123 replies to this topic

[Grale]

Yes the Autogen is real fps killer, i have it set to one below normal.
once i get the final i might have to look into dumming down the texture size as discussed in the other thread, if my fps are as bad  

just try and remember FSX is more than just a game, what i mean is unlike say Call to Juarez,which looks and runs great now, you won't just play, finish and forget, we will have FSX for a good few years before next version.
And i can remember FS9 running much worse than FSX back when it was first released, i had many upgrades before i had all sliders up to max!
remember it's going to get better as we upgrade our pc's, i know it would be great if we could maxout all the sliders now, but we just havn't got the hardware yet.. unless your very wealthy  

just my 2p's worth

[G-HERB]

i tried playing it on the highest settings and the frame rate was awful.

[spand]

One word, and that is customize, everyone whacks everything to the right and then moans, I have car traffic at about 45 but don't have any ship or boat traffic, I have high terrain details but try to cut out autogen at this time, I am sure someone will come out with lower res textures.

[Chief_Bean]

Dan321, on Oct 2 2006, 12:04 PM, said:

i tried playing it on the highest settings and the frame rate was awful.

   of course that's expected, FSX is optimised for the latest hardware (infact hardware that isn't out yet) DX10 and windows vista.

[h.V]

11 min... Cable internet 2 MB per Secound  

EDIT: Speed 1.06 MB per secound

Edited by DiscoveryVACEO, 02 October 2006 - 08:02 AM.

[Katahu]

Dan321, on Oct 2 2006, 07:04 AM, said:

i tried playing it on the highest settings and the frame rate was awful.

What the heck did you expect? You just cranked the sim up to the max.

Besides, many flight sim fanatics see the FS series as a true way to test the performance of the latest hardware. For example: If your $3,000 Alienware desktop can't handle FSX, then your computer is not the best.

[Chief_Bean]

30% ... this is taking ages

[DMcGrew]

Grale, on Oct 2 2006, 06:58 AM, said:

Yes the Autogen is real fps killer, i have it set to one below normal.
once i get the final i might have to look into dumming down the texture size as discussed in the other thread, if my fps are as bad  

just try and remember FSX is more than just a game, what i mean is unlike say Call to Juarez,which looks and runs great now, you won't just play, finish and forget, we will have FSX for a good few years before next version.
And i can remember FS9 running much worse than FSX back when it was first released, i had many upgrades before i had all sliders up to max!
remember it's going to get better as we upgrade our pc's, i know it would be great if we could maxout all the sliders now, but we just havn't got the hardware yet.. unless your very wealthy  

just my 2p's worth

I actually think the autogen is messed up in this latest version. It seems like the amount of trees never changes. Even on the lowest autogen setting (one click to the right) I still see a massive amount of trees. When I'm flying I can look out the window at the trees and KILL my FPS.. then I can look out in another direction with water and buildings and the FPS is good. Of all things.. friggen trees have to be an FPS killer  

[Robin.]

Chief_Bean, on Oct 2 2006, 03:56 PM, said:

Dan321, on Oct 2 2006, 12:04 PM, said:

i tried playing it on the highest settings and the frame rate was awful.

of course that's expected, FSX is optimised for the latest hardware (infact hardware that isn't out yet) DX10 and windows vista.

It isn't optimized for FSX. It isn't optimized FOR Vista either (yet), because the demo still has some minor issues with Vista.

[Chief_Bean]

Robin., on Oct 2 2006, 04:58 PM, said:

Chief_Bean, on Oct 2 2006, 03:56 PM, said:

Dan321, on Oct 2 2006, 12:04 PM, said:

i tried playing it on the highest settings and the frame rate was awful.

of course that's expected, FSX is optimised for the latest hardware (infact hardware that isn't out yet) DX10 and windows vista.

It isn't optimized for FSX. It isn't optimized FOR Vista either (yet), because the demo still has some minor issues with Vista.

I thought that i read on the microsoft website FAQ that it was optimised for vista and DX10  

[Katahu]

DMcGrew, on Oct 2 2006, 11:11 AM, said:

Grale, on Oct 2 2006, 06:58 AM, said:

Yes the Autogen is real fps killer, i have it set to one below normal.
once i get the final i might have to look into dumming down the texture size as discussed in the other thread, if my fps are as bad 

just try and remember FSX is more than just a game, what i mean is unlike say Call to Juarez,which looks and runs great now, you won't just play, finish and forget, we will have FSX for a good few years before next version.
And i can remember FS9 running much worse than FSX back when it was first released, i had many upgrades before i had all sliders up to max!
remember it's going to get better as we upgrade our pc's, i know it would be great if we could maxout all the sliders now, but we just havn't got the hardware yet.. unless your very wealthy 

just my 2p's worth

I actually think the autogen is messed up in this latest version. It seems like the amount of trees never changes. Even on the lowest autogen setting (one click to the right) I still see a massive amount of trees. When I'm flying I can look out the window at the trees and KILL my FPS.. then I can look out in another direction with water and buildings and the FPS is good. Of all things.. friggen trees have to be an FPS killer  

Your remark about the amount of trees never changing doesn't seem to be a solid defense as FS9 had far less autogen to render even on the highest settings as opposed to FSX. In fact, most of us seasoned simmers complained that the autogen trees were a bit lacking in FS9 in terms of density when flying over a forested place such as Brazil, the Rockies, Africa, etc. Now people like you are saying that the number of autogen trees in FSX is too much?

[Mango]

DMcGrew, on Oct 2 2006, 11:11 PM, said:

Grale, on Oct 2 2006, 06:58 AM, said:

Yes the Autogen is real fps killer, i have it set to one below normal.
once i get the final i might have to look into dumming down the texture size as discussed in the other thread, if my fps are as bad 

just try and remember FSX is more than just a game, what i mean is unlike say Call to Juarez,which looks and runs great now, you won't just play, finish and forget, we will have FSX for a good few years before next version.
And i can remember FS9 running much worse than FSX back when it was first released, i had many upgrades before i had all sliders up to max!
remember it's going to get better as we upgrade our pc's, i know it would be great if we could maxout all the sliders now, but we just havn't got the hardware yet.. unless your very wealthy 

just my 2p's worth

I actually think the autogen is messed up in this latest version. It seems like the amount of trees never changes. Even on the lowest autogen setting (one click to the right) I still see a massive amount of trees. When I'm flying I can look out the window at the trees and KILL my FPS.. then I can look out in another direction with water and buildings and the FPS is good. Of all things.. friggen trees have to be an FPS killer  

I think you are right, it's not the clouds... When i look towards this hill packed with trees, the sim is not flyable even with reduced scenery and Catalyst settings (i'm tweaking now the second evening and just gave up...). When i don't look towards Hamburger Hill, f.e. i approach from the other direction and have this 'forrest' behind me, i can use full settings included full traffic at 25 FPS locked. That's not the smallest problem for a Conroe at 3.6 Ghz.






Regarding the final release - this should better be fixed ! Hope that's not Gold...

[Lucas]

Mango, on Oct 2 2006, 04:06 AM, said:

Did you find this FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.33 thingy somewhere ?

What that thing do ? I'm downloading that new version, if i found that line somewhere i tell you.

I totally agree with Mango, the big problem is the Autogen. Even if i choose from Sparse to Very Dense, i see a difference of 1FPS or 2FPS. If i turn off, my frames go to 45, something is wrong, its not possible that eat our frames like that.

Edited by Lucas Ferreira, 02 October 2006 - 03:32 PM.

[Chief_Bean]

This is a big improvement:
Less blurries, higher FPS, better traffic, i could go on. But just as Mango said I hope the minor issues are fixed.

[DAL_762]

Its being released soon.. how can they fix it so soon before release, do they put these things in those tin boxes that quick.. ?

[DMcGrew]

Katahu, on Oct 2 2006, 12:04 PM, said:

DMcGrew, on Oct 2 2006, 11:11 AM, said:

Grale, on Oct 2 2006, 06:58 AM, said:

Yes the Autogen is real fps killer, i have it set to one below normal.
once i get the final i might have to look into dumming down the texture size as discussed in the other thread, if my fps are as bad 

just try and remember FSX is more than just a game, what i mean is unlike say Call to Juarez,which looks and runs great now, you won't just play, finish and forget, we will have FSX for a good few years before next version.
And i can remember FS9 running much worse than FSX back when it was first released, i had many upgrades before i had all sliders up to max!
remember it's going to get better as we upgrade our pc's, i know it would be great if we could maxout all the sliders now, but we just havn't got the hardware yet.. unless your very wealthy 

just my 2p's worth

I actually think the autogen is messed up in this latest version. It seems like the amount of trees never changes. Even on the lowest autogen setting (one click to the right) I still see a massive amount of trees. When I'm flying I can look out the window at the trees and KILL my FPS.. then I can look out in another direction with water and buildings and the FPS is good. Of all things.. friggen trees have to be an FPS killer  

Your remark about the amount of trees never changing doesn't seem to be a solid defense as FS9 had far less autogen to render even on the highest settings as opposed to FSX. In fact, most of us seasoned simmers complained that the autogen trees were a bit lacking in FS9 in terms of density when flying over a forested place such as Brazil, the Rockies, Africa, etc. Now people like you are saying that the number of autogen trees in FSX is too much?

I'm not sure if you understood me completely. Basically I just think there are waaay too many trees for the lowest Autogen setting. With my system theres no way I should be hitting only 4 or 5 FPS with autogen at its lowest setting (just above OFF).

[DMcGrew]

Also noticing a lot of unstable FPS while on the runway. With autogen all the way off I get between 5 and 25 FPS on the runway. It will be at 25 then all the sudden jump down to 5. I have no idea what is causing that.. makes it pretty jumpy.

[Mango]

DMcGrew, on Oct 3 2006, 06:51 AM, said:

Also noticing a lot of unstable FPS while on the runway. With autogen all the way off I get between 5 and 25 FPS on the runway. It will be at 25 then all the sudden jump down to 5. I have no idea what is causing that.. makes it pretty jumpy.

...and results in micro stutters as well even with low settings and locked FPS. Wasn't the case with the first demo. There's an awful autogen bug in the second release. I hope the development team is reading the forums and have time to react.


Dang...

[Mango]

Chief_Bean, on Oct 3 2006, 03:24 AM, said:

This is a big improvement:
...higher FPS,

Which sim you are talking about ?!  

[RoniisH]

Mango, on Oct 3 2006, 05:48 AM, said:

Chief_Bean, on Oct 3 2006, 03:24 AM, said:

This is a big improvement:
...higher FPS,

Which sim you are talking about ?!  

you seem rather upset, Mango