Does FTXG need a 2048 or 4096 texture size in fsx.cfg?

[flyinion]

Subject says it all.  I'm currently running it at 2048 for REX but wondering if FTXG needs anything over the basic 1024.

[GlennH]

no, the textures are the standard fsx format of 1024

[Alex Goff]

Glenn is correct, the ground textures are standard 1024px as are the autogen textures

[flyinion]

Thanks guys, I thought that was the case but figured I'd better double check.  

[gjpollitt]

I wouldnt bother running REX or any weather textures above 1024 anyhow.

[John Venema]

Running 2048 textures is not recommended. No Orbx products have a dependency on 2048 textures, and those few addons we have that use 2048 textures work perfectly fine at 1024.

[flyinion]

Running 2048 textures is not recommended. No Orbx products have a dependency on 2048 textures, and those few addons we have that use 2048 textures work perfectly fine at 1024.

 

 

I wouldnt bother running REX or any weather textures above 1024 anyhow.

 

Hrmmm, well I used to run REX at 4096 but later on "compromised" to 2048 in attempts to tune my FSX install.  You guys are saying I should just go to 1024 and wouldn't notice any difference at all?  If that's the case, why would they have 2048 and 4096 sized textures?  Perhaps I'm not understanding how all that works then.

[John Venema]

I have never used cloud textures greater than 1024 and frankly don't see the need to, since that resolution looks perfectly fine (see my preview screenshots on these forums) and I even have lots of requests asking for my settings and clouds set.

There is a simple reason certain key FSX.cfg settings revert back to their default settings, like texture max resolution (1024) and LOD radius (4.5), because Microsoft knew higher settings would stress the engine too much with the VAS and DX9 limitations of 2006, which have not changed in 2013 because the FSX code is static.

[deetee]

Agreed. I always set my REX texture options to "Low end system" and the clouds water and sky still look great.

Setting stuff at more than 1024 gives very little benefit and can only increase your chances of an OOM.

[GlennH]

I have never used cloud textures greater than 1024 and frankly don't see the need to, since that resolution looks perfectly fine (see my preview screenshots on these forums) and I even have lots of requests asking for my settings and clouds set.

There is a simple reason certain key FSX.cfg settings revert back to their default settings, like texture max resolution (1024) and LOD radius (4.5), because Microsoft knew higher settings would stress the engine too much with the VAS and DX9 limitations of 2006, which have not changed in 2013 because the FSX code is static.

+1

 

I cannot stand addons that insist on these massive size textures. IMHO, clouds in FSX look far more relaistic with the softer edges at 1024 then they do with hard edges at 2048 and 4096. Plus AA'ing these huge textures causes perf issues too.

[flyinion]

Thanks for the info guys.  I'll see about trying out the 1024 textures then.  I'm going to stick with 6.5 lod radius just because I noticed less terrain popping with that, although maybe I should re-check that now with FTX Global installed.  I do run in DX10 right now so there should be less chance of hitting the VAS limitations since I guess DX10 mode is apparently more efficient in memory use.  I never had any VAS issues under DX9 that I know of but I know a lot of people have reported having them and that DX10 fixed it.