Author Topic: Work in Progress / 01  (Read 105189 times)

newmanix

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
Re: Work in Progress / 01
« Reply #60 on: October 07, 2010, 12:23:38 am »
As for the screenshots, I was refering to the ones posted before not yours. I would not imply you would create settings for a simple screenshot. As for the shots you took, I have to be honest... they dont look that different to me... and the differences I did see... were minor to me.

As I've said, I didn't really wanted to point out the image quality in FSX, it was just a performance remark.

Both FSX and FS9 are capable to create nice screenshots, but FSX offers many visual effects which need to be seen live (like shaders, wet runways, refractions) to be appreciated, because the whole point of those effect is how they react to the eyeposition or the sunlight.
 

Now that I 100% agree with, I just don't understand with my specs why I am not getting the "smooth frames" you seem to be getting. I just assume my specs are still not good enough. BTW, KJFK in FS9 on my system is getting about 40FPS with thunderstorms, 100% AI with PMDG 747. I just can't seem to get that in FSX. And my sliders are at default. Any lower and I miss out on those water effects etc. Now with VFR, with little to no traffic in a turboprop like the Lionheart aircraft, my frames are wayyy up. It's just the big airports I have the problems with which is why I stick to FS9 with the heavies. I am sure this will change with my next system.

I haven't tried Hawaii pack 1 in FSX yet but I am curious how the frames will act with the airports being small and very little traffic flying to them... i'll look into it.
« Last Edit: October 07, 2010, 12:28:36 am by newmanix »

yankeesji

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 67
Re: Work in Progress / 01
« Reply #61 on: October 07, 2010, 12:25:15 am »
Super Duper!  ;D

virtuali

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 50755
    • VIRTUALI Sagl
Re: Work in Progress / 01
« Reply #62 on: October 07, 2010, 12:28:26 am »
BTW, KJFK in FS9 on my system is getting about 40FPS with thunderstorms, 100% AI with PMDG 747. I just can't seem to get that in FSX. And my sliders are at default. Any lower and I miss out on those water effects etc.

If you are using the PMDG 747 for FSX, I don't doubt you struggle to get good fps, but then we are talking about a product that clearly has performance issues, rather than a problem with FSX itself. Their MD11 is *much* better, and is not any less complex or sophisticated. I guess more care was taken optimizing the MD11.

newmanix

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
Re: Work in Progress / 01
« Reply #63 on: October 07, 2010, 12:30:27 am »
BTW, KJFK in FS9 on my system is getting about 40FPS with thunderstorms, 100% AI with PMDG 747. I just can't seem to get that in FSX. And my sliders are at default. Any lower and I miss out on those water effects etc.

If you are using the PMDG 747 for FSX, I don't doubt you struggle to get good fps, but then we are talking about a product that clearly has performance issues, rather than a problem with FSX itself. Their MD11 is *much* better, and is not any less complex or sophisticated. I guess more care was taken optimizing the MD11.

True but the interrior textures in the MD-11 are not as good. I believe they down scaled the VC textures for performance...

cmpbllsjc

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 948
Re: Work in Progress / 01
« Reply #64 on: October 07, 2010, 12:39:07 am »
BTW, KJFK in FS9 on my system is getting about 40FPS with thunderstorms, 100% AI with PMDG 747. I just can't seem to get that in FSX. And my sliders are at default. Any lower and I miss out on those water effects etc. Now with VFR, with little to no traffic in a turboprop like the Lionheart aircraft, my frames are wayyy up. It's just the big airports I have the problems with which is why I stick to FS9 with the heavies. I am sure this will change with my next system.

I haven't tried Hawaii pack 1 in FSX yet but I am curious how the frames will act with the airports being small and very little traffic flying to them... i'll look into it.

Newmanix, I just bought the PMDG 747 about three weeks ago at Fry's since it was only $30. On my rig, E8400 OC'ed to 3.85, 2 GB RAM, GTS 250 1GB video card, with AI turned off and bad weather (not completely IMC, but overcast and rain), and the PMDG 747, with FPS unlocked I get between 24 and 35 FPS, usually hanging around 27 or so, but it fluctuates when the FPS are unlocked. The same scenario with AI on (UT2 at 100%) I get fluctuations between 19 and 25, but usually staying around 22 or so. Still very flyable at that FPS. Clearly the PMDG doesn't get the same FPS as the LDS 767 in FSX, but its not that bad either.

Sometimes what I will do if I feel like the FPS hit is too much and I am using UT2, I can reduce the traffic density in game using a hot key without a sceney reload, or using the UT2 hot key I will kill traffic completely when on final, then as soon as I touch down, I hit the Hot key to turn traffic back on. Kind of like nothing ever happened if you know what I mean.

newmanix

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
Re: Work in Progress / 01
« Reply #65 on: October 07, 2010, 12:47:26 am »
BTW, KJFK in FS9 on my system is getting about 40FPS with thunderstorms, 100% AI with PMDG 747. I just can't seem to get that in FSX. And my sliders are at default. Any lower and I miss out on those water effects etc. Now with VFR, with little to no traffic in a turboprop like the Lionheart aircraft, my frames are wayyy up. It's just the big airports I have the problems with which is why I stick to FS9 with the heavies. I am sure this will change with my next system.

I haven't tried Hawaii pack 1 in FSX yet but I am curious how the frames will act with the airports being small and very little traffic flying to them... i'll look into it.

Newmanix, I just bought the PMDG 747 about three weeks ago at Fry's since it was only $30. On my rig, E8400 OC'ed to 3.85, 2 GB RAM, GTS 250 1GB video card, with AI turned off and bad weather (not completely IMC, but overcast and rain), and the PMDG 747, with FPS unlocked I get between 24 and 35 FPS, usually hanging around 27 or so, but it fluctuates when the FPS are unlocked. The same scenario with AI on (UT2 at 100%) I get fluctuations between 19 and 25, but usually staying around 22 or so. Still very flyable at that FPS. Clearly the PMDG doesn't get the same FPS as the LDS 767 in FSX, but its not that bad either.

Sometimes what I will do if I feel like the FPS hit is too much and I am using UT2, I can reduce the traffic density in game using a hot key without a sceney reload, or using the UT2 hot key I will kill traffic completely when on final, then as soon as I touch down, I hit the Hot key to turn traffic back on. Kind of like nothing ever happened if you know what I mean.

And that's the very problem. I like my traffic. It's just a very big deal to me. And my point is with FS9 there is no trade off. With FSX there is, so I am just enjoying the best of both worlds. Don't get me wrong, I love FSX for my VFR flights are simply BEAUTIFUL but currently the buck stops there... Now since I got FSX, VFR flying in FS9 simply sucks!! So I have what I feel to be the best of both. After the move, the weading, and the new car, I will be in the market for a new system. By then, should be good enough to stop requesting FS9. Just one more year... i hope... Already dropped $2500 this year on a system can't afford to keep doing this.

cmpbllsjc

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 948
Re: Work in Progress / 01
« Reply #66 on: October 07, 2010, 01:01:50 am »
[And that's the very problem. I like my traffic. It's just a very big deal to me. And my point is with FS9 there is no trade off. With FSX there is, so I am just enjoying the best of both worlds. Don't get me wrong, I love FSX for my VFR flights are simply BEAUTIFUL but currently the buck stops there... Now since I got FSX, VFR flying in FS9 simply sucks!! So I have what I feel to be the best of both. After the move, the weading, and the new car, I will be in the market for a new system. By then, should be good enough to stop requesting FS9. Just one more year... i hope... Already dropped $2500 this year on a system can't afford to keep doing this.

Well, that was at KJFK which is probably the worst area in the US as far as FPS, plus the hardest hitting FPS plane I own, and bad weather, and like I mentioned, even with traffic ON, still 19 to 25 FPS which on my system is still very smooth and no blurries.

However, at KDFW and most other big hubs like ORD, LAX, or even the stock LAX, using the same a/c since I have tried it at all of them, I can usually keep around 25 of higher FPS with AI on during arrival, hence not needing a tradeoff.

But if KJFK is part of every flight, then sticking to the FS9 version if you need 40 FPS is about all you can do.

Your milage may very, but I don't fly to JFK all that often and since all my other big hubs perform great it's a non issue for me personally and I haven't needed to make any tradeoffs.

newmanix

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
Re: Work in Progress / 01
« Reply #67 on: October 07, 2010, 01:12:51 am »
[And that's the very problem. I like my traffic. It's just a very big deal to me. And my point is with FS9 there is no trade off. With FSX there is, so I am just enjoying the best of both worlds. Don't get me wrong, I love FSX for my VFR flights are simply BEAUTIFUL but currently the buck stops there... Now since I got FSX, VFR flying in FS9 simply sucks!! So I have what I feel to be the best of both. After the move, the weading, and the new car, I will be in the market for a new system. By then, should be good enough to stop requesting FS9. Just one more year... i hope... Already dropped $2500 this year on a system can't afford to keep doing this.

Well, that was at KJFK which is probably the worst area in the US as far as FPS, plus the hardest hitting FPS plane I own, and bad weather, and like I mentioned, even with traffic ON, still 19 to 25 FPS which on my system is still very smooth and no blurries.

However, at KDFW and most other big hubs like ORD, LAX, or even the stock LAX, using the same a/c since I have tried it at all of them, I can usually keep around 25 of higher FPS with AI on during arrival, hence not needing a tradeoff.

But if KJFK is part of every flight, then sticking to the FS9 version if you need 40 FPS is about all you can do.

Your milage may very, but I don't fly to JFK all that often and since all my other big hubs perform great it's a non issue for me personally and I haven't needed to make any tradeoffs.

What are your specs?

cmpbllsjc

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 948
Re: Work in Progress / 01
« Reply #68 on: October 07, 2010, 01:43:47 am »
What are your specs?

I listed them in my first response to you but here they are again and more detail.

Win XP 32 SP3
E8400 OC'ed to 3.85
2 GB RAM at 1088 ghz
GTS 250 OC'ed 1 GB video card
Asus Maximus Formula mobo
PC Power and Cooling 750w power supply
Zigmatek cooler <----- Not 100% sure on this one. would have to get the big box that my case came with and go thru the empty boxes to check the make and model
Antec 900  case

Addons used:

* UTX USA * UTX Europe * GEX US/Europe * FEX * REX * ActiveSkyAdvanced/Evolution * SceneryTech LC * FSGenesis Mesh * PMDG 747/JS4100 * LDS 767 * RealAir SF-260 * Aerosoft F-16 * Nemeth CH-53 * Cera Bell 412 * Lionheart Creations Quest Kodiak/Epic LT * Wilco E-Jets EMB 170/190 * Captain Sim 727-100/200/Freighter * Captain Sim C-130 X-perience * MegaScenery SoCal/Pheonix/Las Vegas/Dallas * FlyTampa St. Marten * FSDreamteam LSGG/LSZH/KLAS/KFLL/KJFK/KORD/KDFW * Sim Giantes Gran Canaria International Airport * RGFlight Slazburg UK2000 * Gatwick Extreme * Aerosoft Madeira X/German Aiports 2/Nice X/Approaching InnsbruckX/Lisbon X/Gibraltar X * Cloud9 KMCO * Imaginesim KCLT/TJSJ/KATL * BluePrint KDAL * LatinVFR Toncontin * Tropical Sim SBRJ/SBGL/SBSP/SBGR * WOAI * Ultimate Traffic 2 SP1 * EZdok Camera * Setup FS-GS
« Last Edit: October 07, 2010, 01:46:39 am by cmpbllsjc »

TouchandGoFilms

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • Touch and Go Films
Re: Work in Progress / 01
« Reply #69 on: October 07, 2010, 05:11:53 am »
Im sad...

I have a Duo Core @ 2.2GHz
and a nVidea 9800

No wonder I like FS2004 better!  LOL!
Slade Mitchell
Owner of Touch and Go Films
www.touchandgofilms.com

newmanix

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
Re: Work in Progress / 01
« Reply #70 on: October 07, 2010, 06:17:26 am »
What are your specs?

I listed them in my first response to you but here they are again and more detail.

Win XP 32 SP3
E8400 OC'ed to 3.85
2 GB RAM at 1088 ghz
GTS 250 OC'ed 1 GB video card
Asus Maximus Formula mobo
PC Power and Cooling 750w power supply
Zigmatek cooler <----- Not 100% sure on this one. would have to get the big box that my case came with and go thru the empty boxes to check the make and model
Antec 900  case

Addons used:

* UTX USA * UTX Europe * GEX US/Europe * FEX * REX * ActiveSkyAdvanced/Evolution * SceneryTech LC * FSGenesis Mesh * PMDG 747/JS4100 * LDS 767 * RealAir SF-260 * Aerosoft F-16 * Nemeth CH-53 * Cera Bell 412 * Lionheart Creations Quest Kodiak/Epic LT * Wilco E-Jets EMB 170/190 * Captain Sim 727-100/200/Freighter * Captain Sim C-130 X-perience * MegaScenery SoCal/Pheonix/Las Vegas/Dallas * FlyTampa St. Marten * FSDreamteam LSGG/LSZH/KLAS/KFLL/KJFK/KORD/KDFW * Sim Giantes Gran Canaria International Airport * RGFlight Slazburg UK2000 * Gatwick Extreme * Aerosoft Madeira X/German Aiports 2/Nice X/Approaching InnsbruckX/Lisbon X/Gibraltar X * Cloud9 KMCO * Imaginesim KCLT/TJSJ/KATL * BluePrint KDAL * LatinVFR Toncontin * Tropical Sim SBRJ/SBGL/SBSP/SBGR * WOAI * Ultimate Traffic 2 SP1 * EZdok Camera * Setup FS-GS


I'll look into overclocking my system... I have always been afraid to do that...

skimmer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 678
Re: Work in Progress / 01
« Reply #71 on: October 07, 2010, 06:19:48 am »
If you over clock your sys you better keep your eye on the cpu temp!!!!
« Last Edit: October 07, 2010, 06:21:50 am by skimmer »

cmpbllsjc

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 948
Re: Work in Progress / 01
« Reply #72 on: October 07, 2010, 07:11:30 am »
Im sad...

I have a Duo Core @ 2.2GHz
and a nVidea 9800

No wonder I like FS2004 better!  LOL!

LOL, it all makes sense now, just kidding of course.

On a serious note, I can see why you don't care much for FSX trying to run it at 2.2Ghz. Frankly, from me running it at everywhere from 2.53ghz to 3.0ghz then 3.60ghz and now 3.85ghz, I will say that FSX really shines when you can get either a quad or dual core to run it at greater than 3.6 ghz. Anything over 3.6ghz is just gravy and extra eye candy.

When I was running it at 3.0ghz it was pretty solid still, but I had to cut down on some autogen and reduce the scenery complexity sliders a bit, but was still able to fly the big hubs with a least 75% airline AI.

If mine runs great at 3.85ghz, I can only imagine those guys running i7's at 4.0ghz to 4.4 ghz with 6GB DDR3 RAM, that must really be sweet.

cmpbllsjc

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 948
Re: Work in Progress / 01
« Reply #73 on: October 07, 2010, 07:30:37 am »
I'll look into overclocking my system... I have always been afraid to do that...

It's funny how we can presume, without actually knowing. This whole time I figured you and most everyone on this board and most FS boards for that matter are overclocked.

You know, this is the first computer system I ever OC'ed. Like you I have always been scared to try, mostly just because

a. I didn't know how.
b. I didn't know who's advice to trust
c. Read all the horror stories about people frying their CPU, mobo, etc.

That said, about 6 months after my rig was built I said what the hell, if I am ever going to really take advantage of FSX i'm going to have to OC so I might as well get it out of the way.

Frankly speaking, most of the pretty current hardware made in the last few years is pretty fool proof as far as overclocking goes. The bios is pretty easy to understand once you get into it and there aren't really a whole lot of things to adjust to do a basic overclock.

Not only that, but most of the current hardware is pretty safe in regards to frying. What I mean is that if you set voltages too high the rig probably wont even boot. You can even set some mobo's to shut the comuter down if certain temps get too high. Knowing that there are already some safeguards built in makes it a lot easier and less worrysome.

When I made my first attempt, I did a very mild OC from 3.0 to 3.4, then once I got the hang of it, I kept on increasing the multiplier and core voltage just a hair until I got to 3.85. Mind you I tested along the way using freeware tools like CPU-Z, p95, Realtemp, etc. Those tools let you run a battery of test to stress the CPU and RAM while at the same time monitoring temps. Once I got to around 3.6 ghz on my rig I opted to buy a $100 CPU cooler and then with the reduction of heat was able to get to 3.85 with no problem.

I could probably get to 4.0ghz, but I have a nice stable set up right now and plan on leaving it alone until I do my next hardare update. Surprisingly, as well as my current rig runs FSX, I am not really even that tempted to go out and get a new CPU, mobo, RAM and Win 7. If was really having performance problems I would have already done it, but at the moment I am really not sure if I would get that much more out of the upgrade over what I already have.

If you want to get started, you may want to talk to GEX co-creator NickN over at Simforums. He pretty much walked me through my OC when I first started and recommended the tools needed and recommendations on what mulitpliers and voltgages to start at. He's pretty much familiar with most mobos and their BIOS, so you could start with him. When he's not busy, he is pretty much willing to help anyone with OC'ing questions.

POST EDIT:

Forgot to mention the other common notion. A lot of non overclockers always say "..but it will reduce the life of the components".

I'm not saying that it wont, but as long as you keep the overclock in range of the temps recommended by your CPU, mobo, and RAM manufacturer, the reduction in the life of the components should be slim to none. I've been OC'ed for about 2 years now and my system is running like a champ and temps are always in check, even in the hot Texas summer when ambiant temps get warmer inside.

Beside the fact, how long are most of us going to keep the same rig anyway? If mine last me a good 5 years I will be more than happy and by then I will be way overdue for a hardware upgrade anyways.
« Last Edit: October 07, 2010, 07:35:07 am by cmpbllsjc »

Dimon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 491
Re: Work in Progress / 01
« Reply #74 on: October 07, 2010, 01:27:44 pm »
May I ask you a simple question? Why should I overclock the hardware for the software released in 2006? It seems that you all, folks, lost a common sense.   ;D
i7-6700k@4.6Ghz, Z170 Delux, 980Ti-6GB5700, 2TB EVO850, 16GB DDR4 RAM Win7/64 PRO.