Jump to content

Evros

Members
  • Content Count

    398
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

226 Excellent

About Evros

  • Rank
    Member

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hey, whatever float's ones boat. Or engine 🤨
  2. Would it really? With hectic convolution we have in every simulator, I'd rather have one simulator kill off all others. I'm not looking forward to running three simulators with all their respective, stand alone and pricey ecosystems. Of course competition is good, but is there enough of us to feed all that market?
  3. What's up with your screenshots? Why are they so smeared outside of center point? I feel like looking at some terrible 3D image without 3D glasses.
  4. I wonder if all the mesh is stored as local assets or is something streamed?
  5. Well now that's subjective. I'm sure that most are fine with it but it is not the best out there. At least I have seen better in P3D with FSGU NG.
  6. Just for testing purposes, I disabled two out of my four DIMMs which left me with 16GB of RAM. Saw literally zero difference in performance. Faster RAM could make difference as 2400MHz is indeed on rather slow end of the spectrum, especially if you couple it with Ryzen CPU, but that doesn't really matter anymore because I doubt that you are in a market for an upgrade now.
  7. Haven't done much flying post patch, but from a screenshot taht I took today, it indeed seems like flora draw distance is less. I don't know if it is actually so or not, but if it is then it certainly is a strange decision by developers. We have a slider that controls this setting, so just tell people to lower it instead of reducing its total effectiveness. Now I have yet to seen direct comparison screenshots (which is hard to achieve, I admit) so I will refrain from getting my pitchfork out just yet. Would like a comment from developers.
  8. That is not how you take and example. You are not mentioning what aircraft are you comparing, let alone what simulator, but I am willing to bet that this other simulator is not at its stock configuration so why do you pit it against stock MSFS?
  9. Start putting those opinions next to facts and you will soon discover why people should often keep their opinion to themselves. The OP is moaning about not having a same level of vertical depth of stock MSFS than his, most likely, pimped out P3D or XP, not to mention complaining about features that are outright absent from other platforms. This is not a subjective or objective opinion but a useless whining. I can very well respect constructive criticism, but not some senseless venting just because something is not to your unrealistic and groundless expectations.
  10. I get a sense that people generally dont respect your opinions.
  11. Dont bother at this time. Live weather is more like a random weather scenario mode at the moment. Should be improved with next patch. For the life of me I can't figure out how they messed it up so bad in the first place. Taking local METAR data with models from Meteoblue should be pretty straight forward. Same goes to their navigation database that comes from Navblue. Outdated and erroneous.
  12. This performance increase comes back to amount of pixels being driven. If you shrink the application window, then adjacent pixels that fall outside of the window no longer need to be calculated because there is nothing but a static desktop displaying on those pixels. What you are effectively doing is decreasing resolution that the game is rendered at. Lets take an example. On a 1080p monitor, there is 2 073 600 individual pixels making up that panel (1920x1080 right?). When you are on full screen, GPU does calculations to continuously update information on all of those pixels as game progresses/moves. When you go windowed and start to shrink the application window, then all of a sudden all of those pixels that are no longer inside the window don't need to be rendered anymore for the application in use. If you shrink it by 50% then only half of those 2 073 600 pixels no longer need to be calculated for a 3D application. This is where the performance increase comes from. Regarding going from 60" monitor to 25", I assume that this 25" screen has lower native resolution and that is why you see performance improvements. Remember, smaller resolution means less pixels and easier to drive. Windows itself recognizes native resolution for connected monitor and sets it at this.
  13. What's with that driver? Not available from GeForce driver search or GeForce Experience.
×
×
  • Create New...