Jump to content

Aviara1985

Members
  • Content Count

    85
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 Neutral

About Aviara1985

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well I for one mostly fly airliners and I don't want to limit myself in flying in a specific region. I want to explore the entire world, especially places that I probably will never see in real. Of course TrueEarth is visually superior than any LC-based scenery, but at what cost?? openLC for me is the perfect balance between visually appealing (there still is a significant difference to default) and optimized enough not to burst my disk or hardware and gives me the entire globe (well hoping that Orbx will indeed finish the missing openLC gaps). Even openLC Oceania would be on my buy list as there is more to Oceania than just AU and NZ and I love flying around the Pacific.
  2. When it comes to terrain (Global, Vector, openLC, etc...) I pretty much got everything except TrueEarth plus several airports here and there. I'm also one of those that have no use for TrueEarth. My wallet is open for all missing openLC packages, Australia V2, airports that can cater airliners and Buildings HD.
  3. Would really be a shame if the openLC line weren't to finish. As a global jetliners flier TE is just too much and openLC just makes that huge difference, which is enough.
  4. Is Australia V2 LC based like all the other Full Fat regions or will it be like TrueEarth. I hope it's the former.
  5. Hi, I was just wondering if YMML is still on the update list for dynamic lighting. About 2 years ago there was a post saying all airports will be updated and YMML seemed to be one of the first ones as it was showcased with screenshots. Just curious or maybe I have missed something. Thanks
  6. I don't think we should stop at "Do you fly VFR or IFR?" when someone is considering of getting a product like Orbx. Another important question is "Do you fly in the Sim for training purposes or for the experience?". I fly pretty much only airliners in P3D and I'd rather go with terrain that resembles the local atmosphere of wherever I am flying than some lifeless, flat photoscenery, despite the latter probably being more accurate when it comes to the layout of fields, buildings, roads, etc..... Not necessarily comparing Orbx with Ortho4XP.... just going against the idea that a flat photoscenery is enough for IFR, while Orbx is only good for VFR. Even IFR/Airliners have to fly at 3000ft AGL at some point. I'd like any IFR/Airliner pilot to fly from Tromso to Bergen and tell me the experience is the same when flying within FTX Norway or default (night or day).
  7. Yeah that was my plan as well. Of course the fact that VAS isn't a problem anymore and the better CPU utilization is already enough for my huge excitement, before raising any settings from P3D v3. As mentioned before I don't really need 4K, VR (don't even have the hardware yet), etc... for now.... but I probably won't be able to resist LOD increase and especially dynamic lighting. And I am one of those being rather conservative when it comes to settings... e.g. I had ASCA clouds on 512x512 for VAS reasons. EDIT: I'd also like to add that I am not necessarily seeking to gain much more FPS. I currently use P3D v3 at 30 FPS and I probably wouldn't pay a lot of money just to get it up to let's say 60 fps. What I mainly am looking for is being able to increase settings/visuals and keep it fluid. But yeah we'll see what's what. Some time is going to pass by anyway until all the goodies that we love catch on to v4 and even more time will pass until the v4 world will be filled with Add-Ons that take advantage of the new features
  8. Thanks for all the feedback. Much appreciated. Yeah I will stick with what I have for now. I initially intended to stick with my CPU as suggested in my OP anyway. The question was GPU, because everyone is screaming about vram and I would like to enjoy the new lighting and increased LOD. Even LM themselves recommend 8 GB. I dont feel to comfy about overclocking right now. I also dont have a high end cooler.
  9. Hey there, I am currently on a Flight Sim "break" and planned to get back around Fall this year. But it probably won't happen as P3D v4 is rolling out quicker than expected. Now I know my system can perfectly handle v4, as I don't see how it would perform any worse than v3 at same settings/conditions...probably even better. Given that I probably will do fine with my current setup for a while as more sophisticated Add-Ons (and even the port-overs) will take some time. On the other hand some people like Matt Davies have spoiled me with all the lighting and LOD radius. Anywhere here are my system specs: i7-4790k at 4 GHz (no OC) MSI GTX 970 4GB ASRock Z97 Extreme4 16 GB DDR3 RAM 250GB SSD for Windows only 2TB HDD for everything else (yet even P3D v3 and wasn't a big deal for now) be quiet! 600W Power Unit I have posted this on other Forums and also read a lot of Forums (also non-Flight Sim related), but I'd like to hear as much opinions and experiences as possible but also, because I use a lot of your products. I have been pretty much convinced that my MB-CPU-RAM Combo is still good for the time being and a newer combo with a i7-7700k and DDR4 won't give that much of a boost... at least that's the general consensus (but I will happily hear out any arguments that may convince me otherwise) So I am faced with that to do with the CPU. My budget for immediate (timline of 1-2 months) upgrading allows for following options: a ) GTX 1070 + 1TB SSD b ) GTX 1080ti without SSD I'd also like to add that I am easily spoiled. I have resisted 4K until now and I will do so for the time being. And I don't have a problem trading off loading time for FPS/smoothness, as long as the trade-off makes sense. Let's say option b ) would just be a minimal performance boost in comparison to option a ), but would be a huge difference in loading times, then I'd obviously go with a ). So given the information I haven given you, what would you do if you were me? a) or b)?
  10. Thanks for all the good ideas. Yeah it seems I won't get around getting one of the singles. But it seems all of them lack the support for updatable database. Obviously you'd do a lot of VFR flying with them, but even then I still like to use navaids. I don't know how big of a problem it would be having to stick with 10 year old data, even for VFR.
  11. That's the only way I drive. A flight instructor said it very well. ''a pilot that trusting the other pilot (different plane) to do the right thing are two, too many''
  12. Wow that C90GTX does look like something. How is performance on that thing??
  13. Hey folks, Ok now with OpenLC NA and since I've also got all the FTX regions there I want to do some NA exploring. I'm typically an Airliners person, but once in a while love doing some low and slow sight-seeing and go to some small hidden airfields. I already posted a thread here looking for a bizjet... I got the Mustang and I really love that plane, also awaiting the Citation XLS. Anyway, still looking for a good twin prop. I already have the Twin Otter, but looking for something smaller.... and a little more private/exclusive. One that I'm looking into is the RealAir Duke. Seems to be exactly what I'm looking for in terms of size and performance and can pretty much land anywhere it seems. But one big criteria for me is updated navdata. I pretty much only fly on VATSIM and depend on up-to-date navdata. So the GTN 750 is a no-go for me, since I can't use my navigraph subscription to update it. And I don't really have the money to update it via Garmin directly as regular as navigraph. If I did I'd be buying a real plane. Anyway, is it really a big disadvantage going with the Duke without the GTN750?? What are the alternatives to the Duke?? Thanks and fly safe. Cheers, Amadeo
  14. Yeah I'm not worried about the cpu. The cpu looks good. It's just that main mainboard went up to 43-45 C quite quickly when running P3D. I have a hard time finding the recommended daily tenps for the ASRock Z97 Extreme4. IIRC mainboards have less heat tolerance than cpu/gpu.
  15. Yeah my CPU (also 4790k) didn't go beyond 55 C (no overclock or turbo). But it was the first time my GPU has hit 68 C at more than 40% fan. I just hope the temps won't rise too much when summer kicks in. Well I'll see what it does when the sim is running for mutiple hours. If it's in that range as well I guess I can sleep well.
×
×
  • Create New...