ANSWERED Relative to the scenery detail/quality, the perf hit is big - KTVL

[Noel]

I did a clean full install of P3D V2.3 and KTVL IMO performs poorly, despite very lean settings in its configurator, relative to the scenery quality itself.   During pushback I'm seeing about 23 frames, taxi 27, TO 26 to 29.  These aren't show stopping frame rates at all I for me, however when I hop over the hill to KRNO using NCA/Global Hybrid Mode, the scenery is massively more complex appearing, and w/ frame rates slightly above KTVL.   Right now, I wouldn't recommend KTVL as an add-on, or put another way, I wouldn't buy it again.   Perhaps it can be teased thru to optimize it a little more?

[Misha Cajic]

Hi Noel

The biggest performance hitters are the grasses and shrubs, so try leaning those settings a little more.

Whilst KTVL doesn't technically have many buildings, it's complexity is far larger, since if you look around it has a whole lot more details and objects you certainly wouldn't find in one of the default airports, not to mention all the custom objects outside of the airport.

Also KTVL has incredibly complex autogen, and if your computer isn't up to date for P3D, then it's recommended to turn it down. P3D is a very different system to FSX, and you need an excellent GPU to run more complex addons well (many haven't had problems running the scenery on maximum settings due to this).

Defragging or cleaning your computer after installation of software can also help with loading and performance in many cases, so you could try that.

Of course it also depends on the aircraft you are using. No matter the scenery, complex aircraft will always have a bigger impact.

Cheers

[Noel]

Hi Noel The biggest performance hitters are the grasses and shrubs, so try leaning those settings a little more. Whilst KTVL doesn't technically have many buildings, it's complexity is far larger, since if you look around it has a whole lot more details and objects you certainly wouldn't find in one of the default airports, not to mention all the custom objects outside of the airport. Also KTVL has incredibly complex autogen, and if your computer isn't up to date for P3D, then it's recommended to turn it down. P3D is a very different system to FSX, and you need an excellent GPU to run more complex addons well (many haven't had problems running the scenery on maximum settings due to this). Defragging or cleaning your computer after installation of software can also help with loading and performance in many cases, so you could try that. Of course it also depends on the aircraft you are using. No matter the scenery, complex aircraft will always have a bigger impact. Cheers

Misha,

I assume you are saying there is no optimization possible?  

 

My machine is about as high spec as is available currently, and it's overclocked and optimized w/ the correct AM.  I use lots of ORBX scenery and I am not new to P3D.  I maintain KTVL is very poorly optimized and perhaps it's not even possible I don't know, and w/ the configurator I have everything already leaned out.  I'm also using relatively easy to process aircraft.   I'll maintain it again:  relative to the scenery detail/complexity the user sees--it's really hard on performance.  Thanks for you thoughts, but I maintain the same opinion and would always recommend others users avoid this one.  Keep working on it maybe there are ways to improve its performance.  It's really a tiny little airport and performs really about the same as FB's KSFO or KDEN HD which are hugely complex visually by comparison to the lil' airport at Tahoe.   Rethink your design approach is my suggestion Misha perhaps there's a way to get the feel w/o the hit.

[Alex Goff]

Could you post the settings you are using, Noel? That along with your system specifications will help give a better idea what we're working with. 

 

Something else to try, set FTX Central to North America rather than Global/Hybrid. Some users have noted an increased load with Global/Hybrid mode set.

[Noel]

The point here is that KTVL, relative to other custom areas, and relative to its small size and essentially quite limited complexity, performance isn't up to snuff IMO.   If performance was marginal elsewhere I can see posting my settings, but that is not the case.  My machine is an SB-E hexacore running at 4.4Ghz, HT enabled, and GTX Titan, lots of quad channel ram at 2400Mhz, and performance pretty much everywhere is very good.  My suggestion to your team, if you're open to suggestions, is to rethink what you are doing when you use 'incredibly complex autogen...'  Perhaps you can optimize these if they are the culprit. 

[Alex Goff]

Usually when a user has performance issues we can troubleshoot it to see if there is a particular setting that is causing the issue or which component of the scenery is at fault. That way you can have functional scenery at an acceptable level of performance. If you do not wish to post your settings then we cannot go any further with trying to diagnose the issue.

 

Perhaps this thread may be of assistance since it is the only other to note poor performance around the airport: http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/82695-ktvl-very-poor-framerates/

[Wolter van der Spoel]

Noel,

I fail to understand as to why you react like this, the guys are trying to figure out and help as to the why this occurs on your setup, I've beta tested KTVL and did not encounter any issues like you describe and my system here is 3,5 years old, for specs see my sig.

[Noel]

Noel,

I fail to understand as to why you react like this, the guys are trying to figure out and help as to the why this occurs on your setup, I've beta tested KTVL and did not encounter any issues like you describe and my system here is 3,5 years old, for specs see my sig.

Likely Wolter is that I am using stronger settings than you are if your system is 3.5y old.  I'm talking relative to other add ons, for example KDEN HD, KSFO, and these are hugely complex airports as you must surely know compared to KTVL.  The point is w/ my strong settings performance elsewhere is very good--not so hot at KTVL which IMO is quite simplistic by comparison visually.  Clearly there is something in its programming that puts high demands on some parameter or other, and I won't be changing something just for KTVL since, as I say, performance is very good elsewhere.  It's ok, i'm done w/ it.   I plan to disable it if possible in the scenery library.  Plus, I have lost patience when developers default stance to help you fix your platform, rather than consider maybe there are things they can do to engineer products for better performance.  There are certain types of objects that are known to be exceedingly demanding relative to their contribution visually.  Try flying over the wind turbine farms east of the SF Bay Area.   That are really hard on performance, yet you hardly see them.

[Wolter van der Spoel]

You seem to know it all so it has no use to continue this discussion, I wish you all the best in your future endeavors

topic locked