Q_flyer

Just to put something else on the table............. those of you who have experimented with removing the external model from some aicraft, may have noticed that when you look outside, some of the Effects still render.... eg, you can still see engine start smoke, touchdown smoke, and other custom effects. So to further try out reducing your load when purely in the VC, you can rename (temporarily remove) some of these effects within the FSX / Effects directory (they're mostly easily identifiable by their name).

.....you are using toggle switch when it loads aren't you? Perhaps it's loading in an OFF position and you need to toggle the CTRL+F12 or whatever it is......

I'm not sure about nVidia, but with ATI I had SweetFX working perfectly in DX10. However it did require the use of an 'advanced' (non-standard) driver: RadeonPro So perhaps you need nVidia Inspector? Within RadeonPro there was a dedicated section for changing SweetFX settings. It all worked very straightforwardly, but as I say, not sure on the nVidia side of things - but I bet it can be done.

I can do that, but my set-up is opposite to yours in pretty much every way :lol: I'm on ATI, and DX9 (far superior performance with DX9 in the PMDG airliners). My system is an i7 2600k 3.8Ghz (stock), with 8GB DDR3 RAM, an ATI HD 7850 2GB graphics card, and Win 7 64 bit. Here are my ATI Catalyst Control Centre settings :- You'll see that I use Supersampling which is a high AA mode. I can get away with this with this particular video card. It's not an amazing card (pretty average) but what it does do well, is high AA and AF settings, without too much performance penalty. When you are using Supersampling you do not need any higher AA/AF levels than 4x. My settings within FSX are quite modest; Scenery complexity: Dense, Autogen: Sparse (I only need a little autogen), AI Airliner traffic: 10%, Road traffic: 7%. I use OpusFSX for all weather and have medium settings for that. (I like my weather :smile:). This gives me an absolutely solid 30 FPS (locked at 30) in the PMDG NGX, T7, and pretty much every other complex airliner at Dubai. ..........if I were parked at London Heathrow it would be a different story........... :wink:

Possibly, but I think it's more to do with the surrounding scenery in FSX (or lack of!). It's a very quiet, desert based environment around the city in FSX, so I guess FSX doesn't have much else to render, other than the FlyTampa Dubai Scenery itself.

I know I'm not original in saying it, but I really think that FlyTampa Dubai is the best scenery package ever released for any version of FS. When I consider that in the PMDG 777, I am getting 20 FPS on the ground at Aerosoft EDDP (Leipzig/Halle), a c.2008 product (albeit updated in 2012) and it's not the most detailed scenery in the world, then I look at the scale of the buildings, skyscrapers and exquisite detail in FlyTampe Dubai and the fact that I get 30 FPS solid!!.......... it's crazy!!!! ....... How does this scenery perform so well. The airport itself is so detailed, the ground textures are just stunning, and then there's that cityscape......... and 30 FPS solid in the PMDG 777. If only everything could perform that well. :smile:

Yes that's fair enough. :smile: (Does that mean that MSE Austria is next then? :lol:) I stake a quid on it!

Excellent. And I may not be so excited about the SUI release, but I still think it's excellent that MSE have spread their wings and are offering other areas of the world. I will be buying some European releases for certain. As Turbo Tomato said, it's probably more likely to be ones not covered by existing country-wide packages. :smile:

Get outta here! (not literally, just with false 'prophecies' like the above). Did you read that from the X-Plane carton? :lol: Not even in the same league. Seriously, if you measured the featues and functionality against a real 777, the PMDG would probably come out in excess of 90% and the P&R Worldliner one for XP10, less than 40%........

I have to admit being a little disappointed on hearing the location of MSE 2.0s first non-US scenery. It just felt a little predictable that it was Switzerland. I guess there is good data availability, with the fact that we already have a Switzerland Pro and Switzerland X in the past. But I really agree with Lee - Switzerland with one season; and no snow? :( $40 is a fair price but this one is not for me. I'll perk up when I see Slovenia or Bulgaria or maybe Norway or Sweden getting done.

Give him a break Bonchie........ that's harsh and doesn't represent everything that Alain posts. Maybe you need a mirror to hold up because being completely honest, I see a lot of negativity and cynicism in your postings too..... ........and yeah, my posts are crap too :wink: so it's probably good that we avoid rating eachother's 'content'. :lol:

Thanks Stephen. I installed at around 1210z today (26th) so should be on the re-built version (all looks ok). I cannot thank you guys enough for adding the DHM effects to standard (non-camera) views!!!!........ Love it. :Party: Like many TrackIR users, I didn't actually need camera views, but had to set them up for each aircraft, for DHM. Now, I've just set up the DHM effects for standard VC in the 'Configure' screen and I'm good to go! What is so strange is that that I kept literally thinking to myself I wish these DHM effects could just be applied to a standard VC view but I never got around to actually requesting it, or even mentioning it here!!.......... So you guys have got a seriously good telepathic link going on, for customer requests..... :wink: Have a fab and well deserved holiday B)

Hi Roger, Yes FSX can be 'quirky' in terms of the registry. So yes, if you get the option to 'repair' do that first, then reboot then attempt a full uninstall. After the unistall, again reboot, before re-installing. Try to ensure your PC definitely regards FSX as 'unistalled' before attempting the re-install because installing on top of a 'half baked' FSX registry entry can lead to some headaches regarding the Simconnect versions.

Hi Cheryl, I'm pleased to report that it is indeed just the scan rate. :smile: I think earlier versions had a higher default scan rate, but v3.34 in installing with 0.18 which seems low. Anyway I experimented and found a perfect sweet spot with a scan rate of 0.34. No more jerks and jumps. :smile: Glad you like the banner! Have a good hol Dave.

Hi, Thanks for the v3.34. My TrackIR is 'jumping' a lot every few seconds with this version....... I will take a look at the scan rate to see if it has changed and do some experiements and report back. Cheers.

I feel your frustration, but sincerely, I don't think many people here will believe that the DX10 Fixer programme has the propensity to delete an entire FSX directory. - something else must have been happening here. Have you tried a virus scan? Failing that, as Robert said, try a system restore - it may well get you back to before you lost everything. Good luck.

Yes but Samdim, the Q400 is the best optimized aircraft ever released for FSX, so personally speaking, I wouldn't even consider removing the external model - you guys did a phenomenal job with optimization on the MJC Q400. :cool: I too am seeing around 7 FPS increase when removing the external model from the 777, but it was only a temporary test. There are some models that I just would not consider removing. But saying that, removing an external model, certainly isn't sacrilege or blasphemy. Remembering that this is a simulator and if we compare it with a true CAA / FAA Level D simulator; that too has no external model! :lol: ...... it could be argued that the VC is where the simulation happens, and the external model is really just a gaming element.... (DUCKS! :ph34r: )... :lol: Q. - If a very high end complex simulation of a B787 (as an example) was released, that contained a 99% systems functional VC, but no external model at all, would you buy it? A. - I would.

Hi all, I've just recieved an email from MSE saying that they are releasing Switzerland, their first non-US scenery on 1st October 2013. Nothing on their website yet, but I expect something will be on there by the end of the day.

Ah yes that's right - I renamed that one some time ago, as that was causing the micropause when landing wasn't it? (that people thought was audio related). You've got a better memory than me Julian!

Emirates flight EK35 departing OMDB in 18 minutes, for EGNT.

Good questions - Not sure in my honest answer. [EDIT: Steve's reply above sounds logical]. There appears to be something going on with regards to some effects, and their resource intensity, but it's hard to nail what is happening. Perhaps it's a Red Herring; not sure. Perhaps some effects are somehow sitting on standby ready to go, and use some resources. As you can tell I haven't a clue what is really happening, except that when I disabled one particular PMDG smoke effect, I saw a noticeable frame rate increase in the NGS under DX9. Crazy stuff this FSX business!

Nice!

Thanks for the clarification. And apologies if I caused any confusion, in my subsequent reports. (This whole thread has been a bit like Chinese Whispers). :smile: Smoke effects can cause stutters and micro-pauses even in MS default aircraft, so it seems that perhaps the way FSX renders any smoke effect may be the issue. There was a thread a while back where someone was getting a huge micro pause stutter every time they landed, and thought it was a sound file playback issue (the touchdown sound causing the pause), but it ended up being related to a touchdown smoke effect........ So yes everyone, do your own tests, back up anything that you 'remove' as part of a test, and reach your own conclusions.

It wasn't aimed at you. It was a summary, including the file paths......... ======================================== More generally; As Pe11e has said, removing external models to test or mess around shouldn't be the cause of upset or over-sensitivity. It's just another form of tweaking, that it has to be said, has very little overall usage but nevertheless, it can be useful for example to do some tests to see if an external model is the cause of an FPS drop or other issues. .....just as in FS9 days, some users removed VCs, if they did not use or value them. I don't think anyone is suggesting everyone remove their external models, or that such a practice would catch on!

You certainly were sir, and it was a great call. I am defininately seeing a 3-5 FPS consistant improvement in FPS, with that effect de-activated. I am not sure how it would impact performance when the engines aren't even running, but I've compared a new load up, with and without that effect active, and I get 3-5 FPS more (quite significant when it's the difference between 19 and 24 FPS) with the effect disabled. Definitely worth a try Chris. Although as odourboy said, the effect seems to become even more resource-intensive under DX10 conversion, so I'd try it under DX9 initially. Load a flight and check your FPS after 20 seconds on the ground. Then remove the engine smoke effect and go back to the same scenario and see if you too get a few more frames.