ComSimPilot

Hello Patcho! My experience with Ezdok is very good. I has nice shaking effects and I believe its better in terms of performance and latency than Chase Plane, or at least it seems tome. I also have CP and when installed experienced exactly what you describe, so that's why I installed Ezdok. I recommend it.

I agree! A2A made so much work on these planes, both systems and visual wise that it is a pity to not enjoy them anymore and waiting for each one to be released for MSFS if ever... Yes, shaders and lighting and models are better in P3D but a system/realism geek like most of us are is finding enough visual fidelity and much more system realism to keep us satisfied.

Hi Ray, thanks for the question..So far I have only played with the VC and admired the visual work they have done. hope this August I will find the time during my vacation weeks to properly dive into it. It seems like a hard project to master, but I have to do it..it's a pity to sit on my disk so long. I hope I succeed 🙂

Hi all, Just wanted to share an observation. After upgrading my system lately with a capable AMD 9800X3D and 5070Ti, I decided to just use MSFS 2024, X-Plane 12 and DCS from now on and skip P3D. Fortunately the variety of Airliners and GA is good right now. The driver Possibly as for many of you here, the investment in P3D add-ons that I have done in the past decade is easily the highest one in any simulator at least for me, so I felt the need to install again P3D on a separate SSD and see how I feel about it. The biggest driver was the FSL Concorde which I never had the time to fly even though I bought it on release, along with some other great planes (A2A, PMDG and the Majestic Q400). The visual I won't lie, coming from MSFS24, textures and modelling looked more cartoonish in P3D, lower polygon models and photorealistic textures embedded with some minimal reflections. On the other hand, flying even at low altitude gave a more real experience in the sense of sharpening, because all objects on the ground are sharp and more defined in my opinion. Sky and atmosphere also looked in many ways more realistic. Aircraft - MSFS24 Ground - MSFS24 with P3D wins in many areas Atmosphere - P3D Flying Flying the FSL A320 in P3D, seemed more natural to me. The inputs from the side stick are translated to the aircraft in a more organic feel, airbus FBW feels better to me, even though I have not flown the real thing, from videos on YouTube, P3D hand flying seems more spot on. Taxing Taxing feels nicer to me on P3D. Using Ezdok with shaking effects are more persuasive than in MSFS24. Performance Even though MSFS24 has better performance in terms of absolute FPS, it seems to me that fluidity in movement is better in P3D during critical phases of takeoff and landing especially. What is your opinion?

The question for me is, is it worth it over the XP12 version in terms of systems-FM ?

That's terrible...I have invested so much on these videos

As many I guess, I would be interested to know how it compares to the Majestic version in term of systems functionality and accuracy.

GNS 530W + GNS 430W configuration file for Digital Replica - RV-10

GNS 530W + 430W configuration file for Digital Replica - Cessna 310L (Updated for version v1.12)

GNS 530W configuration file for Just Flight - Piper Archer III

GNS 530W configuration file for Digital Replica - Cessna 310L

GNS 430W configuration file for Just Flight - Beechcraft Duchess Model 76

GNS 530 configuration file for Just Flight - Arrow III / Turbo Arrow III/IV / Warrior II

GNS 530 + GNS 430 configuration file for the Dreamfoil Embraer 110 - Bandeirante

Thank you very much guys! That is something solid, so its certainly worth the upgrade +20% or more improvement is a lot. Garret, thank you for providing me with specific scenery load and numbers. It's very important to visualize and justify. I will contact you for more details if I have more questions about your setup Will certainly consider that as a next upgrade..

I'm not arguing the fact that the Skylake would be faster than the Ivy bridge..I'm just wondering if the performance spec difference would make a noticable difference in FPS. I remember super smooth youtube videos with the 2500k some years ago and I'm thinking if the [email protected] is already not enough. Especially after upgrading my GPU to the new 1070. If the FPS increase is more than 20% then it would be certainly worth it. If the gain is 2-3fps in heavy scenery I think its not that necessairy to upgrade.

Ok! Thank you Martin. So that means that I should expect a 73% improvement in FPS in P3D? If that's so, its certainly worth it!

Hi all, I am a mainly P3D user, flying all kind of the known heavy add-ons that can put load into a system (ORBX, ASN, PMDG, FSL, paywere scenery). Lately I only run FSX:SE because of the FSL Airbus but soon I'm about to go back to P3D again. I only have one sim installed on my computer at a time, so its difficult for me to compare right now their performance. I recently upgraded my GTX970 for a GTX1070. The performance at FSX:SE is good, but not perfect, I get around 18-28 FPS which is smooth but not as good as 30+. I can notice the difference (I also use TrackIR). My CPU is an Intel i5 3570k overclocked at 4.6Ghz using water cooling. What I am wondering about, is whether an upgrade to an i7 6700k at a similar overclock would yield a significant improvement on performance under P3D. I know that P3D is not so bound to CPU as FSX, but still bound on it at the same time. I have heard that the 6th generation does not bring so much of an improvement over an overclocked 3rd gen system, mainly because the advancements on the skylake are mostly on power consumption and internal graphics. I have no idea how truth this is if I don't see by myself, however to upgrade for an 6700k system (cpu+mobo) I need around 500$ which is not a small investment adding to my recent 1070 upgrade. For example I don't think a performance improvement of 3-5 fps would justify the upgrade as I could lower some settings without sacrificing that much. I still haven't seen how P3D would handle the new 1070 under the same processor as I am waiting for FSL in P3D to be released to go back. So I moved from 3570K - GTX970 in P3D to 3570K - 1070 in FSX:SE. Your advice or experience would be tremendously valuable in helping me choose whether it would be worth to upgrade or not my CPU. Thank you very much for your time to read my post!

Amazing shots! Congratulations, extremely realistic! Your clouds also look amazingly realistic. Could I ask which texture set you are using?

It worked !!! Jim thank you so much for your reply!!! I wouldn't have found it !

Hi all, Suddently I get a CTD everytime I load a flight. Has anyone any obvious clue about it? I couldn't find anything similar. I used P3D, ASN, and the AXE. All latest versions. The CTD happens whithin minutes while on the gate. Fault bucket 74164428723, type 1 Event Name: APPCRASH Response: Not available Cab Id: 0 Problem signature: P1: Prepar3D.exe P2: 2.5.12945.0 P3: 55145f5e P4: panels.dll P5: 2.5.12945.0 P6: 55145f20 P7: c0000005 P8: 00023e79 P9: P10: Attached files: C:\Users\Ifikratis\AppData\Local\Temp\WER101.tmp.WERInternalMetadata.xml These files may be available here: C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\ReportArchive\AppCrash_Prepar3D.exe_81a625336d57541857ca2ee635e1f24f342ac7_bcf3591e_16420db3 Analysis symbol: Rechecking for solution: 0 Report Id: 71e079c7-0233-11e5-8281-902b34da42e2 Report Status: 0 Hashed bucket: 2d9907e34e1895a54715bfcdb1ccd98b

Thank you very much Rob !!! I'm sure it wasn't an easy find. I hope it relates to an SDK issue which means that we may can hope for a wide spread memory bug that will reduce or eliminate the OOM errors. I was always wondering if it could be a hard stop in loading memory more than 2-3GB every time, forcing unloading of scenery so that an OOM never happens. However I know this is an ideal scenario far away from the thousands of LM or 3rd party files that are being loaded and come into play every time. Now if we could have a similar solution to FlyTampa's Toronto...

Thats fine! So, we just need the pre-order button now

Hi all, One of the aspects still missing from Prepar3D is a good quality replay. FSRecorder in FSX was producing extra smooth results, sampling the simulation 4 times a second. It was the most fluid simulation I have ever seen. And while it was not possible to have that accuracy during the actual simulation, replays was a rewarding experience. I am aware that an older version of FS Recorder is workign with P3D, however I haven't tried it because of the SimConnect stuff that needs in order to work and I am not willing to break anything with P3D which is working nicely now. So, when I use the Replay function in P3D, the result is full of stutters and I also get a display problem when I try a second replay. I get a "mist" effect that I cannot eliminate afterwards and remains after I exit the replay mode. The playback function in P3D is something I haven't use many times, so I will like your feedback. Do you think it is worth using or FS Recorder is the only viable option? I wish some developer could release an FS Recorder version for P3D as it is always rewarding to enjoy a landing from the relaxed passenger seat.

Hello guys...Its a pity we can't have a measure of our systems in order to know what we can achieve at the first place. I am also kind of confused. Yesterday, I did a flight from Edinburgh to Southampton using FTX scenery and the Majestic Q400 using unlimited. I used high scenery settings (Rob's 4K actually). Results: Panning with TIR was better than fixed FPS. This smoothness of head motion adds to the realism that is for sure... Landing was not smooth at all. Actually it was very bad performance I didn't enjoyed it at all because I couldn't guide with precision the plane to the runway, giving me about 20-25 fps. Then I tried the same situation using a target of 30fps. Same awful result full of stutters. So we should admit..our systems are limiting us whether we like it or not. I think I run a powerful setup but it can't handle a smooth approach on EGHI using all FTX eye candy on a Q400. I am not satisfied with that because there is only one solution, and this is not to use limited or unlimited. I have to reduce my settings. And this test was with vanilla Nvidia CP and NI. I will only be satisfied with fluidity on a non-autogen sim...