active SCA - San Diego Area performance

[GlennH]

Whilst I expected significant FPS hits around LA area, I was surprised to find that the San Diego area also has major FPS fluctuations with even a less intensive addon like the Majestic Q400

 

I have done the following: (FSX Acceleration / SP2 boxed)

 

1) changed all of the SCA control panel options to off

2) Set autogen down to 'Normal'

3) Scenery complexity down 1 notch

4) Water is 2x low

5) No shadows on

6) No AI traffic

 

Even like this the FPS fluctuation dips from my lock of 30 down to low 20's with even further occasional dips into the teens

 

Is this normal?

 

It seems very bad by FTX region standards. Even the KSEA area performs better than this with much more autogen etc.

 

Its the same issues at LA area and Las Vegas areas, although I expected it with the LA area due to the massive urban areas.

 

Am I missing something?

 

Thanks,

 

Glenn

 

 

[fltsimguy]

Hi Glenn, I have an i7 920, GTX 260 2 Mb video, 16 gig RAM, tweaked the hell out of fsx.cfg.

 

I am using similar settings, but higher water, low AI road traffic, and I bounce around between, 26-32 fps with mine locked at 40 fps.

 

I am totally happy with that performance level given my ancient computer and how intense the scenery is in the San Diego area.  It just so happens I started my first flight from Gillespie field just outside of San Diego and flew the entire area.

 

I have not tried LA area yet.

[Andrew 737]

2 hours ago, GlennH said:

Whilst I expected significant FPS hits around LA area, I was surprised to find that the San Diego area also has major FPS fluctuations with even a less intensive addon like the Majestic Q400

 

I have done the following: (FSX Acceleration / SP2 boxed)

 

1) changed all of the SCA control panel options to off

2) Set autogen down to 'Normal'

3) Scenery complexity down 1 notch

4) Water is 2x low

5) No shadows on

6) No AI traffic

 

Even like this the FPS fluctuation dips from my lock of 30 down to low 20's with even further occasional dips into the teens

 

Is this normal?

 

It seems very bad by FTX region standards. Even the KSEA area performs better than this with much more autogen etc.

 

Its the same issues at LA area and Las Vegas areas, although I expected it with the LA area due to the massive urban areas.

 

Am I missing something?

 

Thanks,

 

Glenn

 

 

Reduce your FFTF (Fiber Frame Time Fraction) to 1.5 or 1.2 and try that.

[MotoDave]

Performance has always been very poor for me in and around San Diego, even with a stock FSX.

[Bruce Hamilton]

Why not leave the frame counter off, and just fly?  As long as you're not seeing a slideshow...  

[alexzar14]

oh no not again. PNW works only with default GA aircraft so that I had to disable. SCA again does not work, good I didn't buy it and waited for comments.

So what comes out of this regions concept is that if you fly airliners, you need Open LC's, can't go with regions. NCA however is more or less ok, but having only one region that works makes no consistent sense.

 

[GlennH]

1 hour ago, Bruce Hamilton said:

Why not leave the frame counter off, and just fly?  As long as you're not seeing a slideshow...  

 

I don't need the Frame counter Bruce. It only comes on when I do sense a 'slideshow'

 

Anything from 14-20 is very choppy for me and ruins the whole effect. low 20's are acceptable but barely.

[flying_fish]

Agree with Bruce - on a very mediocre rig (ATI graphics too)  I'm getting 25+FPS in a default aircraft, and only losing 5fps for A2A 172. Just need to tweak the setting to suit.

This is a great addition to the NA suite of sceneries. Congrats to all involved. Its made my Christmas so far!

 

 

[NeilG]

Once again it becomes apparent that different set-ups, even with more or less the same power, are capable of eliciting different results. But it seems to me that as beautiful as this work is, and that is not in despute, the urban areas on SCA are relatively rather taxing on our machinery. Perhaps there is nothing to be done about it and we must turn down our settings. But I've seen miracles worked before with optimising service packs. Anyway, it's good stuff and I love it, but if any performance optimisations can be made I would appreciate it.

 

thanks

Neil.

[rockliffe]

I'm experiencing more stutters and lower FPS around KLAX than any other Orbx scenery I own. Down a slow as 15, flying the A2A Comanche which is really great on performance. Goodness knows what it will be like in the NGX!

[fltsimguy]

1 hour ago, rockliffe said:

I'm experiencing more stutters and lower FPS around KLAX than any other Orbx scenery I own. Down a slow as 15, flying the A2A Comanche which is really great on performance. Goodness knows what it will be like in the NGX!

 

I can't comment on the NGX but so much might depend on individual settings.  How high are the AI settings...try shutting them completely off and seeing how well the area performs.  No cars, no AI Planes etc might make one heck of a difference.

 

Tweak to find the balance.

[Holger Sandmann]

Hi guys,

 

I'm no expert in system/settings tuning but I try to use a systematic approach meaning focusing on different components in isolation -- autogen, scenery objects, LOD radius, water effects, weather, etc. -- to discover which of them are most taxing on my PC and then set sliders accordingly.

 

Also, if you're using third-party airports with SCA and want to plan a flight between just those then you could experiment with deactivating the "FTX_NA_SCA05_SCENERY" folder. This contains all of the SCA enhanced airports plus custom object placements, which should save a bunch of frames while the overall scenery won't change much since all autogen remains visible/available. You don't want to fly to the SCA-enhanced airports with this folder off as you'll be missing the grass polys and other features but that won't be very visible while in the air (The alternative approach would be to temporarily remove all _objects_ files from that folder, which would retain airport backgrounds but is more "fiddly" to implement). Note that this is the only SCA folder though one can deactivate without breaking too much in terms of its components.

 

The main issue with the LA Basin and San Diego area is that they are not only massive urban metropolises but also contain loads of large and mid-sized airports, all of which have been greatly enhanced compared to the default versions. The airports team was conscious of this situation and didn't go "all-out" in terms of adding 3D grass, "peopleflow", small objects, etc., but some cumulative effect is to be expected.  

 

Cheers, Holger

 

 

[alexzar14]

One important point is lost: the settings don't matter when it comes to NGX and others alike, the hardware does not mater either. Sceneries must be designed and tested with airliners like NGX, not default Cessnas or A2A (I don't want to sound demanding or rude I'm just talking, not shouting or crying or blaming etc...)

 

I have 4790K, GTX970 and Samsung SSD (SSDs help), my ai traffic is set to 20%, I see 5-8 aircraft at airports and that's good enough. Settings are smartly managed. With this and PMDG I get 14-18 fps at KSEA with PNW, 20 max, for brief periods. This is not because my settings are mine..., or hardware or other, this is so because the software was not designed and tested to perform with airliners like PMDG. 

Huge masses of people fly PMDG stuff with FTX products (I believe there are like 3 persons in the world (or less!) who fly PMDG over default FSX). Also, it's been proven optimization is possible, a story: there was once a hopeless plane: iFly 747, performance was horrible and many shelved it. FSX architecture was blamed, 3rd party sceneries/airports were blamed, anything you could think of was blamed too...

Then, a period of time later, the SP1 was released, and now this plane performs better than NGX and way better than a 777. What did they do in that SP1? - they optimized it -))))

 

 

[Martin]

It's always a trade off between complex scenery or complex aircraft, can't have both.  The hardware is just not there yet. I've been involved with this hobby since 1984 and that was the case then and is the case now.

 

Cheers

Martin

[fltsimguy]

Holger is a wise man....I'll say it again....tweak and find the balance.  And Martin...exactly, find the trade off.

[alexzar14]

Interestingly NCA does well, I get 20-22 fps on approach to 28 KSFO-HD by Flightbeam any star path/any direction. How is that possible? NCA does come with options panel which helped a lot. PNW doesn't have the options panel which is a disaster. Does SouthCA have an options panel?

[wulfbindewald]

3 hours ago, alexzar14 said:

Does SouthCA have an options panel?

Yes, see below

[VAL067]

Have to agree with the guys who said its a trade off with settings. .you have to be willing to drop some of the sliders and turn off some settings to find a happy medium. SCA has huge metropolitan areas and this is whats causing most of your problems. To me the trade off is worth it I have spent over 10hrs flying SCA since downloading yesterday its amazing.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[dominique]

8 hours ago, Holger Sandmann said:

Hi guys,

 

I'm no expert in system/settings tuning but I try to use a systematic approach meaning focusing on different components in isolation -- autogen, scenery objects, LOD radius, water effects, weather, etc. -- to discover which of them are most taxing on my PC and then set sliders accordingly.

 

Also, if you're using third-party airports with SCA and want to plan a flight between just those then you could experiment with deactivating the "FTX_NA_SCA05_SCENERY" folder. This contains all of the SCA enhanced airports plus custom object placements, which should save a bunch of frames while the overall scenery won't change much since all autogen remains visible/available. You don't want to fly to the SCA-enhanced airports with this folder off as you'll be missing the grass polys and other features but that won't be very visible while in the air (The alternative approach would be to temporarily remove all _objects_ files from that folder, which would retain airport backgrounds but is more "fiddly" to implement). Note that this is the only SCA folder though one can deactivate without breaking too much in terms of its components.

 

The main issue with the LA Basin and San Diego area is that they are not only massive urban metropolises but also contain loads of large and mid-sized airports, all of which have been greatly enhanced compared to the default versions. The airports team was conscious of this situation and didn't go "all-out" in terms of adding 3D grass, "peopleflow", small objects, etc., but some cumulative effect is to be expected.  

 

Cheers, Holger

 

 

That is very interesting. I experienced quite a staccato landing in KSMO with a good computer by today standards and  the same parameters which yield 30+ fps everywhere else  I've flown so far in SCA . 

 

If all these smaller airports are the main drain on the frame rate, would it be possible to have a control panel to deactivate a choice of them ? Let me explain. If I want to fly from Santa Monica to Salton Sea, I don't need any of them but I want KSMO and KSAS both fully furnished by Neil and team. The control panel could cover ony the coastal urban areas where the airports and buildings density is the highest. Just a thought, maybe impractical.

 

I want to add that SCA is not only about the LA and San Diego areas. I was skeptical about the desert after the previews but is panned out as an excellent surprise. You did a great job there mixing the photorealist terrain which looks amazing with the textured terrain.  The screenshots don't do justice to that kind terrain You have to fly (to move) over them within the sim to see how good it is with the SCA mesh. P3D dynamic shading add, I suppose an extra dimension. Holger, I look forward to see more desert coming from you   ! 

 

[Orbx Flyer]

8 hours ago, Martin said:

It's always a trade off between complex scenery or complex aircraft, can't have both.  The hardware is just not there yet. I've been involved with this hobby since 1984 and that was the case then and is the case now.

 

Cheers

Martin

I totally agree.  For myself, I pick as virtual world as I can get...so tend to fly less complicated cockpits.  I'm not a real-world pilot, or a person that will likely get my real-world PL.  So...delving into every nuance of a real-world's plane sub systems, is not my focus.  I just want to have a mind believe that I have just taken off from destinations that I have been to, in the real world.  That is the greatest simulation 'high' for myself as a hobbyist.  I am getting fantastic FPS performance out of FSX and P3D, with the likes of Carenado single and twin engine frames.  Easily keeping into the 50-75 FPS range as a mean average. (screen shots of flights in South Cal ((with FPS counter display)) to prove that, if required).

 

I have both FSX and P3D fully maxed out in all graphic settings, less two shadow settings that are in the mid range in P3D.  Water is set to High in P3D and Max in FSX.

 

I am a great supporter and 'preach it up'...always...to defrag your new region and airport installations...so very important for quick linear referencing by your hard drive, etc.

[Pete Wilcox]

I don't think anyone can blame ORBX for giving us something nice to look at.  I place all the blame on the computer industry for trying to reinvent the same wheel over and over.  I don't care if they come out with an I9 or an I11 or an IXX, as long as processing is based in silicon chips it's not going to get much better.

 

Until the industry finds a leap to another level of technology (I've heard talk for years about it but don't see it happening) we are going to be stuck with the same issues.  If our game was just a battlefield or room or racetrack or whatever, it wouldn't be such a problem but our game room includes the entire world.

[JoseCFII]

With FSX, I experienced stutters and poor fps in LA, Las Vegas, & San Diego areas, so I decided to delete SoCal. It was a slideshow in many areas with a high VAS usage. 

 

It's sad that some simmers think that it's their computer or settings.

[Jiri Kocman]

I did 25 flights over SoCal with FSEconomy with KSNA as my base... Only one big deal is LAX, there I go under 20FPS with full autogen and scenery sliders. KSNA, KONT, KSAN are easily low 20's at approach, most time when airbone there is absolutely no problem 30-40FPS and over deserts... 60FPS... even Turbine Duke which is performance heavy aircraft.

 

So yes, LAX is very bad with all settings, but other areas are fine.

[Voyager]

Hi folks,

 

Well, there even in times of the default scenery, and then with FTX Global Base, it has always been difficult to fly in the San Diego surroundings without getting stutters and, with high velocity, blurred textures. 

 

As I flew a lot for that area, I then bought a good RIG - CPU & GPU (later 2012). 

 

What a fiasco! 

 

So, when P3Dv2 came to light, I embarked on it. I got there fairly flying with a certain lag, of course mainly at high velocity, but I flew. 

 

Since then, with the improvement of P3Dvx, I can fly without blur or lag, but sometimes - some stutters! 

 

FPS? Enough to fly! This was and is on P3Dv2x&3.x, using all features that the RIG offers!

 

So when SCA was in test, I wondered: what will happen to those who are flying FSX? 

 

By various reports posted here ... everyone knows!

 

So, in conclusion, SCA is not heavy to fly, default always was. 

 

What's needed is a good RIG and (imho) a new simulator (P3D).

 

Talking all this, I still use FSX ... few times.

 

Cheers,

Voyager
 

[JoseCFII]

Unfortunately, there are still way too many ftx add-on airports that need to be upgraded before I upgrade to p3d v3. This does not include the updates that will keep coming from LM.

 

In my case, the answer is not a new computer or a new simulator. I have zero issues with default FTXG and FSDT KLAX, LVFR KSNA, and KSAN.

 

I can list countless of amazing flights that I've done in FTX PNW, Northern Cal, and Norway with lots of payware airports. I've had zero issues with fps or VAS.

 

There's something wrong with this region and I'm confident that the ORBX team will find out and fix it.

[Jon Clarke]

For me it is KLAX that causes problems, not so much the heavy urban area but the airport itself. I have all the config options set to ON except NA traffic, and use AirTrafficManager to ensure there are no more than 40 planes active within my radius. I struggle to get 17fps max(this is not counter watchng but micro stutters) but as soon as I pass the terminal building on the runway I am up to high 20s fps. After a mile or so away from the airport I am still in the 20s fps with ever increasing fps the further from the airport I get. I have tried most settings scenarios including reducing LOD radius, autogen, lighting, traffic, disabling all config options etc but it is definately the KLAX airport for me. I even tried Holger's suggestion regarding KLAX objects disablement but that did nothing. Just down the road at Santa Monica, I get 25-30fps wuth full normal settings for me, but if I turn to look towards KLAX I drop to 12-14fps, look away (and still in heavy urban area) back upto mid 20's. I would much prefer to have a less detailed KLAX and be able to have a living airport with traffic than the current one. To have to set things like autogen to Normal defeats the object especially when the orbx team have spent such a long time hand placing autogen objects and then the user having to disable a large proportion of them just to be able to fly. My rig is not that great but I can fly San Fran well in the smooth 20+fps and that was considered a high detailed airport and a challenge to the system.

I note that Rob Abernathy too has suggested Normal as the autogen setting and his rig is way above my specs. Kind of defeats the object really to me.

The scenery is fabulous but I want to enjoy the LA region. Absolutely no problems with all the other areas covered at all. Max settings and beautiful detailed scenery, and realistic traffic both GA and airlines, but not around KLAX.

[alexzar14]

2 hours ago, jjaycee1 said:

For me it is KLAX that causes problems, not so much the heavy urban area but the airport itself. I have all the config options set to ON except NA traffic, and use AirTrafficManager to ensure there are no more than 40 planes active within my radius. I struggle to get 17fps max

 

 

Try to disable all options in the SCA options control panel and see if fps rate goes up. You only need core stuff to fly airliners anyway, don't need details like harbor objects and smoke stacks, GA AI etc... This is good when you fly GA low and slow, airliners you don't need it.

 

Anyone tried KLAX/KSAN with PMDG NGX? please report performance with details - off in the options panel.

[Holger Sandmann]

Hi jjaycee1

 

Quote

I would much prefer to have a less detailed KLAX and be able to have a living airport with traffic than the current one.

 

I'm not quite sure I understand correctly but, FYI, the SCA version of KLAX is not more detailed than the default version. In fact, I just compared the two in ADE and ours has a few objects less (236 against the default's 250). Generally speaking, the larger the airport the fewer objects our airport team add because we know that those airports tend to be harder on resources as is. Moreover, users interested in large international airports will likely already own a third-party add-on anyway. Specific to KLAX our focus was to better match the aprons, runways, and taxiways to the SCA photoreal background, to check for proper AI flow, and similar items that don't add any extra strain.

 

Cheers, Holger

[Rexbo47]

On ‎12‎/‎23‎/‎2015 at 9:42 AM, Andrew 737 said:

Reduce your FFTF (Fiber Frame Time Fraction) to 1.5 or 1.2 and try that.

 

How does one do that?

[Andrew 737]

2 hours ago, Rexbo47 said:

 

How does one do that?

 

You have to add a line. To you FSX cfg file.

 

I assume the OP is using FSX?

 

Mid you Google 'Kosta FSX' you will get a result to go to Srdn Kostic's blog - great blog, good info.

 

merry Christmas 

 

[Rexbo47]

18 minutes ago, Andrew 737 said:

 

You have to add a line. To you FSX cfg file.

 

I assume the OP is using FSX?

 

Mid you Google 'Kosta FSX' you will get a result to go to Srdn Kostic's blog - great blog, good info.

 

merry Christmas 

 

 

Thanks, but I'm in P3D3.

[Voyager]

Prepar3d not need this setting. But if you want to put it to see how it looks, here you go:

 

=======================

[Main]
.......
FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.15

=======================

 

If it's not good, remove it from Prepar3d.cfg.

 

Voyager

[Andrew 737]

1 hour ago, Rexbo47 said:

 

Thanks, but I'm in P3D3.

Sorry I can't help.

[Rexbo47]

Thanks, Guys!

[FalconAF]

My 2-cents.

 

Like Martin, I've been flight simming on computers since they first came out in the '80's.  Got my real world PPL in '72.  Did IT ("computers") in the Air Force for 25+ years.

 

What have I learned during that time?  With the available plethora of addons over the years, and even the massive improvement capabilities of home computers today, you still can't "have it all" at the same time.  Load up enough state-of-the-art scenery, toss in a massively complex airplane, and crank up too many sliders in your flight sim settings, then you will still create an over-stressed computer system that can't handle it all.  There has to be some give and take depending on the flight scenario you are trying to do.  And that has pretty much been addressed in this thread so far.

 

So I'll address another factor.  And I'm not intending to be critical of any flight sim enthusiasts by saying this.  But in more cases than I can remember while assisting flight simmers who were having problems with their simulators, one large contributing factor was they didn't understand the real need to "maintain" their computers in ways that would ensure those computers would function optimally.  Your computer is a machine, just like your car.  You gotta do routine maintenance on it and keep it "clean".  "Junk" accumulates in and on computers.  Not just physical junk, like dust and pet fur and crud that means the case needs to be opened and the insides cleaned up, but also "program" junk.  You need to regularly run freeware programs available on the Internet to clean out this junk...temporary files, the recycle bins, spyware...all the "junk" that accumulates that will slow down your computer.  I've helped users who bought a state-of-the-art computer that 6 months later was running like a 3rd generation older one from 4 years ago, simply because they never did any regular "maintenance" of the computer.  It's not uncommon for me to see people with 3 or 4 year old computers running flight simulators better than a relatively newer computer that hasn't been taken care of properly.

 

And especially with something like our flights simulators that will want as many resources available as they can get their grubby little hands on, you should know how to NOT run other "programs" that don't NEED to be running while you are running your flight sim.  Things like Windows Update running "in the background", or "check for updates" processes that get automatically installed with other programs you install, and are "running in the background" using your computer resources while flight simming.  DON'T turn off any Security software and leave yourself vulnerable, but you should know how to prevent your anti-virus program and firewalls from "real-time scanning" EVERY file your computer tries to use, like every file in your flight sim while it is running or trying to load as a scenery file.  There are "exclusion" settings you can set up in your Security programs to prevent them from scanning your flight sim files before letting your flight sim use them (can you say "stutters" while your flight sim is waiting for the anti-virus software to check the files first?).

 

I'm NOT bragging, but my main flight sim computer trashed on me a few months ago (my UPS failed during a thunderstorm and my computer went "Poof!" after a nearby lighting bolt surged the electrical outlet it was connected to).  I've been waiting until after the holidays to purchase all new components for a new state-of-the-art computer build (prices drop drastically after the holidays in preparation for the "newest" hardware components to get released in the spring).  I installed FSX Steam on an old Quad-Core, 3.0GHz computer I have, with a GTX285 GPU in it (that's also one of the reasons I haven't gone P3D yet...the GPU isn't good enough, and I can't plug the "better" GPU from the "trashed" computer into it 'cos the motherboard won't handle it).  But even with that old a computer, I don't experience anything near what some people here are complaining about as far as "performance" with ORBX products and complex aircraft.  But I am ANAL about doing "routine maintenance" on whatever computers I own.  It makes a difference.

 

If you use Windows, boot your computer.  Then open up Task Manager and look at the bottom left-hand corner where it says "Processes".  If that number is exceeding 55 - 60 processes running, you have way too many things "running in the background" that are fighting your flight simulator for your computer resources.  I have seen some computers that were running over ONE-HUNDRED processes.  No wonder the flight sim didn't run "smooth".  You need to use something like the Windows "MSconfig" utility to "turn off" (prevent) a lot of those "background" processes from loading at bootup (some freeware "maintenance" programs like MalwareBytes also include the same tools to do that).  And take a hard look at some of the actual full PROGRAMS you have "automatically starting" during your bootup.  Do you REALLY need them just sitting on your Taskbar, "pre-loaded", in CASE you decide you want to use them?  If not, KILL them from starting during bootup (by using MSConfig, or something similar).  Examples of these types of programs would be Adobe products to read PDF files, etc. Start 'em yourself ONLY when you really need to use them.  Then shut them down completely when you are done using them.  Don't just allow them to "minimize" themselves to the Taskbar after you close the PDF file.   

 

Having a "good" running flight simulator is just as much about ensuring the HARDWARE you are running it on is as "good" as the SOFTWARE the flight sim is.  But in this case, "good" doesn't mean "more capable" or "faster" than any other hardware.  It means "well maintained" hardware, like a well maintained car.  If you carried 500 pounds of lead around in the trunk of your car, but only used the lead "once in a while", your car's performance would suffer too.  If you never washed your car, it would eventually rust (depends on where you live, of course).  If you never cleaned the inside carpets or seats of it, it isn't gonna be anywhere near like "new" anymore.  A "dirty, polluted" hardware platform (computer) is just as bad (and can be even worse) as a "dirty, polluted" flightsim software installation.

 

I know...not every flight sim user can be, nor should be expected to be, a computer "Geek" or "Nerd". But if you really want to use the latest and greatest flight sim software, you gotta learn enough to keep the hardware working at it's best also.  If you don't, 6 months after buying the fastest flight sim computer on the market, somebody with a 4 year old computer will be running their flight sim better than your computer will.

 

Combine the above with the other posts in this thread about "give and take" in what the flightsim software can do, and you will have a much more enjoyable, and much less stressful, flight simming experience.

 

Respectfully submitted.  PLEASE don't anybody get PO'd at anything I said above. 

[fltsimguy]

Well said.  Which is why I can still have an old computer and still manage to get a good flying experience.  Although the Friday Harbour offering put mine over the top.

[Jon Clarke]

To Holger: Merry Xmas Holger and thank you for your support this year and for heading up the SCA project to produce a fabulous addon.

Regarding my post about KLAX above, I had assumed the airport had been enhanced. My error or " MyBad" as they say now ! I was only reporting my personal findings at KLAX and because i experience no problems at all as soon as I reach 3/4s of the runway my fps shoots up by about 8 and carries on rising to mid to late 20 thru to 30+ as i move further away from KLAX itself. I am still in very heavy urban area, so it is KLAX that has, for me, a performance issue, enhanced or otherwise. I know that ai traffic has a serious impact on performance in that area because there are so many airports within a close proximity that will all draw traffic at the same time. 

Anyway KLAX it is not spoiling my enjoyment of SCA, so that's the good news!

Cheers to you and have a great day.

[Adam Banks]

I'd like to throw something into the mix here ... not a "solution" ... but a bit of advice - after many months of trying every known tweak for FSX/DX10+Fixer for the "How To" guide.

 

1) Always make backups (and/or comment lines changed) in any file you edit.

2) Never change more than one thing at a time. Most settings in either FSX or P3D are inter-dependent, so tweaking on thing may actually negate a series of other tweaks.

3) Set up and use a standard test.

4) The is no "magic bullet"!

 

Adam.

[APbjoern]

Hey guys, ORBX did a great job with NA SC but LA area with NGX and FSdreamteam LAX, sliders all left is unflyable do to FPS drop down to 5-8 (

[Guest]

Many tweaks from FSX are useless into P3D and some of them have also nasty effects in case of invoking