FS9 used to have. Now with release of XPX the guys behind truscenery (who are finnish, ofc) saw that developing for xplane was the way to go, and we have amazing quality airports for it, but very few have simmers have converted to xplane. I believe biggest reason for that is the demographic, most simmers who frequent the forum fly tubeliners and prefer realistic weather to go with that, and both of those are lacking in xplane. I've posted some pics of my flights with jardesign A320 and such, but people got their payware helsinki for FSX and NGX, AXE and ASN so they don't have much reason to switch.. But i hope they will come around to see the beauty of xplane :)

So I just saw this piece of news on a tech site and instantly though of the uses it would possibly have in simulation environment, AKA one of the complaints i saw here about oculus rift is how you don't see your own hands and it wouldn't probably work too well due to that. But what about this? Think of the possibilities in a flight simulation environment: See yourself sitting in the cockpit of a plane and reaching out for the buttons and interacting with them. This could possibly make such simulations entirely possible I think, granted you could program the simulator to recognize your arms from the camera and when they are close enough to the knobs turn them etc. Looks pretty amazing don't ya think? :smile:

I would believe that your 3GB Vram is filling up quite fast with your settings, atleast it does with my 3GB GTX780. It seems the memory used number you see in settings is a "one time" reading when sim loads, and doesn't include all the textures you load into your VRAM while flying. I see you use afterburner, scrolling down the hardware monitor you can monitor your memory usage with it, and in my experience when the memory is capped while flying the result is something like what you describe. When memory is full, it can't load textures into it to be ready when they are needed, and have to swap them mid-flying which results in low fps like you have. With simheaven OSM and photoscenery, you might have to turn objects and trees almost to a minimum due to its high density in big cities. My experience is that in big cities, OSM + photoscenery kills your VRAM, even if it might not otherwise be too much of a problem. Turning down the object density one-by-one I get very little increment in fps, but once i get down enough (=enough so that the objects dont fill your VRAM 100%) i get a jump to 60 fps or so. So check your VRAM usage, if it's at 100% or close to it, reduce the object density. I also have noticed that fiddling with settings might leave some stuff in the VRAM which will only clear by restarting sim, so you might not see good improvement in VRAM by turning object density down by one notch, but once restarted that setting might be much better fps-wise.

I also noticed that after someone here on avsim forums said it, that the cpu load seems to often be somehow both cpu + gpu load. After reading i tried it, and sure enough often times cpu load 0.991 for example id be hoovering around 30-40% cpu load and 70+ gpu load. So i wouldn't really trust the ingame monitor for it, rather nowadays i use afterburner and windows task manager for gpu load + memory usage and cpu load on my 2nd monitor.

It wasn't a dodge, but a simple statement. Now as far as the argument goes, I don't think it's worth pursuing. There's a barebones version of the ATC that currently mainly has 1 simple mission: to control the AI aircraft around you. that's what Ben has stated, here and here. One thing X-plane does have that FSX doesn't is developers. FSX is finite in its possibilities and capability, but X-plane isn't. They keep enhancing the flying experience every patch.

Well, at this point i'd like to point that there IS AI and ATC system in Xplane. I wonder how many people arguing here have even tried it? I personally haven't because since FSX I learned that if i want to practice realworld atc/ other airplane communications online atc systems are the ONLY realistic way to go to practice that.

On a unrelated note, i just noticed on your (eaglesoft) support forum news section that you have teamed up with LES to produce addons! that is wonderful news, and i hope something great comes out of it! :smile: Saw those Citation previews on LES support forum, very promising work and im greatly awaiting that product. Like you said this collaboration hold much promise for both platforms and I simply can't wait to see what comes out of it.

Mitsubishi MU-2 Amazing shots uwespeed. To my liking the haze is a bit too blue, but good nonetheless. :friends:

Raleigh tweaks, osm data and simheaven photoscenery in bigger cities on my i7 4670k and GTX780 with 3GB memory im on the edge, 2900mb with max setting i believe and like 20-25 fps. thats with texture set to max resolution WITH compressed option ticked. Unticked no chance ever. With default scenery might be ok, but when you start running photoscenery, osm and addon airplane its just too much uncompressed. And in my experience max texture res + compressed is better than very high texture res uncompressed. Clouds are very hard on fps always for me, but i think skymaxx is a bit better on fps for me. I think, i have not done any tests though but it feels like it. But yes for my system GPU is the restricting factor, CPU load is 50%-70% when GPU is at 90%+.

Yep, getting boring. I believe this is now 2nd week of almost constant fog with about +2 celcius. Friday night there was a bit of snow, but it didnt even last 24h on the ground. :angry:

Scandinavia not so lucky for snow, first snow rained in my city in January, now its all melted and temps are above zero Celsius. Way warmer than normal winter. :(

Are you using ezdok and have the middle mouse button for looking around enabled in it? That overwrites the middle mouse click in my dash.

I finally got around testing my edits in osm2xp, looks okay. I have noidea about what settings i should tune in osm2xp or not to improve the looks but i really just want to get some buildings on top of the photoscenery so when you fly in/out of the airport its not totally flat.

Sure, here they are: In addition i got gamma set at 1.8, and using the newest raleigh tweak settings by pascal :smile: