dannybobmusic Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 I've tried for two years now to figure it out. If I disable pnw, and just run ftx global, I get 30 fps with my settings. With the same settings with PNW, I get around 25-22fps. Sometimes it drops down to 18 or 19fps. There is something else going on besides just the amount of autogen. The only thing I have come up with is that all the airfields in pnw have 3d grass added and it has a cumulative performance drain. To bad I can't test my theory by disabling it. Does anyone have any thoughts on this issue? I fly around the bay area in California (with ftx Global) and I get 30fps consistently. It seems like that area should be more demanding performance wise than the Seattle area. This is concerning because when NCA is released, I'm worried that the performance in the bay area will drop like around Seattle. Just thought I'd ask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SolRayz Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 I do not own PNW...but in my estimation, you should be doing better then that, unless you have a lot of AI and/or a poorly optimized computer and/or poorly optimized fsx.cfg. Considering your specs, that is. If you are speaking about the Seattle cone of death, you will find that even default scenery, presented slow downs since the inception of FSX. Right now I am wrestling with some performance issues with England, particularly in the London area, but then again I run a moderate amount of AI. Without AI, its virtually flawless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rlkjmt73 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 I'm not sure what to say, as I don't think I drop in fps when flying in PNW vs any other, including just global. I may be wrong, so I'll go do a flight in the PNW area with NA applied, then just in Global. Was there a certain area in which you noticed the drop in fps? If so, let me know and I'll fly that same area. And, like Marc stated, Seattle is definitely a fps cone of death. Rod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlennH Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 all the pnw airfields don't have 3d grass added to my knowledge. with custom hand placed landclass, autogen, vector and elevation data, of course pnw will not be as fps friendly as global. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannybobmusic Posted September 19, 2013 Author Share Posted September 19, 2013 I'm sorry I wasn't clear in my initial post. I'm specifically talking about the Seattle area with PNW. With ftx Global, I get 30 fps around Seattle but with PNW I get around 25fps. I also don't think that landclass or hand placed autogen is the reason for the slowdown. The ftx Global textures and PNW textures are basically the same and have the same hand place autogen. As many have said, Seattle is the fsx cone of death for framerates. I already know that though. The question is why is it worse with PNW? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Venema Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Have you tried setting the old style 3D lights to FTX Day mode? This disables thousands of light poles and effects in your FOV and definitely improves FPS. Also, Tim Harris optimised the autogen in a patch for PNW not long after release so ensure you are fully patched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannybobmusic Posted September 19, 2013 Author Share Posted September 19, 2013 Yes, I have it set to Day mode. I did a night flight just to confirm that there where no lights. I also have the latest patch installed as confirmed in FTX central. The one thing that helped was defragging my fsx drive. I would still like to know what the main difference is performance wise between PNW and FTX Global. Is it really just the landclass changes and vector data? By the way there is 3d grass at most PNW airfields. It's the older style grass, not the nature flow or newer grass. I don't know what effect it has on performance. It was just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lthendrix Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 that area is notoriously hard on frame rates...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmiG Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 that area is notoriously hard on frame rates...... This. The area around Seattle is the worst of all OrbX sceneries. If you also have all the OrbX airfields in the area activated, it requires a very powerful system as well as careful management of the available VAS to avoid OOM errors. 22 FPS sounds a bit low with that system. Should be just under 30 FPS, however infrequent dips to the low 20's might be normal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Venema Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 The more vector data there is (as PNW has) the more FSX has to process for your view, so naturally there will be a slight hit if PNW has much more vector data than default. It likely gives you the same performance as Default + UTX, and as JimmiG says the Seattle area seems to be a bit of a black hole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannybobmusic Posted September 19, 2013 Author Share Posted September 19, 2013 Again, I'm not debating whether or not the performance around Seattle is bad or not. My question is why is it worse with PNW than it is with just FTX Global? Is it just the landclass changes, and vector data? The textures are the same as Global basically. By the way, after the defrag, I now get between 25 and 30fps with PNW installed. Solid 30fps with just Global. Sorry, I see you answered my question John. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Hamilton Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Check the PNW manual, make sure your sliders are set properly. The human eye can only perceive 24 FPS, any faster is wasted resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vora Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Additionally to landclass and autogen annotation PNW has extra vector and mesh data (region vs FTXG). That might be the reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmiG Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 FTX PNW contains a *lot* more than the textures alone. It includes a custom landclass with more variation in the tiles, vectorized landclass, more detailed roads, rivers, coastlines, more detailed airports, custom polygons etc. etc. It's a complete scenery package vs FTX Global which just replaces the default FSX textures with its own. More stuff = lower frame rate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benny Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 If you think that Seattle is hard just try Vancouver + with PNW. We have about the same machine and I'm less OC then you and get 25+ FPS in Seattle. But not over Vancouver. I'm so happy when I'm over 20FPS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Newman Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 The increased vector data in the area certainly adds a degree of drag to any system... Another thing not mentioned yet is the trees... PNW still uses the old style autogen trees... More recent regions (and Global too) use specially designed Orbx Trees (there is a check box in FTX Central if these are available)... Orbx trees are considerably more FPS friendly. Northern CA I imagine will also use Orbx Trees, plus it will also use the new lighting system introduced with Global... So I wouldn't worry about the bay area too much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarm Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Yep...Seattle area is definitely a zone of it's own when it comes to frame rates. I fly KEAT to KORS and other similar routes around the area, but avoid landings at KSEA. I find that the aircraft type/product also plays a part. Have almost no problems when flying AccuSim C-172, or RealAir B200. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molleh Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Check the PNW manual, make sure your sliders are set properly. The human eye can only perceive 24 FPS, any faster is wasted resources. I know this isn't related to this thread really, but that is not true 24fps is just the framerate used for film (i.e.) movies. Most people can differentiate framerate differences up to around 70fps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Copp Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Yep...Seattle area is definitely a zone of it's own when it comes to frame rates. I fly KEAT to KORS and other similar routes around the area, but avoid landings at KSEA. "All these worlds are yours except KSEA. Attempt no landing there." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Hamilton Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 I know this isn't related to this thread really, but that is not true 24fps is just the framerate used for film (i.e.) movies. Most people can differentiate framerate differences up to around 70fps. According to what I found with Google, we're both wrong. The human eye will only see the refresh rate of your monitor, which in most cases is 60. The eye and brain together can actually perceive up to 1000 FPS, but we'll never see a monitor with a refresh rate that high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Venema Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 Wrong again Bruce. There are 120hz and even 200hz monitors on the market. 120hz LED TVs are common too, for providing smooth 3D imagery where each frame is displayed twice. The aerospace industry minimum accepted standard for pilot training is 60hz (60FPS) which explains why FSX has struggled to get acceptance in that market space. Finally I went and saw Peter Jackon's The Hobbit at 48FPS in the cinema and the difference was both noticeable and remarkable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmiG Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 The difference is that the human eye does not see motion in discrete "frames". It's a steady stream of information causing the "frames" to smudge and blur together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Hamilton Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 Wasn't aware of that, JV... D'OH! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelMoe Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 Hmm. I have okay fps in the KSEA array. Did a VFR flight CYVR-KSEA with the 777 on dense settings and had 30-33 fps on approach. I find EGLL and London in general to be the worst part on the Global (Brisbane is also a killer) NO AI. btw Michael Moe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cvearl Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 I'm not sure what to say, as I don't think I drop in fps when flying in PNW vs any other, including just global. I may be wrong, so I'll go do a flight in the PNW area with NA applied, then just in Global. Was there a certain area in which you noticed the drop in fps? If so, let me know and I'll fly that same area. And, like Marc stated, Seattle is definitely a fps cone of death. Rod Most areas are great! KSEA and KPDX and two hard areas if you use any kind of weather. How do you do there with Building Storms theme in a good payware plane?? Charles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cvearl Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 Check the PNW manual, make sure your sliders are set properly. The human eye can only perceive 24 FPS, any faster is wasted resources. False Oops I missed that John already advised. C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.