armchair_pilot

Thanks Richard. Going to try this out today.

Yeah the prices are ridiculous, that's what's holding me off for a little while. Back on topic, which parameters in PTA can be played with to make the draw distance less noticeable? I do have a preset that I found here on avsim but it doesn't help. Maybe it's also because I have ground shadows on which makes it more apparent.

I have a GTX770 and planning on upgrading to a 1070. Will that make a difference? My actual card is maxed at 100% in complex sceneries.

From my coding experience you can do both, it just depends on how well optimized your software is. I'm planning on upgrading my GPU but not so sure if that's going to do anything.

That's true, P3D has a lot more to offer but it still has a long way to go I think. If LM is going to fix the LOD issue and increase performance I'd be more than happy.

It's kinda lame, looks to me like LOD 4.5 in FSX is bigger than LOD 6.5 in P3D..

Somewhat late to the party, but this still seems to be a thing with v3.35. I also see a ring of autogen and in the distance everything is blurred. No matter what setting I set my LOD radius at, the ring always stays the same size.

Hello forum members, I've been thinking about upgrading my 3 year old GTX770 4GB to somewhat more powerful and less noisy. The sim I'm using is P3D and my first question is, is it worth it and will I see some improvement in performance? At the moment my card is maxed out at 100% and P3D at times is not that smooth anymore although I'm running a sub-4k setup, so I guess that must be the bottleneck. The card I am most interested in for the moment is this one: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814126109 EDIT: Important: At least 1Dvi and 2x HDMI ports are required. What do you guys think?

Ok got it, thanks.

What does 'Non-transferrable' actually mean? Not giving anyone else my account or linking the licenses to another one?

Hello, I wonder if it's legal/possible to sell both my 737 and 777 licenses for FSX? I switched to P3D a long time ago and the only reason FSX is still installed on my machine is because of these aircraft but I want to get rid of that sim. The problem is since there is still no upgrade option for P3D, I'm stuck with it.

Looks fantastic. Are those REX soft clouds?

There is a trick with their Concorde on how to save +- 500MB VAS at high resolutions. My setup has 3 screens with a total resolution of 5980x1080 and I'm running Concorde at busy addon airports without VAS issues. The thing is you have to reduce the window size of every 2D panel to fit a 1080p screen since they can eat a lot of memory when stretched across the display which is the result when going multi screen or any resolution above 1080p. Maybe it's the same with the airbus? That one surely has less panels than Concorde but who knows..

My P3D sim is running on a triple screen setup and changing the value mentioned above to single monitor doesn't do anything for me. What makes me laugh is that somehow people always suddenly seem to find a magical trick on how to gain 5-10fps more with a simple tweak but none haven't worked for me yet, even in FSX times. I must be doomed.. EDIT: Apparently this only works for OpenGL. As P3D/FSX runs on DirectX, no win for us guys.

Noticed something strange after installing REX 4 normal clouds in P3Dv3.3. It looks like a mix of normal and soft clouds: I installed soft clouds just before, but normally, by installing another cloud set they're supposed to be overwritten or am I wrong?? EDIT: This seems to be set-specific if I'm not mistaken. I installed another one (no soft clouds) and it doesn't show these fluffy clouds.

Up until now I can't see what people are hyped about with AS2016/ASCA. I have tried none of them yet but judging from the screenshots and videos there's nothing that would justify the upgrade price. ASN + REX4 has always been the best weather experience so far. This is of course my personal opinion..

So basically I shouldn't have problems with soft clouds when my textures are set to 2048 in P3D and 1024 in REX since they are only 512? I also tried with 1024 in both programs (as P3D doesn't have the option for 512x512) and clouds are still a killer.

Here's something to try: Don't install REX soft clouds but choose another cloud set. I noticed a very bad performance hit using soft clouds when flying through them. Then I installed 2048 cloud textures and did the same test again, no fps hit. Although soft clouds are lower res. textures, there's something odd about them.

Does anyone else still have poor cloud performance? For me the fps hit is the same as with 3.2, clouds basically cut my frames in half. Also in general I lost like 3-5 fps with same settings and scenario. Disappointing..

Well I don't know what this new version was supposed to improve, but for me at least it did the opposite. Performance reduced by approx. 15%, my GPU is running at 100% while before it was less stressed and clouds are still hammering my rig just like before. Please don't tell me I'm the only one having issues..

You could also try Projectfly VAS monitor. It works with an unregistered version of FSUIPC and can be displayed on top of your simulator window.

Thanks for the comments guys :smile: The FSX version doesn't work in P3D I think, or at least not that well. You'd have to buy it again unfortunately as FSLabs don't offer an upgrade option but I'd say it's worth the money when looking at the VAS savings the P3D version has to offer. EDIT: You were there in real life? I discovered the scenery by accident as I was looking for an oceanic flight from Sydney that isn't too short. Then I saw that tiny island on the map in PFPX and went straight ahead to ORBX to purchase the addon

Absolutely. It's one of the less boring aircraft, hard to learn but very enjoyable. Not a single regret.

I thought you guys (especially those who like ORBX) might like those shots I took recently on a very nice trip of approx. 2500nm from Sydney to Pago Pago Intl. in American Samoa. Only approach pictures as it was too dark at midnight time when I departed. Approaching the island: Circling to RWY23: Almost lined up, dropped the landing gear just after this shot: Finally approaching the runway with a slight offset of 8°, trying to maintain the calculated VRef of 162kts: Landing was ok, not bad for my first manual landing in the Concorde At the gate: A few nice shots from the location: That's it. It was a blast to fly this approach as it was somewhat challenging. I was quite satisfied that the sun rose as I had expected, this made for an awesome landing. Platform and addons used: - P3D v3.2 - FSLabs Concorde - Orbx FTX Global - ASN - FlyTampa Sydney - ORBX Pago Pago Intl. - EzDok

A bit late but if you're still after a 'better' solution for the resizing thing.. I took the time and resized all those 2D panels in the panel.cfg to 1/3 of their original size (horizontally) and later tested with both panel.cfg's. Result: Jackpot. Resizing the panels in the .cfg does the same as starting P3D in a small window, then going fullscreen. This is the scenario in which I tested: Concorde X loaded at Flytampa Sydney, RWY34R, AI traffic 10%, no weather, resized panel.cfg. VAS result after opening all the panels: 1GB left. The same with the default panel.cfg: barely 500MB left. EDIT: PANEL_STRETCHING can be left at 0, but at this point it doesn't really matter I guess. If anyone is interested in my modified panel.cfg I'd gladly share it. Just PM me.