active TE GB South P3D v4 Stuttering/slowing performance issue

[Nick Cooper]

Can you be more specific about your problem, as evidently, flying in Cornwall

is a very different challenge for hardware resources than in London.

Are you finding it impossible to do either, with any settings?

[bcrawley57]

9 minutes ago, Nick Cooper said:

Can you be more specific about your problem, as evidently, flying in Cornwall

is a very different challenge for hardware resources than in London.

Are you finding it impossible to do either, with any settings?

 

Not even tried London yet, just flying out of Bournemouth towards Portsmouth which, I thought would be a middle of the road area to try.  Its fine on take off, as soon as I start to get closer to Portsmouth its all blurry on the ground.

[flying_fish]

Using:

Default aircraft

Target Frame rate 30

Unchecked 'Use high-resolution terrain textures'

Texture resolution to low 512x512 (didn't need to drop so far as John's suggestion, but blurries do creep in over Londonvp at medium or high settings))

Scenery complexity -  medium

Autogen and scenery draw distance High

Autogen Veg and building - both Dense 

Fair weather (Weather engine off)

 

Flying at 120kts at 2000' I'm getting 30 fps and smooth over the countryside, and mostly smooth over London. Textures sometimes blur when in dense scenery, but the best way to deal with this is simply to reload the same display settings

Here's what it looks like:

and over central London fps drops to 15-20 fps

 

There's no doubt, as suggested above that scenery complexity settings have more impact on fps than autogen. Try 'low' if you still get problems

 

 

30 minutes ago, bcrawley57 said:

I am really struggling with TE

Have a go at these settings - I have the 1070 too, so hope this helps.
 

[Nick Cooper]

Hello,

there are some things that you can reduce without ruining the experience,

most of which are covered in the suggestions from GSalden.

Apart from them, for me the one that makes the most difference is to

untick the high-resolution terrain textures because this stops my graphics

card from using up all its on board RAM.

The unscientific explanation is that once it starts to use "shared GPU memory",

frame rates plummet.

However hard I try, I cannot make the photo scenery ground textures blur, I have not been

able to do this except by ridiculous amounts of Y key use since P3D v4.4.

 

I don't try to fly resource hungry aircraft at high speed over scenery like this.

It simply won't work however powerful the PC is and rather defeats the whole purpose

of developing it.

 

For me, the V number is the most accurate measure of how well the PC is managing the

scenery, 0% being the ideal.

 

This is:

FXAA off

8 x SSAA

Anisotropic 16 x

Texture resolution medium

scenery complexity and autogen at maximum

but autogen display distance at high  and the effect of that hidden by 20 mile visibility

high-resolution terrain textures off

sensible aircraft at sensible speed

2k monitor

The aircraft has flown here from Bournemouth, seen in the distance and the simulator is nether paused nor in slew mode.

The screen shot can be greatly enlarged by clicking on it.

 

[pmb]

2 hours ago, Nick Cooper said:

scenery complexity and autogen at maximum

but autogen display distance at high and the effect of that hidden by 20 mile visibility

high-resolution terrain textures off

 

This might be the key and a working solution without ruining visual impression, indeed.

 

Kind regards, Michael

[bruce e]

I too am really struggling, using Nick’s recommendations managed to stabilise the fps at 18 / 20 but as I flyover the terrain in Lincoln, rural Wash area, it goes from crisp to blurry textures and seems never to catch up. Never had a problem with FTX ENG apart from London city was a bit twitchy but manageable. Still persevering but running low on willpower

I.m now wondering whether my PC is just not up to it

i7 3.5 GHz and GTX 1060 6 Ghz. Also Nick where do I find this V number?

 

[Nick Cooper]

It's part of the average frame rate display and in my opinion, tells you much more

than just the frame rate does.

 

You have to edit the Prepar3D.cfg file.

 

In any of the [TextInfo.X] sections

The 1,3 means line one position three.

You can amend that to suit yourself.

 

Here is how to see it as in my screenshot

 

[TextInfo.2]
FrameRate=1,1
LockedFrameRate=1,2
AverageFrameRate=1,3
FuelPercentage=1,5

 

[John Venema]

5 hours ago, Capt Pugwash said:

 

I feared this might be the case with P3DV4 not being able to handle TEGB well...looks like I will now have to move forward with my plan and run / test x-plane with the same TEGB South scenery.

It well may be x-plane becomes my ‘UK TEGB VFR Sim’ ...could be expensive running both sims, but I see no alternative if x-plane handles TEGB far better than P3DV4!

Anybody know if there is a discount for TEGB South for x-plane if you have already purchased it for P3DV4?

 

Yes, you will receive an automatic 40% discount on TEGB South for XP11 if you’ve purchased it for P3D.

[flying_fish]

51 minutes ago, Nick Cooper said:

However hard I try, I cannot make the photo scenery ground textures blur, I have not been

able to do this except by ridiculous amounts of Y key use since P3D v4.4.

...well for me what brings it on is curiosity: lots of panning and switching from VC to external to check the scenery. I think (unscientifically) it simply overwhelms the memory.

[GlennH]

9 hours ago, IanHarr said:

In all honesty I can't see what you are complaining about. That video looks fine.

 

Seriously?

 

You can’t see all the jerkiness and micro pausing?

[GSalden]

2 hours ago, Nick Cooper said:

Hello,

there are some things that you can reduce without ruining the experience,

most of which are covered in the suggestions from GSalden.

Apart from them, for me the one that makes the most difference is to

untick the high-resolution terrain textures because this stops my graphics

card from using up all its on board RAM.

The unscientific explanation is that once it starts to use "shared GPU memory",

frame rates plummet.

However hard I try, I cannot make the photo scenery ground textures blur, I have not been

able to do this except by ridiculous amounts of Y key use since P3D v4.4.

 

I don't try to fly resource hungry aircraft at high speed over scenery like this.

It simply won't work however powerful the PC is and rather defeats the whole purpose

of developing it.

 

For me, the V number is the most accurate measure of how well the PC is managing the

scenery, 0% being the ideal.

 

This is:

FXAA off

8 x SSAA

Anisotropic 16 x

Texture resolution medium

scenery complexity and autogen at maximum

but autogen display distance at high, and the effect of that hidden by 20 mile visibility

high-resolution terrain textures off

sensible aircraft at sensible speed

2k monitor

The aircraft has flown here from Bournemouth, seen in the distance and the simulator is nether paused nor in slew mode.

The screen shot can be greatly enlarged by clicking on it.

 

 

Nick is right. It also helps zooming out.

 

The TE series is for sightseeing and sightseeing is being done low and slow.

 

Flying over the scenery with a jet can be done but you have to make compromises...

 

Gerard

[The Merowinger]

2 hours ago, Nick Cooper said:

high-resolution terrain textures off

 

This means 512 resolution of the ground textures, doesn't it? I have ticked this on and in the prepar3d.cfg I use "texture_size_exp=10". Even with this settings in the near of the ground textures become unsharp. That's clear so far but with smaller resolution settings... maybe it looks like an usual photoscenerie? I don't know the resolution of TEGBS aerials: 1024? And ticking high resolution terrain textures "on" shows textures with 1024 resolution? Maybe I'm wrong?

 

Kai

[Dreamsofwings1]

Latest test.  Settings and more info under the video...

 

 

Trying some suggestions from this thread.  Vis set to 40nm.  Smoother but visual quality, especially just after take off, pretty awful.  Stop recording and headed over to Portsmouth, as soon as any urban area starts loading in I have similar stuttering as before.

 

 

[Dreamsofwings1]

I have to say, and this is a complement to ORBX, that right now FTX EU England, with it's ability to have seasons, and the performance plus ability to run with real live weather is looking pretty darned good!

[pmb]

7 minutes ago, Dreamsofwings1 said:

I have to say, and this is a complement to ORBX, that right now FTX EU England, with it's ability to have seasons, and the performance plus ability to run with real live weather is looking pretty darned good!

When Earthsimulations made a first attempt on a complete high-res photo-based GB with all bells and whistles years ago,  I was seriously thinking about getting it, despite the extraordinary cost (including the drives) at that time. I was relieved from the decision by their closure soon, but found their approach - I still recall the screenshots - breathtaking.

 

Now we can get GB for a VERY decent price, including continuously cheaper and faster SSDs.

 

Does TE GB P3D have serious issues? I think it has, at least for a number of users, including me, and not only for those with an i5-2500. Despite, I would very much regret to see the product line dying. This is a chance we (including notably the GA flyers) won't see anytime soon again. Thus, let's help to iron out the issues it has, maybe even in conjunction with LM, and make it the product users will have fun with. And expand it into other countries, as planned.

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

Kind regards, Michael 

[Dreamsofwings1]

3 minutes ago, pmb said:

When Earthsimulations made a first attempt on a complete high-res photo-based GB with all bells and whistles years ago,  I was seriously thinking about getting it, despite the extraordinary cost (including the drives) at that time. I was relieved from the decision by their closure soon, but found their approach - I still recall the screenshots - breathtaking.

 

Now we can get GB for a VERY decent price, including continuously cheaper and faster SSDs.

 

Does TE GB P3D have serious issues? I think it has, at least for a number of users, including me, and not only for those with an i5-2500. Despite, I would very much regret to see the product line dying. This is a chance we (including notably the GA flyers) won't see anytime soon again. Thus, let's help to iron out the issues it has, maybe even in conjunction with LM, and make it the product users will have fun with. And expand it into other countries, as planned.

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

Kind regards, Michael 

 

I agree, and it is testament to this community that in this post we are all trying to figure this out.  I don't think any of us want to see this fail.  The concept of the product is great, not only visually impressive and realistic, but also very useful for VFR flying.

[Dreamsofwings1]

Ok so test #2.  Settings below video.  Similar result to previous unfortunately.

 

 

  I also made another attempt afterwards, this time with setting Scenery Complexity to the middle and slightly smoother maybe but still getting very bad blurred scenery and some stuttering.

[flying_fish]

30 minutes ago, Dreamsofwings1 said:

looking pretty darned good!

I don't have a Spitfire, but this C152 and I are flying a well-known route for pilots flying out of Exeter or Plymouth, M5 in the background at Crediton, heading north. I'm pretty pleased with the way this is now performing, not quite V 0%, but just look at the detail for VFR flying - it's doesn't just resemble the real thing, it's actually familar!

Thanks to all for the helpful suggestions so far.

 

[Dreamsofwings1]

15 minutes ago, flying_fish said:

I don't have a Spitfire, but this C152 and I are flying a well-known route for pilots flying out of Exeter or Plymouth, M5 in the background at Crediton, heading north. I'm pretty pleased with the way this is now performing, not quite V 0%, but just look at the detail for VFR flying - it's doesn't just resemble the real thing, it's actually familar!

Thanks to all for the helpful suggestions so far.

 

Looks good, and is this using the settings you listed earlier in the thread?

i am baffled as to why I am getting such awful blurries on a high end system with so much turned down.

[flying_fish]

4 minutes ago, Dreamsofwings1 said:

is this using the settings you listed earlier i

Pretty much, I now have...

Display...

FXAA Off

8xSSAA

Anitotropic 16x

texture Res 1024x1024

Target Frame rate 30

 

World...

Levl of Detail High

Tessellation Ultra

Mesh res 5m

Texture res 1m

Scenery complex Very dense

Autogen & Scenery draw Medium

Autogen and building Very dense

Unchecked 'Use high-resolution terrain textures'

 

Photoreal is less sharp close to the ground, this was taken at 2500'

[Benny]

Hey guys, you guys scared me like heck... yes I had a long 6+ hours installing

 

FPS at 50+, no lag nothing? Took off at  ORBX Shoreham, loading time was a bit longer but not much

 

Is TEGBS installed ?????

I am over Littlehamton now while writing that

 

[flying_fish]

16 minutes ago, Benny said:

Hey guys, you guys scared me like heck

Well Benny you sure are getting your buck's worth  out of your 1060! Great to hear your anxiety is over

[Dreamsofwings1]

26 minutes ago, Benny said:

 

 

FPS at 50+, no lag nothing? Took off at  ORBX Shoreham, loading time was a bit longer but not much

 

 

 

Wow!!!  amazing, wonder why your performance is so good.  That's really great!  Happy flying!

[The Merowinger]

1 hour ago, KaiUweWeiss said:

This means 512 resolution of the ground textures, doesn't it? I have ticked this on and in the prepar3d.cfg I use "texture_size_exp=10". Even with this settings in the near of the ground textures become unsharp. That's clear so far but with smaller resolution settings... maybe it looks like an usual photoscenerie? I don't know the resolution of TEGBS aerials: 1024? And ticking high resolution terrain textures "on" shows textures with 1024 resolution? Maybe I'm wrong?

It seems that I wrote a lot of nonsens in my post. In meantime I read a little bit through the internet about size of aerials, resolutions and so on.. Nobodys perfect, but I can learn and it is important to know things in the right way.

So I learned that aerials are coming in meter per pixel instead of 512, 1024 and so on. These are resolutions for images like the landclasses. And texture_size_exped is fused for sharpness in the distance. In P3D 4.4 the visibility of aerials was improved at generally. What did they do, how did it happen? So I modify my questions:

I assume that TEGBS (like NL and the others coming in the future) is made with 1meter per pixel. The checkbox in P3D-menu for high textures is switching between 512 and 1024 res (for images like landclass). Ticking this box on or off won't influence the visibility of the aerials, will it? I wonder why uncheck this box will improve performance.

[Dreamsofwings1]

45 minutes ago, flying_fish said:

Pretty much, I now have...

Display...

FXAA Off

8xSSAA

Anitotropic 16x

texture Res 1024x1024

Target Frame rate 30

 

World...

Levl of Detail High

Tessellation Ultra

Mesh res 5m

Texture res 1m

Scenery complex Very dense

Autogen & Scenery draw Medium

Autogen and building Very dense

Unchecked 'Use high-resolution terrain textures'

 

Photoreal is less sharp close to the ground, this was taken at 2500'

THanks Andy,

 

Trying your settings (texture res mine was 7cm) and getting better performance but still stuttering as I move around and scenery can suddenly get very blurred as you can see from this screenshot.  Really at a loss now as to what to do having wound settings back and adjusted so much.

Just out of interest do you have any tweaks in your config eg affinity mask etc?

Also I wonder could it be other factors eg PTA, using Chaseplane, using TrackIR maybe

[pmb]

16 minutes ago, KaiUweWeiss said:

Ticking this box on or off won't influence the visibility of the aerials, will it? I wonder why uncheck this box will improve performance.

Independent on what the checkbox actually does, ticking/unticking it didn't change fps, at least in my test:

 

 

Kind regards, Michael

[The Merowinger]

Thank you, Michael!

I found out that commonly landclass images (e.g. FTX England) are looking much sharper with a ticked box. I'd like to know if the sharpness of aerials by using this checkbox is influenced too.

 

Kai

[flying_fish]

10 minutes ago, Dreamsofwings1 said:

do you have any tweaks in your config eg affinity mask etc

No, none. I do try to leave well alone if I can.

11 minutes ago, Dreamsofwings1 said:

PTA, using Chaseplane, using TrackIR maybe

Guilty as charged. I did think maybe that moving in and out of the VC may be having some memory impact, but I don't know enough about this.

 

[Dreamsofwings1]

Just now, flying_fish said:

No, none. I do try to leave well alone if I can.

Guilty as charged. I did think maybe that moving in and out of the VC may be having some memory impact, but I don't know enough about this.

 

ok I am using PTA, CHaseplane and Trackir, just doing another flight in a different area and it certainly doesn't like it if I look around too much.  certainly over any built up area and by the time the textures have caught up and 'unblurred' I have already flown over lol

[pmb]

6 minutes ago, KaiUweWeiss said:

Thank you, Michael!

I found out that commonly landclass images (e.g. FTX England) are looking much sharper with a ticked box. I'd like to know if the sharpness of aerials by using this checkbox is influenced too.

 

Kai

If memory serves me well, I read somewhere (LM forum) aerials should look sharper, too, given the images provide the resolution, of course. But I am not sure about that.

 

Kind regards, Michael

 

[Dreamsofwings1]

………...just flying in a rural area of Shropshire with Flying_fish's settings, away from towns and citys and in 20nm vis and it's more how I would expect it to be.  Smooth, less blurring though still not perfect, but flyable....there is hope

 

 

 

[flying_fish]

2 minutes ago, Dreamsofwings1 said:

there is hope

Yes indeed, just to give Benny a run for his money, here's the C152 heading towards Littlehampton, over the pitches at Worthing 30fps and you can almost see the stumps!

[Capt Pugwash]

Eureka! 25fps(mainly stable & no blurries) flying in circles over Birmingham City & UK2000 EGBB ‘Brum Int’l’  in the VertX DA65...just going to try some other Cities/Airports now and gauge results before I say anything!

I will post images soon as well...

[Dreamsofwings1]

8 minutes ago, Capt Pugwash said:

Eureka! 25fps(mainly stable & no blurries) flying in circles over Birmingham City & UK2000 EGBB ‘Brum Int’l’  in the VertX DA65...just going to try some other Cities/Airports now and gauge results before I say anything!

I will post images soon as well...

Great stuff!

what settings are you using?  Are you also using chaseplane and or Trackir?

[Benny]

What a bunch of cool folks in this thread

I didn't go over London yet,  at Southampton (ORBX) I am around 30-35 FPS , my god that harbor look magnificent.

It look like my GPU is working a bit harder then my CPU, temps are nice. Ram is at 7 steady. 

 

Now flying the Caredado S340 with good result, lost about 5 FPS

I am using CAM:

https://camwebapp.com/

 

Ben

[Benny]

5 minutes ago, Dreamsofwings1 said:

Are you also using chaseplane

 

I am

Ben

[bruce e]

28 minutes ago, Capt Pugwash said:

Eureka! 25fps(mainly stable & no blurries) flying in circles over Birmingham City & UK2000 EGBB ‘Brum Int’l’  in the VertX DA65...just going to try some other Cities/Airports now and gauge results before I say anything!

I will post images soon as well...

As  well as the settings please!

 

Having solved the issue of fps (now pretty stable 18/21 out of Southampton with no stutters etc)  I only have an issue with blurred textures which show shortly after take off & then go downhill

Holding short 21 fps textures all good

http://

http://

and then after a few miles textures start to blurred

http://

after reloading scenery all is ok for the next few miles

http://

Here are my setting, pretty much wound down. i7 3770CPU 3.5GHz with GTX 1060 6 Gb

http://

http://

http://

http://

 

 

[Dreamsofwings1]

10 minutes ago, Benny said:

What a bunch of cool folks in this thread

I didn't go over London yet,  at Southampton (ORBX) I am around 30-35 FPS , my god that harbor look magnificent.

It look like my GPU is working a bit harder then my CPU, temps are nice. Ram is at 7 steady. 

 

Now flying the Caredado S340 with good result, lost about 5 FPS

I am using CAM:

https://camwebapp.com/

 

Ben

Wow, you are lucky to be hitting that kind of FPS at Southampton.  My videos are from just up the road at Goodwood and flying towards Portsmouth.

[Dreamsofwings1]

1 minute ago, bruce e said:

As  well as the settings please!

 

Having solved the issue of fps (now pretty stable 18/21 out of Southampton with no stutters etc)  I only have an issue with blurred textures which show shortly after take off & then go downhill

 

 

Yes similar here.  As soon as I am airborne out of goodwood my textures are blurred, getting slightly better but then constantly playing catch up as I approach Portsmouth.  Much better results flying in the middle of knowhere but that isn’t much good

[Capt Pugwash]

36 minutes ago, Dreamsofwings1 said:

Yes similar here.  As soon as I am airborne out of goodwood my textures are blurred, getting slightly better but then constantly playing catch up as I approach Portsmouth.  Much better results flying in the middle of knowhere but that isn’t much good

Am still testing...but, have changed my nvidia settings where appropriate from ‘High quality to high performance’...there appears to be a lot of load on the GPU with this scenery at the moment...also reduced autogen draw distance significantly to medium...vis at 30ml...one layer of cumulus at base 5700 to tops 17k...trying to figure out if one or more of my settings has made this improvement...