YBBN Performance vs YMML1.5 Performance with 100% AI Traffic

[John Venema]

Hello all,

Just wanted to share a brief insight from my YBBN testing tonight. My PC specs in my sig. All sliders maxxed except water 1.x Low, autogen to Dense and weather minimum.

This is with AI Traffic at 100%

YMML 28.5 FPS Average

YBBN 38.7 FPS Average

So the current YBBN build (which is close to final) is at least 10.2 FPS better than YMMLV1.5 on my PC using full AI.

Of course, in the real world I only ever run my AI at around 16-40%, so there's plenty of headroom.

Biggest FPS killer in YBBN? Easy - autogen. Dense is nice on my PC, Normal gives me 40's to 50's. Same applies to YMML.

[GrahamP]

Very impressive, John.  An amazing achievement considered the level of detail.

My hardware is very similar to yours except that I've got the TH2G with three monitors.  It will be interesting to see how my performance compares with yours.  There's plenty of room in those figures to cope with a little drop in FPS though.

[Spirit Flyer_old]

I'd be surprized if any fairly balanced 4 ghz+ machine would have a lot of problems rendering YBBN for smooth flight. For some reason the city of Brisbane with the existing river and dockyard upgrades with the refinery and all (with non FTX airport) runs much faster on my machine than almost anywhere in Melbourne does.

[JusJ]

This sounds good.  Very, very good!

Edit - John, I'm curious about why you use 1 x low water.  I use 1 x high because 2x really kills performance for me.  Any specific reason for the setting you were testing with?

[John Venema]

This sounds good.  Very, very good!

Edit - John, I'm curious about why you use 1 x low water.  I use 1 x high because 2x really kills performance for me.  Any specific reason for the setting you were testing with?

1.X Low gives you better performance and IMHO looks just as nice as 1.X High.

[Dylan Lampard]

Good to know John,

Good to have reasurance my new rig will be able to run it well,

[JusJ]

This sounds good.  Very, very good!

Edit - John, I'm curious about why you use 1 x low water.  I use 1 x high because 2x really kills performance for me.  Any specific reason for the setting you were testing with?

1.X Low gives you better performance and IMHO looks just as nice as 1.X High.

Thanks, I think I'll try it!

[jaje]

John, thank you. At last! The one thing I haven't adjusted in my settings has made a world of difference to performance on my (admittedly) out-of date system; (if only I could afford to upgrade - sigh). Water at 1.X low and  reducing autogen to normal on the slider improves performance an enormous amount - instead of staggering along at FPS in the low teens at best in most areas, I can now wend my happily through PNW without stutters and blurries and average around 40FPS, and my frustrations have all but vanished. Cheers John - I'm a happy little Vegemite again.

John

[John Rambo]

What happens if you put water at max?

[John Venema]

What happens if you put water at max?

You get to take pretty screenshots 

[John Dow]

Well dang me if you don't find out things on these forums that you should have known yourself.  I've been using water at the low 2.x setting which looks all well and good over the ocean, especially with a low sun to reflect off the waves, but turns inland water into unrealistic garbage, with ocean sized waves on even the smallest pond or dam.

After reading this I dropped it down to 1.x high and I have been reborn!  I can live without the waves, because the overall picture is soooo much better.  However around YHBA which is where I was flying, a setting of 1.x low resulted in the watermasks showing shallow water and sandbanks were a bit too sharp I thought.  I reckon I'll settle on 1.x medium or perhaps high, probably high because I'm already getting 30 of 30 locked fps.

So thanks y'all especially JV for making my flights that little bit more enjoyable again.