• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

Scenery water levels

Messages
63
Country
scotland
Can anyone offer advice, please? I had a decent photoscenery package covering my country, which to me is important as I only do vfr flying and a good visual environment enhances this.
The only thing missing was autogen, leaving the landscape bare and unrealistic.
I then discovered another photoscenery package covering the same area which also included autogen, so I thought that this could be so much better and I decided to buy it.
The result wasn't too bad with the landscape looking a lot more realistic with plenty of vegetation. The colour tone of the vegetation is a bit bright, but acceptable.
After a while, I decided to try a seaplane and to my horror found that the sea levels round the coast were all over the place and looking like nothing approaching reality.
Neither the "default" scenery or my previous vfr scenery is compromised like this and I enquired via the support page on the website if these concerns could be addressed. After several emails which did not directly address the problem but promised updates which have not as yet appeared and seem unlikely, I have, to be fair, been offered a refund. This however would leave me back where I started. I would like to keep the good bits of the package but get the flaws sorted out.
Surprisingly, I have not seen any similar complaints about this. Maybe I am the only customer, but I very much doubt it, or the others just haven't noticed the problem.
Is there a way of repairing this myself, bearing in mind that I am not a competent developer?
Thanks
jp
 

Attachments

  • water level.gif
    water level.gif
    258.4 KB · Views: 105
  • wild water.gif
    wild water.gif
    427.9 KB · Views: 83
  • water level.gif
    water level.gif
    258.4 KB · Views: 85
  • water settings unchecked.gif
    water settings unchecked.gif
    396.9 KB · Views: 86
  • also in fsx.gif
    also in fsx.gif
    127.8 KB · Views: 82
  • ScreenShot_20210705142709.gif
    ScreenShot_20210705142709.gif
    181 KB · Views: 80
Messages
7,112
Country
us-illinois
Hi John:

Although you apparently began using P3Dv4.x last year, terrain scenery file formats are similar between FSX and P3Dv4.x.

But there can be a lot of work involved in fixing shorelines. :alert:

FS shoreline anomalies are typically the result of either inaccurate CVX vector Hydro poly and Hydro line BGLs and/or terrain mesh BGLs.


If the original package had more accurate shorelines, you may be able to substitute its Hydro BGLs and/or terrain mesh BGLs for those from the second package.


Otherwise, IMHO, it would be easier to just acquire a dedicated CVX vector terrain package such as Ultimate Terrain X Europe from Flight1.



If you send me a PM listing the names of the (2) packages you refer to above, I may be able to offer additional suggestions. ;)

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
Messages
63
Country
scotland
Hi, Gary,

Thanks for replying.
You helped me out a while back with Sbuilderx (forth Bridge area)
Sorry I didn't get back quicker but I have been thinking about the possibilities of sorting this.

I already have Playsims Genx photoreal -in 3 parts for the whole of Scotland -but unfortunately it excludes trees - no autogen, very bare at ground level. Apart from that pretty good including water round the coast.
I saw the ad for Justflight VFR Real Scenery NexGen 3D and it looked quite impressive as it also included autogen. Unfortunately I subsequently discovered that the coastline water level was all over the place.
You mentioned another vfr package from Flight 1 but that doesn't seem to include autogen .
I have had a look at the Playsims Genx again and surprisingly found that after I copied the agn files from the new faulty vfr package into one of the folders of the previously ok Genx, the autogen did appear over that part of the old vfr scenery. This was only with Volume 8 though, and I am having a bit of trouble re-installing the other volumes (7 & 6) with files all over the place and missing patches etc.. I will have to experiment a bit to find out where best to place the agn files if they are indeed able to work correctly.
By the way, excuse my ignorance, Gary, but what is meant by sending a PM?
jp
 
Messages
7,112
Country
us-illinois
Hi, Gary,

Thanks for replying.

You helped me out a while back with Sbuilderx (forth Bridge area)
Sorry I didn't get back quicker but I have been thinking about the possibilities of sorting this.

I already have Playsims Genx photoreal -in 3 parts for the whole of Scotland -but unfortunately it excludes trees - no autogen, very bare at ground level. Apart from that pretty good including water round the coast.

I saw the ad for Justflight VFR Real Scenery NexGen 3D and it looked quite impressive as it also included autogen. Unfortunately I subsequently discovered that the coastline water level was all over the place.

You mentioned another vfr package from Flight 1 but that doesn't seem to include autogen.

I have had a look at the Playsims Genx again, and surprisingly found that after I copied the agn files from the new faulty vfr package into one of the folders of the previously ok Genx, the autogen did appear over that part of the old vfr scenery.

This was only with Volume 8 though, and I am having a bit of trouble re-installing the other volumes (7 & 6) with files all over the place and missing patches etc.

I will have to experiment a bit to find out where best to place the agn files if they are indeed able to work correctly.

The Autogen QMID tile names / number series for custom photo-real imagery land class BGLs is different from FS default land class.

But, custom *an.AGN files are normally interchangeable, assuming imagery is not 'Off-Nadir' when captured, and its precisely placed.

By the way, excuse my ignorance, Gary, but what is meant by sending a PM?
jp

PM = 'Private Message' (aka "Conversation") here at FSDev forum.


PS: Most shoreline anomalies such as you show in the OP, are due to mis-matched CVX vector water flattens and/or terrain mesh.

If terrain mesh is largely acceptable, one can substitute a more accurate CVX vector water body BGL file set (...as in UTX Europe).

Mixing / Matching 3rd party Autogen *an.AGN files will of course be a separate consideration from any CVX vector 'Hydro' BGLs.

Simply stated, one creates a separate (but locally-paired) \Texture folder at the same sub-folder level as the \Scenery folder: :pushpin:

Code:
| __VFR_GenX-VOL8
    | __Volume8
        | __05mPhoto
            | __Scenery <-- Imagery BGLs go here
            | __Texture <-- Autogen *an.AGN files go here
        | __5mDTM
        | __Airports
        | __Docs
        | __Links
        | __Vectors

Let me know if I may be of further help. :)

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
Messages
63
Country
scotland
Thanks, Gary.
I'll see if I can get on with this and hopefully get it sorted.
So far I have vfr genx vol 8 (with the autogen from the other package - looks pretty accurately placed too) and with correct water levels. I still have to get the autogen on to the other areas yet (vols 7 & 6) and as efficiently as possible, bearing in mind the vast number of files involved and the sim's response times.
Looking hopeful, though.
Once again grateful for your input and I'll remember the private message bit.
jp
 
Messages
63
Country
scotland
Hi, Gary,
A quick update:-

Sorry about the delay as I had other matters to atttend to.
I managed to get the autogen to appear by inserting it in the correct folder structure and the result was a massive improvement on the bare photoscenery.
I then decided to combine the 3 separate scenery volumes into a single volume to avoid the duplication of the large agn files into each volume separately just to save space. This has been successful and I am pleased with the result so far. I now have believable scenery and water levels at the correct height and matching the coastline all round.
The only minus I can see is that the enormous amount of addon scenery I have is slowing the sim quite a bit and very noticeable with a fast aircraft.
This could also be a hardware issue as I have the sim on the C drive (ssd) and all the scenery on the D drive (hdd}. I am thinking that a bigger ssd drive that would accommodate everything should allow things to run more smoothly, but I would have to consider the possibility of that happening.
The only other niggle is that the photoscenery kills the P3D water dynamic effect in the areas covered, but I can live with that.
jp
 
Messages
7,112
Country
us-illinois
Hi John:

Congratulations with your further progress. :cool:

P3Dv4.x performance may be influenced by a number of factors, including hardware.

If you post your computer hardware and Windows version info, perhaps we can identify some ways to speed things up. :)

GaryGB
 
Messages
63
Country
scotland
Hi again, Gary.
Regarding my system -
Processor Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-6600K CPU @ 3.50GHz
Installed RAM 8.00 GB
Windows 10 64-bit operating system, x64-based processor
Samsung SSD 750 EVO 250GB
ST1000DX001 1TB
NVIDEA Geforce GTX960 graphics card
This is about 5 years old now and was fine to run P3D standard with not much in the way of addons, but with the volume of stuff I have now it struggles a bit.
Addon scenery is currently over 20 Gbytes and is on the HDD. I feel that if it was on the SSD along with the sim things should be smoother and quicker to load. I have also noticed that sometimes the scenery looks a bit washed-out and lighter than it should.
Problem here is that the SSD drive is 95% full.
I would be interested to hear how best to improve my set-up with the proviso that my finances are limited.
Any advice would be appreciated.
jp
 
Messages
7,112
Country
us-illinois
Hi John:

If you also state your Motherboard Mfgr./ model (with hardware Rev. number), I could advise you better. ;)

Additionally, please state what type of system RAM modules you have (Mfgr./ model), and what speed they are rated for.

Regarding the NVIDIA Geforce GTX960 graphics card, please state which Mfgr./ model it is, and how much VRAM it has.


FYI: There are utility software packages that can inventory the system without opening the computer case; let me know if you need info on those.


This looks like a custom built "desktop" / tower design; ...or was it a off-the-shelf model from a particular manufacturer ? :scratchch

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
Messages
63
Country
scotland
Hi, Gary
My system was supplied by a company building pc's dedicated to flight-simming and is 5 years old now.
They have 3 basic specs and I got the "cheapest " one. At first it was a big improvement on my old XP 32-bit setup, but over time I have overloaded it and is now struggling a bit.
Regarding the details, I have gleaned the following:-

Motherboard -
Gigabyte GA-Z170-HD3P-CF (2015)
Device Type Processors
Device Name Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-6600K CPU @ 3.50GHz
CPI\GENUINEINTEL_-_INTEL64_FAMILY_6_MODEL_94_-_INTEL(R)_CORE(TM)_I5-6600K_CPU_@_3.50GHZ\_3

RAM -
Total Memory 8192MB
Free Memory 6131MB
Maximum Swap File 11341MB
Free Swap File 7478MB

Graphics-
Display Adapters
Name NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960
Adapter RAM 4095MB
Colour Depth 32bit
Vertical Resolution 96dpi
Current Refresh Rate 60Hz
Video Processor GeForce GTX 960
Adapter DAC Type Integrated RAMDAC
Adapter ID GeForce GTX 960
BIOS Version84.6.26.0.6

VRAM - I don't know what that is.
I have tried to find as much detail as I can and, as you suggested, I found the Winaudit app and used that to get some of this information.
Hopefully it may give you a better idea of where an improvement could be made to the system.
regards
jp
 
Messages
7,112
Country
us-illinois
Hi John:

I have a techie friend in Scotland with the same CPU on a similar chipset series motherboard; I shall prefer to discuss your hardware with him.

He will return from his Holiday travels early next week, and I may have a better FS-specific set of recommendations for you shortly thereafter.

Generally speaking, your hardware cited above is capable of providing a good flight experience in both FSX and P3Dv4 with some tweaks.

I have not had time to tinker with P3Dv4 much yet, but thus far on my own new hardware, there are problematic rendering engine graphical issues when compared to FSX that are not likely due to the scenery being loaded, that I hope to sort out in the future via misc. tweaks.

If I am unable to sort those problematic graphical rendering issues in P3Dv4, I would be inclined to continue to use FSX in DX10 Preview mode.


FYI: Since August 2020 I almost exclusively fly in MSFS 2020 ...the rendering of default (no addon required) scenery in Scotland is 'to die for'.

Believe it or not, even on my prior computer hardware (which I now have to rebuild in a recycled case with new cooling to allow overclocking), I was already able to run MSFS 2020 with visually acceptable lower-settings without overclocking.

IIRC, my techie friend with the same CPU on a similar chipset series motherboard ran MSFS with visually acceptable lower-settings without overclocking ...also using a GTX-960.

I'll have a better update of his experiences in FSX, P3D, and MSFS with a hardware configuration closer to yours some time soon.

In the mean time, try limiting P3Dv4 LOD Radius and Autogen and Scenery draw distance to no more than Medium.

Additionally, try setting Scenery complexity and Autogen density to no more than Medium.

Also, disable (or minimize to no more than 10 %) A.I. / Ground Vehicle Traffic.

If necessary for a FPS boost and/or elimination of micro-stutters, try disabling Shadow casting for most- if not all- objects.

Disable 'Dynamic 3D Autogen Vegetation' (aka "SpeedTree" objects.)


UPDATE: I solved several graphical and run time FPS /micro-stutter issues in P3Dv4 on my new hardware via tweaks cited in this thread: :)


{Many thanks to Beau Hollis for posting his suggestions in that thread) :wizard:


GaryGB
 
Last edited:
Messages
63
Country
scotland
Had a look at the settings, Gary and I've been all through the graphics options including the full screen auto fill box, but I still suspect that having the sim on one drive and all the scenery on the other (HDD) must be causing some delay in the transfer of data between the separate drives.
Previously, P3D4 could run smoothly with all settings at100% but with the volume of extras now on it, it is only ok with things turned down.
Don't you think everything on the one SSD would be able to run a lot faster?
(maybe wishful thinking on my part - I'm certainly no expert), :)
jp
 
Messages
7,112
Country
us-illinois
Had a look at the settings, Gary and I've been all through the graphics options including the full screen auto fill box, but I still suspect that having the sim on one drive and all the scenery on the other (HDD) must be causing some delay in the transfer of data between the separate drives.

Previously, P3D4 could run smoothly with all settings at100% but with the volume of extras now on it, it is only ok with things turned down.

Don't you think everything on the one SSD would be able to run a lot faster?
(maybe wishful thinking on my part - I'm certainly no expert), :)
jp

P3Dv4.5, as with all prior version of FS, is primarily dependent on the CPU clock speed for increased run time rendering performance. :pushpin:

Data loading "Fibers" that run as child processes of the FSX / P3D task session load and deliver scenery to be rendered via the main CPU loop.


It is true that disk reads are a major killer to main loop efficiency, and one works around that by increasing caching in system RAM.

IIRC, there have been tests which showed greater efficiency having Windows with FS on one drive, and addon scenery on another drive.

While one may see faster initial loads to system RAM of FS using a SSD, once data is loaded, I/O efficiency is a function of RAM size and speed.


The Windows PreFetch and SuperFetch caching utilizes part of the system RAM to implement disk caching of data (...thus decreasing disk I/O).


So we must look at what overclock is possible for (larger and faster ...but stable) system RAM modules in coordination with the CPU overclock.

Intel I5 Sandy Bridge K-series CPU chips are unlocked, meaning they can (more easily) be overclocked (...and usually with better stability).


I plan to get more info on that option via first hand experience of my techie friend who has used comparable hardware to yours with both FSX and P3D.


Generally speaking, your CPU and Motherboard are still acceptable for use with FSX / P3D.

Believe it or not, the same is true for MSFS, although that 2020 version would still benefit from a video card upgrade (...and 32 GB of fast RAM).


Regarding your video card, we will have to see what your current (tweaked) configuration achieves before we consider an upgrade just for P3D.



For P3D, you may want to upgrade your RAM to at least 16 GB with higher quality modules so they will overclock better along with the CPU.

I can get you some suggestions on RAM types / Mfgrs. / Part #'s for you, once I have more info from my techie friend.


In the mean time, please gather some info on your existing RAM and CPU etc., using CPU-Z from CPUID:



Click on the 'down arrow' next to the [Tools] button and select "Save Report as .TXT"; attach that TXT file- or PM it to me- here at FSDev.


In the mean time, you may also wish to attenuate some of the (JustFlight addon ?) Autogen 'overkill' in P3D by applying an edit in: :idea:

C:\Users\{ user account name }\AppData\Roaming\Lockheed Martin\Prepar3D v4\Prepar3D.cfg





To facilitate faster load time of custom photo-real scenery, launch and Save a loaded 'flight' (aka "Scenario") as a P3Dv4.x "Default Flight" via


P3D GUI Menu > P3D Scenario > [Save] button > click: [Default] button (Set scenario as the Default Scenario) > click: [Populate With Current] button


Misc Tweaks:


https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/554228-p3d-v-45-useful-tweaks/


I hope this helps get you closer to the desired performance until we have more info available next week. :)

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
Messages
63
Country
scotland
Thanks, Gary.
You've given me a lot to think about there and I must admit most of it is way, way over my head.
I downloaded the cpuid thing and have attached the text result you suggested. I hope this helps. In the meantime I will try the other adjustments to see if they can improve performance a bit.
regards,
jp
 

Attachments

  • DESKTOP-D826QUM.txt
    74 KB · Views: 46
Messages
7,112
Country
us-illinois
Hi John:

I now have some updated information regarding anticipated performance of your current FS computer hardware with MSFS, and by inference, P3D as well.

Believe it or not, you may actually get better performance and realism in MSFS on moderately complex settings, but with better visual rendering of the world IRL than that of your current add-ons in P3D.

You may find that you like MSFS so much, you might no longer be inclined to fly in earlier versions of FS / P3D. :duck:

If you no longer use P3D, that would potentially free up space on your 250 GB SSD for MSFS (~160 GB installed).


I would strongly encourage you to try MSFS with your current hardware, but with a plan to eventually upgrade the RAM to 32 GB from your apparent (1) 8 GB installed module of DDR4 2400 MHz RAM, either by:

* Adding (3) matching modules

...or:

* Re-populating all (4) of your motherboard DIMM slots with faster XMP compatible, DDR4 3600 MHz RAM modules.


Your motherboard, CPU, and CPU clock speed may be adequate for the present time.

Having a more powerful video card would be beneficial in the (distant ?) future, but whereas your NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 will get approximately 20% less FPS than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 which my techie friend has, he was getting 50 FPS, thus you would likely see a fairly smooth 30 to 40 FPs at moderately complex scenery settings in MSFS.

My friend says: "check GumTree prices in UK", as some folks are selling their used RAM to buy even newer modules.


He has the same CPU with 16 GB of DDR4 RAM running at the same clock speeds as you do on his spare FS computer.


FYI: We both have much more powerful main computers which we use for MSFS weekly multiplayer flights that achieve ~100-130 FPS; however with the recent improvements to MSFS from MS-Asobo, even 30 FPS runs "smooth" with good scenery detail ...on our older spare computers. :pushpin:


Some say MSFS Steam version has less download headaches, but AFAIK, most users buy MSFS directly from MS-Store.

I bought a MSFS proof-of-purchase voucher number via Amazon and redeemed it in the MS-Store to buy my copy.

IMHO, there was no extraordinarily compelling content in the Premium Deluxe version that I bought which was pertinent to my most frequent flying activity which is GA without A.I. / Ground Traffic with occasional Multiplayer mode, focused around wherever I am working on scenery.

I would now recommend buying just MSFS basic version to get started; you can upgrade later via MS-Store if desired.

As I mentioned, the Scotland scenery "is to die for", and if that is primarily where you fly as well, you may like it too. :cool:

Feel free to post an update on how your P3D tweaks are working, and let me know if you wish to confer on all this. ;)

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
Messages
63
Country
scotland
Hello again, Gary.
I have been in touch with my local pc builder and asked him for ideas on upgrading my system so that it would run P3D properly with all the addons I require. I let him know that you had recommended several upgrades which I relayed to him and he advised that I should consult you on his recommendations.
He has come up with the following spec:-

Motherboard:
ASUS Prime B560-PLUS SKT 1200 Motherboard
Processor:
Intel i5 10600KF CPU and cooler
RAM:
4 x 8GB Corsair Vengeance 3600MHz
Graphics card:
8GB AMD Radeon RX 6600XT
Storage:
1 x ADATA XPG SX8200 Pro 2TB M.2-2280 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe
1 x Seagate 2TB SATA3 HDD
Power Supply:
600W 80+ efficiency Cooler Master

I have tried all the graphics settings with my current system with no satisfactory results and I won't really be happy until I can run it on 100% settings.
I hope you can have a look at his suggestion and see if you think it would fit the bill. (I think he has looked at the requirements and balanced performance against cost. )
As to the new MSFS, I have seen a lot of positive responses to it, but also some negatives. I think I will hold fire for a bit until it matures further, especially as there doesn't seem to be much in the way of addon aircraft yet.
Thanks again.
jp
 
Messages
7,112
Country
us-illinois
Hi John:


My initial impressions...

You will likely see improved visuals and FPS due to the Graphics card alone; be sure you do not pay any current 'profiteering' retail prices for it.


The CPU may require some further research to verify that one can overclock a single core separate from other cores to keep heat down.


Why: Beware of Intel TurboBoost, which by default, attempts to overclock all cores; (it may be possible to control this via software):

https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/again-bsod-machine-check-exception.452534/


NOTE: Some i7 and i9 Intel CPUs are outstanding performers, but FS / P3D do not benefit from multiple CPU cores / hyper-threading.

Single core overclocking of the FS main loop makes P3D more performant.

Be aware that P3Dv4.x will not be further fixed, and P3Dv5.x has multiple display / performance "issues".


This is why the i5 6600K with its 4-cores continues to be good performer for FS due to its efficient over clock-ability (ex: via water cooling).


The motherboard may require some further research to verify that overclocking is as stable as more expensive ASUS models / chipsets.


A M.2 SSD at 3500 Mbps is faster than SATA-3 SSDs, but PCIE Gen4 NVMe is capable of 7000 Mbps, so I would spend $100 more for that speed.


The 2TB mechanical SATA-3 (internal) HDD is a practical choice for storage space compared to a expensive NVMe M.2 for faster-load times.


Both M.2 NVMe and SATA-3 HDDs will have most frequently accessed content cached in upper addresses of the (faster) DDR4 32 GB RAM.


The RAM type will be a good stable performer even at 3600 MHz via its XMP profile capability with a compatible motherboard BIOS and CPU.


The Power Supply is probably adequate, but may require some further research to verify it is adequate for any/all future hardware upgrades.



Regarding the Autogen from your JustFlight addon, there have been adverse reviews of its accuracy, and how its 'overkill' density affects FPS.

Have you implemented any of the P3D configuration file 'Autogen attenuation' tweaks I linked you to ?


Regarding MSFS, there are issues for some users with download speeds, and with FPS when seeking 2K or higher resolutions at maxed settings.

Most aircraft control issues have been improved, and the scenery is even better now than in the last world update.


Appeal of MSFS features may vary with end user preferences for how they use the sim.

I'm a scenery lover, and am mostly happy with the current default, but I am also presently seeking to enhance certain FS world locations.


I hope this helps you with your upgrade decision making. :)

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
Messages
63
Country
scotland
Thanks for your insight, Gary.
Some of that information is a bit complicated for me to understand but I'll relay it to my computer guy and see what he makes of it. I'm pretty sure that a decent choice of components can be made, hopefully resulting in abetter-performing pc.

As to the Justflight autogen, I found it strangely quite accurate on top of the Genx photoscenery. I had expected there to be a noticeable mismatch, but no, it does look pretty good. (vegetation anyway - the buildings look like lego - maybe ok above 10,000').
As for the cfg tweaks, apart from the user iinterface settings, I maxxed the scenery draw distance one and it seemed to make a slight difference, but I'm not sure. The main tool I have at present to get the autogen to load properly is slow flight. At mach 1 or 2 am well over the horizon and have to pause and wait a while for the vegetation to form.
MSFS? - I need decent scenery for the sim to work for me, but I also want loads of really interesting aircraft to play with. MSFS can't apparently do both yet.
I remember when I first got FS2000 - The hook for me was when I could get a Spitfire to work on it. Otherwise, I may have just dropped FS altogether.
I really appreciate you spending your time and expertise on this, Gary.
I will see what the pc guy thinks and make a decision one way or another and let you know.
jp
 
Messages
63
Country
scotland
Hello again, Gary.
I managed to get my system upgraded and reinstalled P3D with all of the previous addons and the performance is definitely improved, but not as much as I had hoped for.
I have attached the CPU-Z readout again for the new setup. Hopefully you will be able to advise on how to get the best from the hardware.
The system can be overclocked, which I imagine should speed it up, but my efforts with the Radeon interface haven't been successful so far.
There are options to overclock both the GPU and VRAM but not incrementally, and attempts so far have just crashed the sim. I am not clear about the options on turning up the settings on the GPU and VRAM tuning. It is set at 100%frequency for the GPU and VRAM at 2000 Mhz max. but the sim is still a bit stuttery at times. The software states that performance is marginal and fps average 47.
Would you be able to give me some advice on this, please?
You can probably see where I am going wrong here, but I can't at the moment.
Many thanks again.
jp
 

Attachments

  • DESKTOP-J95HJ7R.txt
    117.6 KB · Views: 45
  • Screenshot 2021-11-04 160553.png
    Screenshot 2021-11-04 160553.png
    221.2 KB · Views: 47
Messages
7,112
Country
us-illinois
Hi John:

Congratulations on your hardware upgrade . :)

I would first need to confirm what hardware you acquired.

Please indicate if it is exactly as listed above in post #16 of this thread:

https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/scenery-water-levels.453203/post-890688


If not, please list what your actual final hardware build consists of.

Then, please review the Intel CPU Turbo Boost overclocking issues and troubleshooting concepts here:



Pending your reply, I shall post some info that may prove useful to optimizing your new computer for P3D and/or MSFS. ;)

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
Top