Announcement

Collapse

PMDG Forum Rules

1) SIGN YOUR POSTS. Since 1997, we have asked users to sign their real name, first and last, to all posts in the PMDG forum. We do this in order to keep conversations personal and familiar. You took the time to be here, we want to get to know you. This is one of the few rigid rules that we enforce regularly. We do so because we feel that forums in which users must engage one another personally are generally warmer, more collegial and friendly. Posts that are unsigned will be quietly removed without comment by the moderators, so to make your life easy- we recommend enabling your forum signature so that you never need to remember. Do this by clicking the username pull-down at the top right, then selecting "User Settings." You will find the signature editor on the ACCOUNT tab, about half way down the page. Look for "Edit Post Signature." Be sure to click the "Show Signatures" box.

2) BE NICE. We are all simmers here and no matter our differences of opinion, we share a common love of aviation, computing and simulation. Treat everyone else in the forum with respect even when you disagree. If someone frustrates you, walk away from the conversation or ask for a moderator to get involved. Speaking of Moderators, they prefer not to be treated as "The Thought Police" but if any behavior infringes on the enjoyment of another user or is otherwise considered to be unacceptable in the moderator's judgment, it will be addressed in keeping with our view of ensuring that this forum remains a healthy environment for all simmers.

3) BE LAWFUL: Any behavior that infringes upon the law, such as discussion or solicitation of piracy, threats, intimidation or abuse will be handled unsympathetically by the moderators. Threats and intimidation may, at the moderator's discretion, be provided to law enforcement for handling.

4) BE FACTUAL: When you post, always be factual. Moderators will remove posts that are determined not to be factually accurate.

5) RESPECT COPYRIGHTS: Posting of copyrighted material such as flight manuals owned by Boeing or various airlines is not allowed in this forum. If you have questions related to copyrighted material, please contact a forum moderator for clarification.

6) RESPECT PMDG: We love to hear what you like about our products. We also like to hear what you think can be improved, or what isn't working. Please do tell us and we will always treat your feedback with value. Just be sure to treat the team respectfully, as they do put a significant amount of effort into building and maintaining these great simulation products for you.

7) RESPECT PMDG DEVELOPERS: All of the developers will spend some time here. Given the ratio of developers-to-users, it simply isn't possible for us to answer every post and private message individually. Please know that we do try to read everything, but developer workload is simply too high to manage personal contact with tens-of-thousands of users simultaneously. In most cases, members of the development team will stick to conversations in the forum and will not answer private messages.

8) RESPECT OTHER DEVELOPERS: PMDG has always advocated for a strong development community and we have many friends within this community. Every developer offers something unique that helps to make the simming community larger and more vibrant. We insist that you treat our friends respectfully.

9) RESPECT MODERATORS: Moderators have a tough job, and none of them enjoy having to stomp out negativity. If a moderator has to weigh in to keep a thread peaceful, please respect that effort and refrain from giving the moderator any grief.

10) If you require official support for any of our products please open a support ticket through the support portal, https://support.precisionmanuals.com

11) This forum is designed primarily as a vehicle for the PMDG development team to interact with our customers, and for customers to interact with one another in a manner that is positive, supportive and assists in the general advancement of understanding the simulation and helping to make this and future simulations better. Any other use of this forum is not permitted, including but not limited to discussion of pricing policies, business practices, forum moderating policies, advertising of non-PMDG products, promotion of events, services or products that are not approved in advance by PMDG or any other topic deemed unacceptable by any forum administrator

12) HAVE FUN: This is the whole point of it all.
See more
See less

[22DEC19] The genesis of a performance discussion...

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    [22DEC19] The genesis of a performance discussion...

    This thread is long, and probably not very exciting- but if you are interested in the performance of your sim, you should read this. You may find that many of the things you thought you understood about performance are really no longer true. At least, not since we transitioned to the x64 platform of Prepar3D v4. Before you dive into it, please understand that my intent here is not to engage in an engineering discussion of how processors work, how rendering engines work, or to dissect the core of the Prepar3D engine beyond some surface level observations. I do simplify a few things to keep the conversation understandable to most of the audience, and of course not everything here is an absolute truism in all situations. Instead- this is a general illustration of where we started, how we got here, what we have, and how it does/does not affect your sim performance on a daily basis. At points in this discussion, my goal is to correct some long-held-misunderstandings that get repeated by simmers (even though there is little-to-no-truth to them) and to hopefully educate a few folks on how to properly evaluate the things that cause their sim to experience poor performance.

    Ready? Okay- lets go....

    Genesis Act One: The Musical Box:
    Back in 2005, PMDG were invited to a meeting in Seattle to learn about a new product line that was coming. This product line was to be a code-drop from FSX and would cater to the industrial simulation market. It was known as Microsoft ESP. Fast forward a bunch of years and Microsoft decided to exit the simulation business, but on their way out the door they licensed ESP to a small company few simmers had ever heard of (Lockheed Martin ) who have continued the growth and development of ESP under their own brand name, “Prepar3D.”

    Prepar3D is now in it’s 4th generation. It is a vastly different and superior platform to the original Microsoft ESP. It has far greater capabilities and has brought us a vastly improved visual experience in incremental steps along the way. The addition of HDR lighting and reflective surfaces for example have dramatically improved the look and feel of the simulation. Evolutionary improvement has been good in that it meets simmer’s demands for greater visual quality, but it has kept attention from being applied in places where it was probably equally well needed: The core simulation engine and the rendering engine.

    The capability of the hardware that we use has gone up exponentially during the same decade. The capability of modern software graphics engines when run on modern hardware are simply astounding (see: Microsoft Flight Simulator to be released in 2020, or any of a variety of action world simulations such as Red Dead 2 as an example of what I mean.)

    The Prepar3D engine has NOT moved forward as rapidly, and this has us using a sim that we are all aware is bottlenecked by processor dependencies, lack of GPU use, inability to spread itself across many cores, etc etc etc. In other words, we are running software that is intrinsically of a 1990s architecture on hardware that wants to see the software take advantage of 20 years of evolution in software and rendering design, but our platform simply cannot.

    Genesis Act Two: Behind The Lines
    Keeping in mind that our simulator is an inherently inefficient architecture for modern hardware, a few things have been added that play against efficiency very strongly:
    1. HDR rendering.
    2. Physics Based Rendering (PBR).
    3. Volumetric Lighting.
    4. Re-shading (varies by type and use)

    Putting it bluntly, it would have been impossible to add these features to the Prepar3D simulation engine ten years ago, because the hardware didn’t have enough spare overhead to manage it all. With the exponential growth in hardware capability coupled with some efficiency improvements in the core Prepar3D engine, the developers have been able to bring us these capabilities and as stated they do enhance the quality of the sim visually.

    The MAIN sapper of performance in a simulation engine is a draw-call. Think of a draw-call as a function that adjusts something visually in the scene so that it cane be rendered and sent out to the display for you to see. It can sometimes be helpful to think of the scene you view on the display as having many layers, and each of these layers being created by a draw-call. (not entirely factual, but it helps you understand the impact they have in the discussion here…)

    For example, the shapes in the scene are a draw-call. The textures applied to those shapes are a draw call. The light playing onto surfaces is a draw call. The shadows effected by the shapes is a draw call. The reflection of light off surfaces is a draw call. The way light fades over distance is a draw call. The location of your mouse pointer on top of the scene is a draw call. The color of your mouse pointer on the scene is a draw call.

    With every graphically driven product, you get a certain number of draw calls just to get the scene on the display. With modern software engines these draw calls are handled on the GPU, thus freeing the main processor to do it’s own work. In the FSX engine however, all of it was done by the main processor (simplification warning) and this is why we describe FSX as being processor limited. Back in the x86 (32 bit) FSX days, there were two primary creators of “excess draw calls” and these were related to rendering the mouse cursor position and texture-based-lighting.

    This is why products like our own 747 that used lots and lots of mouse-click areas were so hard on performance. It is also why nearly everyone got a boost in performance in our 747 when Dovetail addressed this issue back in (I think it was) 2014.


    Genesis Act Three: Cinema Show:
    Moving forward to the current version of Prepar3D, the main creators of excess draw calls are HDR lighting, PBR (dynamic lighting, dynamic reflections) and volumetric lighting. To make matters worse, the effect seems to be exponential, because the scene has to be re-rendered so many times to include all of the effects of color shifting caused by HDR, reflections, volumetric lighting, etc etc etc.

    Now, once all of those draw calls are completed, the sim then has it’s own inefficiency in dusk/dawn that causes it to re-render the entire scene over again to account for color shifting related to the changing light conditions, and this retriggers the entire draw call sequence to recompute the way the various lighting sources interplay with one another to render the scene.

    Most modern games throw this process off at the GPU, but Prepar3D does not do this fully. Much of the rendering process remains on the core processor, which must re-render the scene multiple times for each frame in order to account for color shifting the way the computational process bottlenecks at the processor, rather than handing complex rendering processes off to the GPU, who’s job it is do all of the associated work of rendering the scene. Since MOST of this is (simplification) is being done on the processor, it means that the processor is the bottleneck, and if it cannot handle the excess draw calls triggered by all of the new effects, things will slow down.

    So this brings me to using NGXu as a specific example of how all of this interplay kills performance:

    I have two machines here of very different capabilities. The first is an I7 6700K with an Nvidia 980 card. The second is an I9 9900K with an Nvidia 2800Ti.
    On these machines I will compare the performance of the PMDG 747-8 (PBR on external model but not in VC, texture based lighting) and the PMDG 737NGxu (PBR externally and internally with volumetric lighting in the VC) This is a reasonably good comparison because both airplanes have and the same number of cockpit displays.
    Scene I7 6700K // GTX980 I9 9900K // GTX2080Ti Performance Delta
    747-8 mid-day 34 62 82%
    747-8 dusk 21 52 147%
    747-8 night 30 58 93%
    NGXu mid-day 30 53 76%
    NGXu dusk 15 47 213%
    NGXu night 25 50 100%
    The point of this comparison is to show you the impact of excess draw-calls on hardware that doesn’t have the performance overhead to absorb the work. You can skip right to the “NGXu-dusk” line and compare the performance results on the two machines. The performance difference in this scenario is dramatic, and much larger than comparing the performance of NGXu and 747 in other identical scenarios.

    Why is this so?

    NGXu has a number of features that the 747 doesn’t currently have: Volumetric lighting, and a PBR treated flight deck. These two features are creating a large number of draw calls as the product works to color-correct the cockpit displays and the EFBs to keep them consistent in spite of the effects of Prepare3D’s horribly implemented HDR lighting bloom effect, while also forcing additional draw calls related to the color correcting that must go on to account for the impact of volumetric lighting on all of the surfaces/displays/efbs in the NGXu cockpit.

    A scene rendered with the NGXu flight deck, at dusk/dawn with volumetric lighting and the EFB present on a Prepar3D platform likely requires 60% more draw calls than the 747 in an identical scene, simply because of these new features.

    On the mid-range hardware, the 747-8 performs just fine in all lighting configurations and conditions, but NGXu comes into these same scenes with much higher draw-call numbers because of all the additional rendering processes that have to be handled to manage the interaction of dusk/dawn, volumetric lighting, dynamic lighting, PBR treatment, reflectivity, HDR color correcting, etc etc etc. These additional processing and draw-call requirements are eating up the overhead processing capacity of the i7 6700K and causing a degradation of performance. On the i9 9900K, the excess processing capacity of the processor is absorbing the additional draw calls and things sail along just fine.

    Genesis Act Four: More Fool Me:
    This brings me to an important point, that I think everyone should take a moment to digest. For years, sim developers (including, at least up until 2010, your faithful servant and PMDG) were telling you that the reason your sim ground to a halt when you ran a complex addon in complex scenery was because “we have so many features included in your airplane.” This was really not the entire truth, although in most of our cases we didn’t know that at the time. One could argue perhaps that this was true back in the 32bit FSX days, but it is certainly not true in the x64 simulation platform genre.

    I frequently see users spouting on about how “well that add-on runs slowly because it simulates so much” and this makes me laugh. Nothing could be further from the truth and to anyone who understands how software is compiled and turned into machine code, and how that code is run through a modern processor knows that any developer saying “our stuff runs slowly because it is so complex” is… well… full of poop.

    If a modern addon running in a modern simulator runs slowly- it is most likely because the product is generating a huge number of draw-calls and the simulator is trying to handle all of them at the processor level, rather than on the GPU.

    So- when you see this mythology being perpetuated- please know that it is garbage. When you see someone saying “oh- this product is more efficient because it runs better” please know that this is also garbage. Look instead at what the product is and is not using in terms of the major features of the Prepar3D platform. If it is using only some of the features discussed above, it will have better performance than if it uses them all. There is just no way around it.

    So don’t be fooled by marketing slogans, hype and outright mis-truths. Excess draw-calls are death to performanc, and it is the job of developers like PMDG to try and get the maximum performance from the simulator while also not loading the platform with draw-calls, because those are ultimately what slow you down. It isn’t easy and it requires some deft decision making as we tweak/tune/move things around in order to control the small marginal areas we can affect developmentally.


    Genesis Act Five: Los Endos:
    To summarize all of this: NGXu really wants good hardware if you want to see good performance during dusk/dawn and low visibility transition periods. If you have the EFB present, lighting turned on, HDR running, shooting a dusk approach in low visibility, then the product is creating a huge number of draw-calls above what is normally required to render each frame within Prepar3D. The NGXu is one of the first products in which the models were developed native to Prepar3D and specifically for the Prepar3D v4.5 platform. Other products are available that use some mix of volumetric lighting and PBR, but none quite to this extent- so in that fashion we are leading the way in the full-inclusion of features on this product.

    To improve performance there is a direct correlation between your processor’s capabilities, your GPUs capabilities and the performance you will see. (I have ignored a bunch of factors related to the GPU which may unintentionally make you think it is unimportant… it IS still important but in a different area that doesn’t impact this argument all that much..)


    Genesis Act Six: Seconds Out
    As part of our normal development process, we are continuing to tweak, tune and adjust things to see what benefits we can bring to users with performance problems. Adjusting the lighting implementation, removing PBR from surfaces that don’t benefit from the capabilities, looking for efficiencies in reflective surfaces, etc. The goal is to find a tiny bit of efficiency in many places in order to provide a larger boost in performance without degrading the quality of the product for the very many users with higher end hardware who are not seeing problems.

    We have heard that users who stow the EFBs see a sizeable boost in performance, which makes sense since you are reducing the number of displayed screens on the flight deck by 20%, thus reducing the number of draw-calls related to color adjusting for HDR and dynamic lighting, etc. Other users have found that simply turning HDR off during the dusk/dawn transition has a positive impact.

    Like just about anything in flying and computing, there are always going to be some tradeoffs, and how you want to approach them will be different for each user. (For example: I think Prepar3D’s HDR makes the sim look ridiculous from within the VC- so I turn it off. I think it looks great in external views however- so if I am going to be showing off the external model I turn it back on… Other users feel completely the opposite. To each his own, as they say!)

    Genesis Act Seven: Afterglow:
    If you have read this far, thanks. This is long, boring and not very entertaining stuff, but I hope you have learned a few things that will help you to understand how you can have an impact on your sim by making smart choices that support what is important to you. On our end, as part of the usual Developer-Customer social compact, we continue to look for efficiencies and to advocate on behalf of performance by asking the developers to find ways to use modern techniques to unlock the full potential of the simulation platform. Over at Microsoft, they have clearly done this with their new simulation platform and we are very much looking forward to seeing what can be done with it to make our products really humm and sing.

    The work with Prepar3D continues.
    Robert S. Randazzo
    PMDG Simulations
    http://www.pmdg.com



    #2
    Bruh......
    Bogdan Misko

    Comment


      #3
      An excellent post
      Wayne Such

      Comment


        #4
        Very informative
        Alex Kulak
        PMDG Studier and flyer
        Ramp Agent

        Comment


          #5
          Dear Mr. & Captain Randazzo,

          Thank You So Very Much for the Granular Dissection of P.M.D.G. Operational Deployment Performance Factors and/or Best Practices!!!!!!!

          HAPPY HOLIDAYS, CHRISTMAS, and NEW YEAR's to you, your family, the P.M.D.G.Family, and P.M.D.G. Folks!!!!!!!

          Take Care and All the Best,
          Dave
          Attached Files
          David M. Edwards: Founder, C.E.O., and Editor-In-Chief---> Aerospace Weekly (A.W.) www.aerospaceweekly.com

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by rsrandazzo View Post
            .......................

            I have two machines here of very different capabilities. The first is an I7 6700K with an Nvidia 980 card. The second is an I9 9900K with an Nvidia 2800Ti.
            On these machines I will compare the performance of the PMDG 747-400 (PBR on external model but not in VC, texture based lighting) and the PMDG 737NGxu (PBR externally and internally with volumetric lighting in the VC)..................
            Robert, this is all really fascinatring stuff and very informative; especially the different results in the performance table for the two machines you currently have, so thank you. I am intrigued they are both Intel based and not AMD, because it would be interesting to know your thoughts on the latest AMD hardware as a comparison. In many of the hardware reports I have read they are considerd to be the best for gaming PC's at the moment. For example, those with a Ryzen 9 3900X, an AMD Radeon RX5700 XT and the latest next-gen PCI Express 4.0,NVME SSD's, such as the Corsair MP600 range, are capable of delivering up to 5GB/s read and 4GB/s write speeds, so presumably they will be able to minimise the inevitable bottleneck by processing draw-calls much faster?.
            Michael Codd

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Michael Codd View Post

              Robert, this is all really fascinatring stuff and very informative; especially the different results in the performance table for the two machines you currently have, so thank you. I am intrigued they are both Intel based and not AMD, because it would be interesting to know your thoughts on the latest AMD hardware as a comparison. In many of the hardware reports I have read they are considerd to be the best for gaming PC's at the moment. For example, those with a Ryzen 9 3900X, an AMD Radeon RX5700 XT and the latest next-gen PCI Express 4.0,NVME SSD's, such as the Corsair MP600 range, are capable of delivering up to 5GB/s read and 4GB/s write speeds, so presumably they will be able to minimise the inevitable bottleneck by processing draw-calls much faster?.
              He listed the Intel i9 9900K which is an undisputed gaming CPU king of the world, and Nvidia RTX 2080Ti, which has no equal today. These are the best there is. With all due respect, AMD has no game in the high-end GPU market today. Their CPUs however, are extremely competitive, I give you that. But the Radeon RX 5700 XT is mid-range at best and competes with Nvidia RTX 2060 or RTX 2060 Super. NVMEs are nice for sure. One of the users here has a dual RTX 2080 Ti with an SLI link, that is a beast of a machine!
              Serge Saakov - KPVD
              my YouTube page

              Comment


              • Michael Codd
                Michael Codd commented
                Editing a comment
                Serge, I confess - I'm also an Intel user!

              #8
              i7 6700K GTX 980 ti. That's me...so thanks for the very informative article. I'm still pretty happy with my (4 year old aging pc) performance, and your information really explains well "the why" of my system's current limits. Looking forward to MSFS and some new hardware in the future so I can enjoy flying once again at dusk/dawn/night with dynamic lighting.
              Randall Coultas

              Comment


                #9
                You answered all my questions. Thank You

                Joe De Campos
                Joe De Campos
                London

                Comment


                  #10
                  Michael,

                  I am considering an AMD build for precisely the comparison. Based upon what I have read and heard in anecdotal evidence from our own users, it seems that AMD have finally come out of the dark ages with their processors. It seems to me that AMD right now has not yet met/exceeded intel in the very top tier of the market, but that in all other tiers they are able to give same level of performance at significantly lower cost to the user. This is a good thing for simmers who may feel the need to update their hardware because they can get greater performance for less investment.

                  The old "competition is good" theory.

                  All things being equal, performance in all areas with the I9 9900K is superb. I have proven over and over again that I am incapable of doing any simming for enjoyment any longer because I am always attaching the debugger to our products to find/fix little things i notice- so instead for leisure simming I have switched to DCS. I find that the I9/2080Ti combination makes that simulation truly spectacular visually. There are things coming down the pipeline for us simmers that visually will be game-changers over the next few months.

                  What an exciting time to be a simmer!
                  Robert S. Randazzo
                  PMDG Simulations
                  http://www.pmdg.com


                  Comment


                  • Michael Codd
                    Michael Codd commented
                    Editing a comment
                    Yes indeed, but I would prefer a DC3 over DCS any day if I were in your shoes! LOL

                  #11
                  Cool information. From what I have just learned I deduce I should get a beneficial performance gain by disabling the FO display as well as the EFB.
                  Victor Green

                  Comment


                    #12
                    any update on the oc2 for fsx Robert

                    Comment


                    • mglan80
                      mglan80 commented
                      Editing a comment
                      Tony, come on, man...

                    • rsrandazzo
                      rsrandazzo commented
                      Editing a comment
                      Tony,

                      If I have such an update- why would I include it in a thread about processor performance?

                      I wouldn't.

                      RSR

                    • Tbarker1989
                      Tbarker1989 commented
                      Editing a comment
                      Tony,

                      You're like a broken record. They said it would come in due time. Let's be honest, is OCv2 going to allow you to do something you cannot currently do? I can attest to no it does not. Currently it has the exact same functionality of OCv1.

                      Tim Barker

                    #13
                    The Prepar3D engine has NOT moved forward as rapidly, and this has us using a sim that we are all aware is bottlenecked by processor dependencies, lack of GPU use, inability to spread itself across many cores, etc etc etc. In other words, we are running software that is intrinsically of a 1990s architecture on hardware that wants to see the software take advantage of 20 years of evolution in software and rendering design, but our platform simply cannot.
                    When I read this I started crying. Someone FINALLY gets it. I'm sorry, I can't talk anymore now - I need more Kleenex.

                    -Aaron Cumberland

                    Comment


                    • Mickel
                      Mickel commented
                      Editing a comment
                      Oh people get it. It's the inclination to waste (yet more) bandwidth explaining it that has gone.

                    #14
                    Originally posted by rsrandazzo View Post
                    Michael,

                    I am considering an AMD build for precisely the comparison. Based upon what I have read and heard in anecdotal evidence from our own users, it seems that AMD have finally come out of the dark ages with their processors. It seems to me that AMD right now has not yet met/exceeded intel in the very top tier of the market, but that in all other tiers they are able to give same level of performance at significantly lower cost to the user. This is a good thing for simmers who may feel the need to update their hardware because they can get greater performance for less investment.

                    The old "competition is good" theory.

                    All things being equal, performance in all areas with the I9 9900K is superb. I have proven over and over again that I am incapable of doing any simming for enjoyment any longer because I am always attaching the debugger to our products to find/fix little things i notice- so instead for leisure simming I have switched to DCS. I find that the I9/2080Ti combination makes that simulation truly spectacular visually. There are things coming down the pipeline for us simmers that visually will be game-changers over the next few months.

                    What an exciting time to be a simmer!
                    Yes. Recent flight simming with the Lockheed Martin Prepar 3D is like owning an older (i.e. 2002) BMW X5 Small Utility Vehicle. About 95-98% of the time is spent making repairs.

                    Domestic Disputes between Lockheed Martin and NVidia are brazenly boundless, uncontrollable, and Paralyzing.......


                    Dave

                    www.AerospaceWeekly.com
                    Attached Files
                    Last edited by DaveE; 23Dec2019, 03:54.
                    David M. Edwards: Founder, C.E.O., and Editor-In-Chief---> Aerospace Weekly (A.W.) www.aerospaceweekly.com

                    Comment


                      #15
                      Having worked in the video game industry, I can attest to everything that Robert stated. I have personally seen developers spend weeks tweaking models, textures, lighting, and code, all just to shave a handful of milliseconds off the time it takes to draw everything on the screen (all of which is done after finding every possible way to reduce the number of draw calls to the smallest possible value). Personally, I don't expect to see any significant improvement in performance with Prepar3D until version 5, and even then I will only believe it when I see it.

                      It would be interesting to hear what kind of performance is being seen in the new Microsoft Flight Simulator tech alpha, but I doubt anyone participating can talk about it.
                      Tim Lincoln
                      My YouTube Channel

                      Comment


                        #16
                        Thank you Robert, keep up posts like this, very interesting.

                        Merry Christmas to all of you Simmers!
                        Marcus Crampton
                        BAe JS4100 | 737-800/900 | 777-200LR/F

                        Comment


                          #17
                          Much over my head but then me, I'm just a lawnmower mate, you can tell me by the way I walk


                          (Well, I suspect Robert gets it anyway!)
                          Bill Casey

                          Comment


                          • Michael Codd
                            Michael Codd commented
                            Editing a comment
                            Charming, Mickel. '''Tis the season of goodwill to all, so where's the respect for your elders? LOL

                          • rsrandazzo
                            rsrandazzo commented
                            Editing a comment
                            Listen son, you're wasting time. :-)

                          • Mickel
                            Mickel commented
                            Editing a comment
                            Bah humbug Mr Codd.. :-) I'm becoming one the of the elders at the office and my boss reminds me of such. Fighting it hammer and tong to the bitter end though.

                          #18
                          I would like to believe PMDG and other add-on developers have made this known to the folks at LM. Is it case of LM knowing newer more powerful CPU exist, which keeps the SIM running (as inefficient as it is) so they don't bother doing anything about it or having to rewrite the SIM code to better take advantage of the GPU/CPU just takes time to do. Either way something has to be done about it for P3D to continue into the future, if not the sim becomes its own bottle neck.
                          Onela Pivra [ATPL (A/H) ME CFII]
                          [email protected] GHz, Nvidia GTX 1070, DDR4 3000 16GB

                          Comment


                            #19
                            Onela,

                            It is very well known to the developers. I believe that a solution is in their long term plan, but I'm not privy to that plan so I don't know when.

                            Robert S. Randazzo
                            PMDG Simulations
                            http://www.pmdg.com


                            Comment


                              #20
                              Thankyou Robert,very informative and educational as usual i love the way you go about explaining things.But just one question why haven’t you said this before?I would have been so much wiser knowing all this.But better late than never as they say. Thankyou for the heads up Robert.🙂
                              Danny Z.Cebis

                              Comment


                                #21
                                I can't tell the difference between FS2000 and latest P3D anyway. It all looks good to me. I think I need new glasses.
                                Paul Gugliotta
                                United 257 heavy

                                Comment


                                  #22
                                  I have 9900K with 2070 and I noticed that if you play around with Process Lasso you can get the game to run smoothly. That software will detect any micro-stutters or freezes. I've managed to get the clock right as well as let the game run on all but 1 cores and things seem to be close to comparison with what you're getting with 2080. The big limit is still the big cities and the way they were optimized. Toronto for example even with default scenery still runs me about 25-30FPS which in comparison to FB SFOHD ~40 is kinda of bad.

                                  With new hardware I think we've reached the times when we do not have to sacrifice eye candy for performance. Issue is , right now new hardware managed to beat all the nuances of P3D code, can it keep up with the new MSFS code that is the question. Many would not be happy to for example invest in top of the line i7 7th gen hardware and have to repurchase everything as things in MSFS will run like they have 1st gen i5 in P3D v4
                                  Konstantin Kharlamov

                                  Comment


                                  • rsrandazzo
                                    rsrandazzo commented
                                    Editing a comment
                                    Konstantin,

                                    Process Lasso: I haven't heard of this. Can you describe a bit more? - RSR

                                  • skwallll
                                    skwallll commented
                                    Editing a comment
                                    It is essentially a very fancy version of your standard Task Manager.

                                    https://bitsum.com/

                                    It can give you a visual of the performance of your PC / detailed usage of applications. It is also gives one of the most important stats which is "responsiveness". You can track how your hardware reacts to usage and whether is stable or whether it stutters. Good feature to play around with when overclocking or assigning cores to specific applications. For example every application that runs along with P3D (spadnext, chaseplane, vpilot, activesky, FTFF) I have set to use only even cores (2,4,6 etc....). P3D runs on all but 1 virtual cores.

                                  • Andreasmb
                                    Andreasmb commented
                                    Editing a comment
                                    Konstantin,
                                    do I understand correctly that through process lasso app you assigned p3d to all of the 8 cores except one core?which of the 8 cores you did NOT assign p3d to? and the rest of the additional p3d related apps like chaseplane, active sky, utl and alike you assigned to cores 2,4,6,8 of your 9900K? would be great to know, pls advise. I would give process lasso pro a try then. tks Andreas

                                  #23
                                  I just built a brand new rig with AMD Ryzen 7 3700X and Nvidia RTX 2070 Super. It's running about 100+ FPS in external views, and 50'ish on the flight deck. I have to say, that my system is absolutely GPU limited, while CPU load is never more than 20%. P3D with NGXu can be a graphics card hog if you let it, although I have most sliders pegged on max.
                                  Serge Saakov - KPVD
                                  my YouTube page

                                  Comment


                                    #24
                                    Rob et all,

                                    If you look at my sig you will see a AMD build. Currently very happy with my 3700x/5700XT combo rig in P3D and with the NGXu. Same build I use in Beta Test. At times my FPS in the NGXu drops down into the 20s but it's still smooth with no stutters and it looks good. The bang for the buck is undeniable. For the difference in cost I put a set of MFG rudder pedals under my desk. My GPU was $415 new. 5700XT's are now showing up for less than $400. I run my system with no overclocking. A Ryzen 3700x can be had for $325.

                                    Waiting to see what the effect of the 3950 will be when supply catches up. I would say AMD is defiantly back in the gaming/simming market. Also for me AMD has stated they will stay with the AM4 socket for at least through the 4XXX generation. From my desk it was a smart decision to go with AMD.
                                    Charles Harris KRTS The Valley of Speed
                                    ASUS ROG Strix B450-F, Ryzen 3700X, 1TB 970 Neo M2,1TB SSD, RX 5700XT 8GB, 32GB DDR4 3200

                                    Comment


                                      #25
                                      Either way, I think I'm going to need to build a new system to get the best out of MSFS 2020. Given the current prices of the newest-generation stuff though, it's practically robbery, assault and battery. For the same money as an RTX 2080 Ti, I could buy a home by the sea. I'm quite sure though that, after the ordeal, it'll all be worth it.
                                      Stuart Cole

                                      Comment


                                        #26
                                        Captain, this is the best comment I have red about sim performance in 2019.

                                        Many thanks for taking the time!

                                        Merry Christmas to the PMDG Team and their families.

                                        Comment


                                          #27
                                          Great information Robert! thank you
                                          David J Guillen

                                          Comment


                                            #28
                                            Hi guys !


                                            Thanks for the posting, that's explain a lot and very informative.
                                            Many thanks for taking the time!


                                            Regards,
                                            Achmad Ferdi Iskandar (SUB-ID)
                                            System: P3D v4.5, ASUS Maximus V Formula, Intel i7-3770K O/C to 4.7GHz, Noctua NH-U12P SE2, Nvidia GTX 1070
                                            16Gb Corsair Vengeance, Corsair 850W PSU, Win 7 Pro 64-bit, SAITEK Yoke and Throttle, X52 Joystick
                                            Pro Flight™ TPM, Switch Panel, Flight Sim Yoke CH, WDC 1TB, Arma Pixxel+ 27" Curve

                                            Comment


                                              #29
                                              "To see reflected there
                                              The trees, the sky, the lily fair"

                                              Draw calls everywhere...
                                              ww9908.png

                                              Comment


                                                #30
                                                Walter,

                                                VERY NICE! Well done!
                                                Robert S. Randazzo
                                                PMDG Simulations
                                                http://www.pmdg.com


                                                Comment

                                                Working...
                                                X