Alpha Floor

So esentially the game is broken?

Hello, I am using 11.41, so OpenGL. Do you mean the low resolution Active Sky cloud replacement is “lower” resolution than the default clouds?

I will have a look, thank you. On the other hand, would you expect to have to resort to this with an i9 9900k CPU and a RTX 2080 Super GPU? Shouldn't a system like this be able to handle the default XP-11 without tweaking its files?

Thanks Steve, The other argument in favour of HT ON is that my PC is not dedicated 100% to X-Plane, I'm doing other things on it and HT on is nice to have for productivity etc. How do I set Affinity Mask? I used to use Process Lasso but gave it up after a while as I thought that it didn't really help at all and I had some suspicions that it was preventing X-Plane from loading scenery correctly during flight.

On the contrary, it's the higher number that shows the bottleneck! That number represents the time to draw one frame, the longer it takes, the worse. It's an inverse relation to FPS.

Thanks very much, I will try increasing the CPU fan speed! I am using a Noctua NH-U14S with one fan. I will also try your settings and I will look for Realbench, the non-Asus version. Two days ago I run Memtest86, the full 4 passes which took almost 6h. Two errors were detected runing Test 8. I went into the BIOS and saw the DRAM Voltage set to 1.35, I changed it to Auto, re-run Memtest86 and now it passed it with no errors. However, Auto seems to set 1.51V on the DRAM, is this not too much? My RAM is Corsair Vengeance DDR4 at 3200 MHz. I am using XMP II profile. What's the difference to XMP I anyway?

Hi Howard, What is your take on the HWInfo screenshot from above? I still can't get to pass Asus Realbench stability testing. It detects instability after around 15 minutes into the stress test. Any ideas as to what I could do other than increasing Vcore as that will push up my temps too high?

Folks, Maybe someone is interested in these numbers I will present. Having OCed the CPU to 5.1 GHz with HT OFF, this is the HWInfo report after a 2.5h session in X-Plane 11.41 in which I flew two VFR flights within the Balearic Islands, with the JustFlight PA28R Turbo Arrow, SpainUHD orthos, Active Sky XP (with stormy weather) and the following settings: Graphics quality: HDR; Texture quality: maximum; Anti aliasing: 4x SSAA + FXAA; Objects: maxium; Reflections: off; No shadows checked. Resolution: 1440p. FPS during the flight: consistently above 50 FPS, I would say average 60 FPS with peaks of up to 100-110 FPS. I reset HWInfo before starting X-Plane and took the screenshot right after closing X-Plane so that the average values were representative.

You should aim for the "aiming point" which are 1000 ft down the runway from the threshold. After flare, usually you will touch down slightly past the aiming point but within the touchdown zone. Don't obsess with vertical speed; it's more important to touch down with the correct attitude, within the touchdown zone, aligned with the centre line and without floating too much. Have the aircraft perform an autoland to see how it does it.

Hello Rick, No, this is 11.41.

Hey Folks, I think this is a recurrent topic but please bear with me. I have done two things to improve cockpit shadows in XP-11.41: 1) Tweaked the settings.txt as explained here 2) Added the "Jagged Shadow Fix" Lua script But still, I get things like this: (static image is not nearly as horrible as watching those stairs moving around, it's truly terrifying...) My question now is: what the hell? At this point this must be an X-Plane bug...

Doing more testing around clouds and not really understanding the inconsistent behaviour. This time I placed the aircraft at FL350 with a Cumulus Overcast set between FL200 and FL310, aircraft surrounded by clouds. The impact on FPS wasn't as bad as yesterday, having a smooth 45-55 FPS. I played with the AA slider and didn't notice any decrease/increase in FPS with any setting other than the right-most 8xSSAA+FXAA.

In real life it also happens that PAPIs are sometimes set to a different angle that the ILS glideslope (although I doubt this is the case in P3D, I may be wrong.) The correct procedure is: follow glideslope down to minimums if you are flying an ILS approach. Ignore them past minimums. Follow PAPIs if you are flying a visual approach.

Hi Jim, thanks for comment. I have AA set to 4x SSAA + FFAA. But if you see the numbers on the top left of the image, it’s the CPU that’s bottlenecking, not the GPU. Why would lowering AA here help?

Gentlemen, I usually get somewhere around 45-60+ FPS on my machine. 60+ during cruise: i9 9900k OC 5.1 GHz, RTX 2080 Super, DDR4 32GB 3200MHz. However, whenever there is a thick cloud layer around as provided by Active Sky XP the frame rate seems to suffer disproportionately. Here is an image when I was cruising at around 30-35 FPS surrounded by cloud. I understand clouds are difficult to render but these are the default XP-11.41 clouds, I did not touch them or applied any weird shader or anything. Also note it's my CPU that's bottlenecking here, not the GPU. any idea as to why? I am not using the Active Sky cloud textures. Do these perform any better or worse than the default ones? Thanks for your help in advance, Jaime