Jump to content

active TEGB South P3Dv4.4 - settings for smooth performance at 4K


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 193
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hello all,   Here are what my settings look like for smooth 4K (3840x2160 resolution) performance over central London in both a simple aircraft (Trike) and a complex GA aircraft (DA62, Glass

Eugene has been working on a bunch of service packs including TE Netherlands SP1 for P3D and AFS2, and also looking at the London 3D building models for TE GB South P3D and has found a 30% performance

Enjoy South for what it is, because Central is quite some way off. We are refocusing our P3D region resources onto the SP1 patch for TE Netherlands and then finishing openLC Africa.

Posted Images

3 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

 

Yes, we made progress in locating a specific build where issue may have started (combination of issues) ... more testing then hopefully a released HotFix soonish.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Great work  Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, I'm going to suspend any new TE purchases until this is all figured out. Totally unacceptable memory usage. Thanks for the update, Rob8)

 

memory was 85% of 32 gbs in downtown London with John V's settings

Edited by FireRx
Link to post
Share on other sites

there may be a nuance that P3D V4.5 may be allocating CPU/GPU/System RAM/VRAM more efficiently, with what is actually available on our computers...

 

i can understand why SLI GPUs could be problematic...

 

the first thing i noticed with V4.5 on my 7700K is that the CPU was running with lots more headroom than before - more efficient with comparable flight experience...

 

why not use the available resources on our computer setups?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm having a different experience in 4.5 compared to 4.4.

 

4.4 the fps were quite reasonable, but I was getting blurries that got progressively worse the further I flew.

4.5 the blurries seem to have gone, but fps is in single figures until the sim eventually crashes with a DXGI_DEVICE_REMOVED error message. Has 4.5 introduced a new way of rendering scenery which may be overloading my GPU? It's a 1060 with 6GB.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/11/2019 at 10:06 PM, twright said:

Hi,

 

Just to say these settings did help and my FRs are now fairly reasonable as long as I use a moderate aircraft.

However for me, having the 'Use high-resolution terrain textures' box disabled made my terrain really blurry and slow to load in. When I enable it the textures load much quicker and are sharper.

Just wondered if anyone else has noticed this?

 

Cheers

I'm with you on this , I enabled use high resolution and no more blurries at all.... in p3d 4.4 yay

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Well I guess I was warned by so many here but, having purchased the entire True Earth series for X-plane 11 and finding it an absolutely gob smacking experience with no frame rate setback at all, I decided to go ahead and purchase it for P3D while it's on special.

 

The FPS has certainly dropped for me since installing it in my Prepar3d 4.5 setup but my main complaint is that whilst I have everything installed onto Solid State Drives, my startup time has gone from about 3 minutes to 13m 33s loading an Alabeo C404 at ORBX's EGHI.

I'm looking at the progress bar on 6% for a whopping 11m 10s of those 13m 33s.

 

I've really only just installed TE-GBS, loaded then rebooted and loaded again but before I start nutting it all out to see if I can make improvements, I thought I'd look here for ideas.

 

Does anyone have any ideas on why I should now have a massive increase in load time especially with the mad delay at 6%?

 

I'm now at about the same boot time I had on an old Western Digital Green Hard Disk Drive back in the day :-)

 

Regards to all - Kym H

Edited by kymh
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is your system drive *also* an SSD? My sims are all on SSDs, but my system is [still] a regular HD. As P3D creates a raftload of temporary/cache files in C (whether you like it or not) and this could be slowing you down.

 

I took find I can run TEGB happily in XP but really struggle on P3D. I have a pretty old/mid-range system :(

 

Adam.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Adam,

Yes, I have everything on SSD except for about 12TB of XP11 Ortho4XP Scenery.

I used to keep my temp files on a HDD but as prices have dropped and I don't like watching paint to dry I changed that.

 

I dropped all the settings in TE-GBS Control panel expecting some difference in load time.

I also prevented Active Sky, Ultimate Traffic Live, GSX 2 etc. from loading and it took 14m47s to load with 11m 32s of watching that 6% marker.

 

Uninstalled TE-GBS and P3D v4,5 was loaded with a Alebeo C404 Titan at EGHI in 3m31s.

 

Interestingly my FPS is only 1-2fps better off.

 

I'm on an i7-6700K at 4500MHz with 64GB RAM and a GTX1070 which I guess is getting towards a mid range system now too but X-Plane 11 thinks it's more than enough :-)

 

I wish I didn't have so much time and money invested in Prepar3D and could afford to put just 10% of that into X-Plane.

 

 

Regards Kym H

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

The best thing to do, if you wish to fly in TEGB South in P3D, is to disable all your other addon scenery.

You could leave any EU UK Orbx products active.

 

It might sound extreme but it will cut the loading time down to a few minutes.

 

Often the long loading time is not just TEGB but the combination with other active scenery.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes thanks Nick.

I had decided to pull SIMstarter NG out of the archives ASAP and as time allows and create a UK only profile to see how much that helps.

I do have an absolute ton of scenery.
 

If you have a better suggestion though, I'd love to hear it as you are more than likely much more knowledgeable than me on the matter :-)

 

Hopefully the soon to come patch (any day now?)for Prepar3D 4.5 will help too.

 

Regards Kym H

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kymh said:

Yes thanks Nick.

I had decided to pull SIMstarter NG out of the archives ASAP and as time allows and create a UK only profile to see how much that helps.

I do have an absolute ton of scenery.

That's what I do. A UK-only SimStarter profile reduced loading time by a large extent and allowed special configuration settings for just this profile.

 

Kind regards, Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Guys,

Yes I shelved Simstarter NG in the early days of P3D4 as I didn't seem to need it any more but will install it this morning and see what difference it makes.

I never disliked it in anyway, just didn't need it as everything was well behaved without profiles.

 

Happy flying to all.

 

Regards Kym H

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use the Scenery Config Editor but I believe your choice is just as good for this task.

 

Attached is a P3D v4 scenery.cfg file for TEGB South and all the payware airports.

It can be easily amended to match the actual products installed.

scenery.cfg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks Nick.

 

I will look at this also and then may wait to see what the P3D 4.5 patch delivers and just fly TE-GBS in XP11 which is just fantastic.

 

SIMstarter NG with a massive scenery reduction, took me from  a 14m 47s (average) startup to 6m 24s with the Alabeo C404 Titan (my standard test plane) at EGHI which is quite an improvement but still twice as slow for my system with everything loading but no TE-GBS.

 

Regards Kym H

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just installed a Titan RTX (after much debate between sensible me and WTF me) and have been somewhat disappointed with the results in P3D. I was running 4.4 and getting all sorts of weird glitches after swapping out my 980Ti and putting the Titan in, so figured that maybe I should bite the bullet and do a clean install of 4.5 and start all over again. So now I've got a gutted PC with just about every bit of non-essential code turned off during flight time, and a clean P3D system with nothing but ORBX scenery on there. I've got a saved setting of exactly these (JV's) values for TrueEarth GB and I'm getting a framerate alternating anywhere between maybe 24 tops and down into (low) single figures at the other end. And even when it is showing in the 18-22 range it feels jerky and stuttery. I understand the hotfix for 4.5 is supposed to address some of these problems, so I guess I'll keep my fingers crossed for that.

 

By comparison, the Titan has transformed my X-Plane experience. I went for the Titan rather than a 1080/2080 because of the huge memory capacity. And I think it was "worth" it in the sense that (in XP at least) I'm seeing smooth flight now in areas where I was in slide show mode in the past - VRAM usage hitting over 13gb in some places but the GPU not pushing much over about 40%.

 

Which is why I'm a bit put out about my P3D experience so far.  I've got way too much invested in it to abandon P3D altogether, but what I'm seeing now is not encouraging.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Welcome to trying to run P3D and ORBX products. I went through a similar process to you replacing my 980TI with an RTX2080TI and throwing in an i9.

 

I won't restate what is already out there and on this thread but I will say how disappointing the Beta testing on both 4.5 and TE GB has been. I will get a smacked wrist probably for daring to say this on here but honestly its unacceptable.

 

We have all spent 100s if not 1000s (in my case) so its fair to expect at the very least ORBX to do a bit of testing on the first TE GB release and definitely for the 4.5 BETA, which they had well in advance. A brand new version of P3D and they didn't bother to do any performance testing with GB, a product dogged by performance issues and that pushes the engine to its limits!? So disappointing, because it shows that LM and ORBX have almost no integration or corporate relationship. P3D v5 is not going to have any feedback from ORBX and we are not going to see anything like the performance of X-Plane. This might be the moment to jump ship.

 

Its only thanks to the likes of @Rob Ainscough that bugs are even picked up, after release! He should be on the ORBX payroll frankly. I'd love to see both LM and ORBX invest more in testing, I work in the field and we insist on automated tests that execute when new versions are being tested. They immediately flag up memory and performance problems for standard or advanced scenario tests. It isn't hard to do but it takes investment, investment that is hard to link directly to profit, making it impossible to convince the money men it's needed. If you are reading, this debacle is the result of that lack of investment. 

 

I guess there is little competition so it doesn't really matter to ORBX, X-Plane will completely replace P3D in the next few years unless something drastic changes at LM. LM don't seem too worried as it is not their core business and for ORBX it makes little difference as they are banging out X-Plane products now. Could it be that releasing products like this on X-Plane then poorly porting to P3D and damaging it is actually beneficial to ORBX? Once P3D dies they'l have a simpler product delivery mechanism? Perhaps that's too cynical but its hard to explain it any other way.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Completely agree.

 

I'm really disappointed with my TE GB purchase for P3D v4. I mean sure it looks incredible, I can't fault that, even as someone who lives within the coverage region. However it's completely unusable, no matter what recipe of settings, tweaks and features/addons I disable. I'm hoping the hotfix we're all waiting for will be a magic bullet, but will believe it when I see it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Delly - I don't have any issues with ORBX here. I previously had TE GBS working ok'ish on 4.4, using similar values to those recommended here by JV. Not as smooth and as detailed as I would have preferred but acceptable. It only went pear-shaped when I replaced my graphics card - and I still don't quite understand that.

 

Interestingly (or not), I have now set a CPU affinity mask in my Prepar3d.cfg and it seems to be bringing things back to what I would have expected. Still nowhere near the sort of results I'm getting in XP but heading in the right direction. Maybe the hotfix for 4.5 will finish the process.

 

The reality, for me at least, is that I just don't expect TE GB to perform as well or look as good under P3D as it does under XP. Different architectures with different capabilities, it seems.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, andy1252 said:

@Delly - The reality, for me at least, is that I just don't expect TE GB to perform as well or look as good under P3D as it does under XP. Different architectures with different capabilities, it seems.

 

You seem to have missed the point I was trying to make or I explained it badly.

 

I am not expecting that equality at all. What I expected is a degree of testing particularly with the 4.5 release. The fact that there has been so little testing poses some difficult questions. The biggest for me being both ORBX and LMs commitment to P3D going forward. I do not see P3D V5 making any significant improvement in 'architecture or capability' (to use your terms) precisely because ORBX who are producing scenery and products at the cutting edge are not even working with LM to help develop and test releases. That was the jist of my point anyway. Sorry for waffling on! :)

Edited by Delly
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I can't really comment from an informed perspective on Orbx's beta team because I'm not part of it.  Perhaps (just speculation) they would benefit from a more structured testing schedule..  Maye the way the company works means its harder to ensure everything IS actually tested?  Do the beta team have access to the LM insider groups, or is that reserved for only the developers of each product?   I doubt that there are many beta testers who would do anything other than run their P3D installation as they have it now, which would make it difficult to build objective comparative data as Rob A does.  Would we be willing to go through repeated installs of different client versions to be able to accurately give performance data?

 

OrbX has for me not always seemed to be open to more than a certain degree of constructive criticism.  I think a beta tester IMHO needs to be able to feel empowered to tell it how it is, and if necessary speak truth to power.  Maybe Orbx do that already, maybe not.  I agree there seems to be room for some improvement, but I'm also not entirely sure it's an easy thing to accomplish.

 

If it were me, I'd be throwing it right back at you saying, "come on then, come on board and help, get it done" ;)

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

If it were me, I'd be throwing it right back at you saying, "come on then, come on board and help, get it done" ;)

 

Haha very cheap shot, as you probably well know I have spent many many hours helping test TE GB v1 for free even after being told on here to check I had installed windows correctly lol :) the big problem is I have a job!  

 

I recently gave LM a big list of detailed performance issues and asked if I could join the BETA team. They didn't even bother to reply. I asked if they could release details on the architecture so developers like me could understand how it works and maybe just maybe (FOR FREE!) help suggest ways to improve it, a tech blog would be hugely populate, so people could understand the direction, limitations and ideas being discussed. Again not even a reply from them.

 

There is just a lot of 'its not our fault' going on, check out Rob at LMs latest below, the relationship has broken down with ORBX or it was never there to start with. That is pretty sad for all of us and I repeat I think P3D is finished as a commercial product, maybe it will take 5 years but X-Plane is I believe the future. Painful to say.

 

http://www.prepar3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6312&t=133165&start=120

 

Please note that beta testers do not have all the add-on's that exist for P3D, for example I do not own ORBX Germany which is one of the areas reported that had problems, more over many 3rd party products require specific updates by their original developers in order to work with the latest version of P3D making it very difficult (almost imposible) not only for Lockheed Martin but also for any members of the beta team like myself to test P3D against 3rd party products.

However each 3rd party developer can perform test of their own products during the entire beta cycle, so in a way it is their responsibility to verify that P3D is working as expected with their own products.

No software in the world is free of bugs / problems, but the important thing to take here is how quickly and hard everyone has and continue to work to resolve the issue as soon as posible, I would like to thank one more time Rob McCarthy, Kayla and the entire LM team for their quick and professional response to this matter.

Special thanks also to Rob Ainscough for his meticulous and professional testing to help everyone, alongside with everyone at AVSIM forums, LM forums and many other social sites who has been doing their best to report and perform many tests trying to narrow down posible causes. 

Edited by Delly
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hot Fix was released today: http://www.prepar3d.com/latest-news/

 

I highly recommend installing client and content.  After you run the install process to update and run P3D be sure to check your Prepar3d.cfg and look for UIHardwareAcceleration=True entry.  In my testing, performance with this hotfix returned to close to V4.4 performance (4.5 hotfix is about 7.1% lower in FPS vs. v4.4 which is better than being down 27.3% FPS).

 

Be aware if you are running any add-on that swaps in/out prepar3d.cfg,  you may end up using an older Prepar3d.cfg that doesn't have this setting ... best option is to delete your Prepar3d.cfg and let one get regenerated when you start P3D and then manually make adjustments thru the P3D UI.

 

Side Note: some testers/users reported that this option didn't make a difference, I'm not sure exactly why as in all my test PC's it did make a significant difference.  I tried to get more information on exactly what this option does but only details I got related to WPF acceleration (Windows Presentation Foundation) which is a Microsoft technology wrapped in .NET that makes use of SSE and SSE2 instruction set (CPU) and some additional GPU accelerated functions.

 

Here is a very good article on what WPF acceleration does: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/wpf/advanced/optimizing-performance-taking-advantage-of-hardware

 

As you can see it's very hardware dependent and can fallback to software rendering "seamlessly" (except that one will notice a significant drop in FPS).  Since P3D requires DX11 all graphics hardware "should be" in Rendering Tier 2.  Would be nice if we could log when software rendering is triggered as a fallback, because my "hunch" is that sometimes software fallback IS happening with certain add-ons.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Edited by Rob Ainscough
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rob Ainscough said:

In my testing, performance with this hotfix returned to close to V4.4 performance (4.5 hotfix is about 7.1% lower in FPS vs. v4.4 which is better than being down 27.3% FPS).

 

This is quite disappointing.  what have LM improved worse to cause this??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't understand your question Kevin?  Are you referring to the v4.5+hotfix = 7.1% FPS drop over 4.4?  Actual numbers are 82.7 FPS in v4.4 and 76.8 FPS in v4.5 + hotfix in my test scenario which is considerably better than V4.4 82.7 FPS vs v4.5 (no hotfix) 58.0 FPS.

 

If so, there were some PBR issues and other "lighting issues" that were cleaned up and improved on including shader changes and night time terrain blending.  

 

If anyone is using additional shader products (reshade, PTA, EnvShade, etc.), I would recommend waiting for these vendors to update their products for v4.5 + hotfix compatibility.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

Don't understand your question Kevin?  Are you referring to the v4.5+hotfix = 7.1% FPS drop over 4.4?  Actual numbers are 82.7 FPS in v4.4 and 76.8 FPS in v4.5 + hotfix in my test scenario which is considerably better than V4.4 82.7 FPS vs v4.5 (no hotfix) 58.0 FPS.

 

If so, there were some PBR issues and other "lighting issues" that were cleaned up and improved on including shader changes and night time terrain blending.  

 

If anyone is using additional shader products (reshade, PTA, EnvShade, etc.), I would recommend waiting for these vendors to update their products for v4.5 + hotfix compatibility.

 

Cheers, Rob.

I would have hoped if anything that 4.5 + hotfix would have better performance than 4.4

 

8% worse than the previous point release is the key stat, either way we're just debating how much worse it got rather than substantive improvements.

 

Are those performance figures with default or addons?  Te-Uk is hard on even the most cutting edge systems, so seeing it go backwards performance-wise makes me consider whether I should revert back to 4.4?

Edited by kevinfirth
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @Rob Ainscough

 

Thanks a lot for your efforts and help!


I am currently running really smoothly and stable on 4.4, but I have your same machine 9900k at 5.1, and 2x2080ti SLI. I think I will give it a shot, and update to 4.5. Considering I have all the ORBX add-ons, including trees. Is scenery component required at all? Would you install it or can I skip it all together?

 

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I applied the patch and I'm very satisfied! Kevin, did you try it already?

Just did a leg to EGHI with TEGBS and AS airbus (the other isn't out yet). No blurries and, for this addon, very smooth and flyable fps. Have a look at my pics.

 

Kai

 

Unbenannt-3.jpg

Unbenannt-1.jpg

Unbenannt-2.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, kevinfirth said:

Are those performance figures with default or addons?

 

Default.  As suggested, try it, I doubt you'll notice the difference from V4.4 and you'll get a lot of bug fixes that content providers are relying on.

 

8 hours ago, radial360 said:

Is scenery component required at all?

 

That's up to you, but since you're running Orbx Global then not really needed.

 

Cheers, Rob.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Alexey said:

Please take a screenshot over London towards EGLL. Shadows of buildings included?

 

London is still horrible for me, very few frames:'(

 

Kai

 

I have to correct myself: using the JV-setting, the frames over London are good anf more than enough to explore London. But if I come from outside where I use my harder settings its difficult to switch on the fly. So I have to choose this setting for the whole fly if I want to fly into London.

Edited by KaiUweWeiss
Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we have an updated version of a decent setting that would give us all a good starting point please?

 

The February user guide seems to be for FSX and JV's original post was pre control panel and pre 4.5.

 

I'm not slider happy and I've tried lots of suggestions posted here, but I'm still getting to the point where 3 minutes into a flight, I can draw quicker with some pencils.

 

For the record I have an i7 4790 CPU @4.00 GHz, 32GB RAM and a GTX 1080 Ti.

 

Thanks ever so much

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

and some very detailed answers from me . Unless I am mistaken the two excellent and helpful replys were not from Orbx . Unfortunately  as all answers I had already covered  ie Sliders .

I know how to operate sliders but if by chance can someone from the orbx team post with the  memory, vram and ram overhead  sliders that will now work post 4.5 hotfix I will be happy . I cannot find a combination that will , maybe my skill is not up to it. If my hardware is lacking I also need to identify .

If anyone has achieved a working London setup with 16gig of ram and 8 gig of vram love to hear from you with your settings but do feel this is ORBX responsibility.

Nice to hear from you Nick and thanks for keeping an eye on the forum you try hard . 

Apologies for the xplane quip was meant to be tongue in cheek but as long term customer it does feel that orbx is no longer interested in P3D customers . 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

if a fellow customer comes along and gives a perfectly correct answer, there is no need for

a staff member to come along later and post the same thing.

There is a large amount of very good advice already posted but the bottom line is, as they said, that

 the simulator has to work harder in the London area than in most other parts of the virtual world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...