Performance issue

[medic87]

So far I like KORD v2 very much. The only problem is the performance, with the FSLabs Airbus I get only 25 FPS (compared to 35 on other addin airports like Denver or LAX). Is there a way to switch off some features, like the internal of the terminal? I only disabled passengers inside the terminal, but not luck so far.

[virtuali]

KORD doesn't have any performance problems. In fact, KORD V2 has an exceptionally good fps, considering how much more detailed is compared to the old one. Here's proof, we took these two screenshots using a saved situation, under exactly the same settings, to compare the old KORD to the new one:

This is the OLD FSDT KORD, a scenery originally made in 2008, which is about 4-5 times LESS detailed:

http://www.fsdreamteam.com/images/2019-8-22_11-53-15-619.jpg

This is the NEW FSDT KORD V2:

http://www.fsdreamteam.com/images/2019-8-22_12-3-1-998.jpg

The resolution it's 4K, the viewing angle is the worse possible, with the whole airport in sight and the Chicago downtown in the background, and every other setting is EXACTLY the same, AI is UT Live at 50%, which still is a lot of planes, and it's a setting that gives you a chance to find some free parking spots, and nothing else is changed, just the scenery.

So no, KORD doesn't any issues with performances. However, it's a scenery that requires A LOT of VRAM, and this is of course have been explained in the manual, with some tips to help understanding which settings affect fps the most.

The issue is, when VRAM is close to exhaustion ( anything higher than 85% ), the sim, and the video driver itself will start to swap textures in and out from RAM to VRAM, and this is VERY slow, because they have to pass through the PCI bottleneck.

So, your goal is to keep your setting in a way that your VRAM usage is not higher then 80-85% of the overall memory you have. For example, to use 4K textures you need AT LEAST 8GB or VRAM and, if you have airplanes with high res textures, lots of AI and high settings, that might not be enough.

Use the default Windows performance monitor, and check how much VRAM you have left. If it's higher than 90%, lower your settings.

[medic87]

with P3Dv4 I'm using not more than 8 GB out of 32. And still, in the terminal Area I get 24 frames tops (locked at 31) with my 1080 and i7-6700K.

[virtuali]

with P3Dv4 I'm using not more than 8 GB out of 32. And still, in the terminal Area I get 24 frames tops (locked at 31) with my 1080 and i7-6700K.

A 1080 surely doesn't have 32GB. I was referring to VRAM not RAM! If you have a regular 1080, you have 8GB, otherwise if it's a TI, you have 11GB. I'll repeat my last sentence:

Use the default Windows performance monitor, and check how much VRAM you have left. If it's higher than 90%, lower your settings. The VRAM usage is checked on the GPU tab of the Windows Performance monitor in the Task Manager.

[virtuali]

I noticed a 2.5 FPS difference in the two screen shots. BIG DEAL lol its terrible.

I don't know what your are trying to say here. It is a bad thing a new scenery that is way more detailed than the old one, it's not slower, but also a bit faster ? I would say if would have been a very good result even if it was something like 10%-15% slower than a scenery made for the PC specs of 10 years go. And instead it's faster.

The new KATL is waaaaaaaaaay better on FPS than the new KORD. what a joke.

Is that airport located in the Chicago area and represent KORD ? If yes, maybe you could have a point, otherwise your comment doesn't make any sense.

In addition to that, are you comparing both airports on your system, or are you comparing the fps you have on that scenery on your system, with the one I show in my screenshot, which was purposely made in the worse place, with the DD Chicago City X in the background as well. Do you have an equally dense photorealistic + city at Atlanta ? Are there any other fairly large airports in so close proximity to it, like KORD + KMDW ?

[Raller]

So far I like KORD v2 very much. The only problem is the performance, with the FSLabs Airbus I get only 25 FPS (compared to 35 on other addin airports like Denver or LAX).

What is bad on 25 FPS on a highest detailed airport with the highest intensiv aircraft like FSLabs Airbus 

In certain areas in bad weather and night lighting sometimes i have to deal with 15 fps or even worse (I5 7600K @ 4.4GHz and GTX 1060 6GB). And then i'll get bumpy motions and have to lower some P3D settings.

I would be happy about 25 FPS...

[CptFlipDover69]

lol looks like default Chicago not DD ChicagoX.

[virtuali]

lol looks like default Chicago not DD ChicagoX.

Why you keep lol-ing and making absurd comments ? FSDT KORD "looks like default" ? On which planet ?

[senchay]

I think he meant the city in background. NOt sure though, his comments doesnt make a lot of sense indeed.

But then, your screenshot shows 24 fps. Probably without any plane loaded and without GSX out. Before i buy this i would like an honest screentshot in either FSL or lets say PMDGs 747, and GSX vehicles out loading the plane.

I dont want to lower your value of work, KORD for sure looks very nice, especially the terminal but with 24 fps without plane i can see why people get problems. I understand you show the worst angle but usually on every arrival the whole airport is seen.
Maybe you should think about options/configurator, if there isnt one. From the posts here it seems there isnt one? Things like terminal interior is for sure nice but it seems its very detailed here. If i would guess maybe 20% of people need this detail. Myself would never have the idea to look inside a terminal.
Things that can be seen from outside are understandable but again, it looks very detailed here and i can imagine this is one of the things that steal performance quite a bit.

Atm im still waiting with a buy to see what other ppl say in the community.

[Captain Kevin]

Atm im still waiting with a buy to see what other ppl say in the community.

Why wouldn't you just download it, install it, and try it. That's what the trial version is there for.

[virtuali]

But then, your screenshot shows 24 fps. Probably without any plane loaded and without GSX out.

With the whole airport in sight, with the dense DD Chicago City X in the background. There were plenty of AIs, with UT Live at 50%

Before i buy this i would like an honest screentshot in either FSL or lets say PMDGs 747, and GSX vehicles out loading the plane.

You are missing the point of the screenshot. It was an obvious "apples vs apples" comparison between OLD FSDT KORD and NEW FSDT KORD, with the same settings, which means a scenery made in 2008, compared to one that is so much more detailed, made in 2019 with the latest techniques of graphic quality.

The screenshot was made to prove the new version, although is way more detailed, is not any slower than the old one. Period.

Maybe you should think about options/configurator, if there isnt one. From the posts here it seems there isnt one?

As explained so many times on our forum, an external configuration is not needed in our sceneries, because we can dynamically optimize fps with our scripting engine, by removing objects in realtime when not needed. Also, we don't use static airplanes, so we don't need to switch AFCADs for that reason.

Things like terminal interior is for sure nice but it seems its very detailed here. If i would guess maybe 20% of people need this detail. Myself would never have the idea to look inside a terminal.

Haven't you followed the whole terminal interior explanation ? Is ONLY loaded IN AVATAR mode and only if you WALK inside of it!

[RJDriver]

You are missing the point of the screenshot. It was an obvious "apples vs apples" comparison between OLD FSDT KORD and NEW FSDT KORD, with the same settings, which means a scenery made in 2008, compared to one that is so much more detailed, made in 2019 with the latest techniques of graphic quality.

That's a stretch, I went "Apples to Apples" directly from the old version to the new on same settings and I went from pretty good performance to regretting I paid for this. The performance is abysmal.

[virtuali]

That's a stretch, I went "Apples to Apples" directly from the old version to the new on same settings and

I don't know what you are trying to say with "that's a stretch", that I faked my screenshot ? KORD is designed to run on good hardware, but if you have it, it will work better than the old version, and this is a GOOD thing, because it takes *advantage* of it.

But if you don't have the right hardware, or you use insanely high settings for the one you have, the old version will run better, simply because there's like 5x LESS detail. That's the point of having a better hardware: being able to run very detailed scenery made to use it at its best with good performances.

I went from pretty good performance to regretting I paid for this. The performance is abysmal.

The performance is extremely good and it's even better than the old one, provided you have good hardware and you are using settings appropriate to it. And, it's not obviously possible (or, more precisely, it's just wrong to complain) to "regret" purchasing something sold in TRIAL version, for performance reasons.

What OTHER reason we would have to spend lots of money each month on bandwidth to let you TRY the scenery for free before purchasing, other than prevent you to "regret" a possible purchase ?

In any case, this is how KORD V2 works, with the proper hardware:

No, I'm not saying you need a 2500$ Titan to run KORD V2, because Rob used *extremely* high settings, so high they couldn't even be set with the normal user interface, but only with .CFG tweaks, it's only proof how good KORD works and looks, on a properly configured system.

A more reasonably priced card will surely work just as well, with less extreme settings.

[RJDriver]

The performance is extremely good and it's even better than the old one, provided you have good hardware and you are using settings appropriate to it.

I run things modestly but thanks for the help.