[SOLVED LEGS PAGE] FPS issues...

[CngDelta757]

Hello! After doing a rundown of the CRJ I am most pleased with this addon... Except the FPS... I have a fairly good system and am having horrid FPS (Even worse than SSJ and Q400)... I ran the CRJ performance tool, said it will work, Made sure everything is ok... Thanks

[Cameron]

You're going to have to be a bit more descriptive than that...

What are your fps?

What are your rendering settings?

What are your hardware specs?

[CngDelta757]

Here is some info:

Q400

http://imageshack.us/f/228/66505712.jpg/

CRJ

http://imageshack.us/f/21/70159554.jpg/

Settings

http://imageshack.us/f/42/37182560.jpg/

System:

i7-Q740 1.73GHz Duo Core I believe

GTX260 Video card

6GB RAM

451GB Hard drive.

[Japo32]

too low megaherz core, and too low videocard. It is normal to have those numbers. This plane uses more cpu than the Q400 and other plane inside x-plane. I suggest you test the plane on other computer with higher settings. Is it a laptop?

[Nova]

Whereas the GTX260 is not that bad. I run XP9 there with the same settings i have now, but only getting a few more FPS, although the GPU has about 3-times the power (in benchmarks). Guess it's due to bad OpenGL implementation on Windows.  :-\

But your notebook cpu is crap, compared to desktop cpus. Even with bosst it has only 2.8GHz on one core.

But wasn't able to figure out how many cores it has.

[Japo32]

before buying the new computer I have.. I had a

q6600 at 3.4gz quad core

285 gtx 1 gb ram Quite similar

I wanted to buy a new video card (580) to have better fps on the CRJ.. I was reading that even if you buy the 580 there would be bottleneck because the CPU. So it is better to also upgrade it. In your case your frequency running is too low, even with a 580 card, it would make it slower.

[philipp]

i7-Q740 1.73GHz Duo Core I believe

There is no such thing as an "i7-Q740 duo core".

Anyway, 1.73 Ghz Dual Core is way too slow.

As a rough estimation, it runs well on a 2.6Ghz Dual Core or a 2.4Ghz Quad Core.

Philipp

[dancemad57]

not true.......2.60 64 X2 Dual Core Processor at normal res, 0 anti-alias, no objects, windows 7, 0 pixel shading, NVIDIA; GeForce 9800 GT, 19-22FPS

This plane is not worth upgrading to quad core just for SID/STAR FMS implemintation

Sorry Guys,

Michael

[Cameron]

GeForce 9800 GT

There's your bottleneck right there regardless of how other products are running. Couple that with a relatively older 2.6 GHz processor and you have the results you've specified.

Aside from what you consider to be "just for SIDs and STARs," I think you're better off looking at this as "for future aircraft other than just the CRJ and X-Plane 10."

[Japo32]

Sorry Guys,

No Michael, sorry about you because not upgrading your old computer, you are not going to enjoy this marbelous plane that for sure is more than 1/5 stars. And you won't be able to enjoy all the new features inside X-Plane10 full potential (I know this well because I have a copy of XP10 because working in Laminar, so I know what is comming next).

So, this is not an SID STARs plane only.. this is something more, and more will come.. and of course I would review your computer 1/5. Not the plane.. but even with you computer, you still can fly 22fps.. that are really 10 more than the PMDG ones with low graphics on my best computer (where I have 90fps with the CRJ).

So of course you can say what you want, and review the plane giving the note you want, but I also can say what I want... and I think you didn't review the plane. You reviewed your system.

so better you upgrade, if you want enjoy future releases (not only this CRJ200). Because not only your Nvidia Video Card is old (3-4 years old!!) but your CPU is so slow right now. I had a 3 years old Q6600 that were faster that that.

Cheers,

Javier

[woweezowee]

I saw this 1/5 review shortly after I had posted mine. Well, what to say?! One star is so far out any reasonable argument that nobody will ever be able to compete with that "rating". Leave it, ignore it, with the follow up reviews everything seems to be said.

[dancemad57]

The point here is that the plane is mis represented through the hardware tester. One would assume, based on your store site, that if the hardware tester passed the buyers system, then it would be worth spending twice as much as the X-plane program itself. However, you sold me a plane, by mis representing that the plane would fly on MY system and now I have a product that is un-usable to me. So for this reason, as far as I am able to review this product, I must give it a 1 out of 5, because that is how it perfoms on MY system, which according to YOUR test, was a sufficient system, and based on what I see on this forum, I am not the only one who cannot run this plane after purchase. Now, if you would refund my money, I would not be able to have anything else to say until I upgraded my system and was able to enjoy your great work. Just don't criticize ME because I bought a plane based on YOUR mis-representations. And, If negative reviews hurt your feeling, don't put that function on your website. As long as I am a paying customer, I have EVERY right to criticize my purchase, and if you were a respectable businessman, you would respect what I am going through and help me through my issues, rather, than saying, "ah gee, sorry your system isn't very good, but thanks for the money"

Blue Skies,

Michael O

[mutestyles]

misrepresentation?  I dont recall a adverstisement stating that the CRJ will work on all new and OLD computers lol And the test was to see if the screens would work not to test the performance of your CPU

[Cameron]

and if you were a respectable businessman, you would respect what I am going through and help me through my issues, rather, than saying, "ah gee, sorry your system isn't very good, but thanks for the money"

Help for Michael: Get a modern system.

The hardware tester has been said time and time again that it ONLY tells whether the product will work on your computer, NOT how it will perform. Guess what...it didn't lie. It WORKED on your system, FPS issues or not!

Your lack of suitable hardware is NOT something we can "support" you with.

[dancemad57]

Suggestion for Cameron,

Put a minimum systems requirement on the CRJ200 listing. Most systems, even older ones, run X-Plane 9.55 and higher AND with newer planes with great success and that is all that is listed for system requirments at your site.

Blue Skies,

Michael O

[Cameron]

Suggestion for Cameron,

Put a minimum systems requirement on the CRJ200 listing. Most systems, even older ones, run X-Plane 9.55 and higher AND with newer planes with great success and that is all that is listed for system requirments at your site.

Blue Skies,

Michael O

Reading might help you too. You seem to think your review is justified and that you have been cheated by means of misrepresentation.

A direct quote from the website:

The process is relatively simple. All you need to do is download the installer for your operating system of choice below. After installing, you'll need to go into X-Plane and open up this new aircraft. The aircraft will be located in your Aircraft/X-Aviation folder (the installer will have created this for you). Once you have loaded it up, you will see a single display screen in front of you. This test is not an indication of how well the product will perform on your machine, but rather a test to see if your hardware is compatible. If the display screen remains black, or is white, then the CRJ-200 will NOT work on your machine. However, if the CRJ-200 is compatible with your hardware then you will see a message telling you so...

Want more? Quoting myself directly from this post: http://forums.x-pilot.com/index.php?topic=2060.msg19624#msg19624

...This does NOT indicate smooth frame rates, or anything of that nature. This test will simply tell you whether your hardware has the ability to even run the CRJ based on your GPU, CPU, and associated drivers!

You, sir, are off base, and you are upset that people are scrutinizing YOU for making a PUBLIC review. Just as much as we are open to scrutinizing of a product, YOU are open to scrutinizing of your review.

[dancemad57]

Oh don't be so dramatic. First of all Cameron, I am not upset at all. I am simply hoping that my experience will help others who do not have a so called 'modern system' to not spend their hard earned cash until they do, as your store does not give all the information needed to make a fair decision.

Direct Quote from X-Aviation:

The Take Command! CRJ-200 introduces a ton of new features never seen before for X-Plane. It is the first aircraft to introduce100% OpenGL vector displays for X-Plane, and heavily relies on your CPU power, as well as more modern graphics cards/drivers. This test will help facilitate your decision in purchasing the CRJ-200 and tell you whether the displays that drive the CRJ-200 are even compatible with your machine.

A simple 'minimum system requirnment' would be easy and helpful. I am sure that when XP10 comes out, they will fairly state what would be a reasonable system to have. And once again, if you guys can't handle the heat from your customers, get out of the business. I could very well be with the majority of xplane flyers who krak, pirate, and freely share x-aviation products, but I thought that this way I would get support and help the industry to grow. After this experience I am beginning to see why so many people have resentments towards software developers, and this decision is becoming less meaningful. Take a break from 'patting yourselves on the back' as you are not the only game in town.

Blue Skies,

Michael O

[Cameron]

Direct Quote from X-Aviation:

The Take Command! CRJ-200 introduces a ton of new features never seen before for X-Plane. It is the first aircraft to introduce100% OpenGL vector displays for X-Plane, and heavily relies on your CPU power, as well as more modern graphics cards/drivers. This test will help facilitate your decision in purchasing the CRJ-200 and tell you whether the displays that drive the CRJ-200 are even compatible with your machine.

Unbelievable. You quote the section that doesn't talk about how the test is NOT to help tell you how it will perform. Seriously, Michael...

Even still, the quote you posted up is VERY TRUE. There are some systems that cannot even display the vector drawn graphics. Such a test is made to "help facilitate your decision in purchasing the CRJ-200." I'm pretty certain those who ran the tester and were told the CRJ wouldn't run on their system...probably didn't buy, and as such it helped facilitate their decision and we did not receive their cash!

Yet again, we read just a little under what you decided to quote from that SAME PAGE, and it says:

...This test is not an indication of how well the product will perform on your machine, but rather a test to see if your hardware is compatible.

if you guys can't handle the heat from your customers, get out of the business.

You clearly are missing the point as to why people are opposed to your review.

You are claiming misrepresentation. That's false. It's right in front of your eyes. We claim nothing performance wise and we state such!

Now looking at a quote from your review:

"Brought my dual core Windows 7 machine to its knees, even though the CPU tester gave it a thumbs up."

The CPU tester gave it a thumbs up? You mean the tester that's labeled as a hardware tester, and clearly states that it does not signify anything about performance, but only compatibility? The one that says this all on the same page that you download the tester from?

We can take the heat fine. It's your "review" that's questionable. You didn't even list your system specs, yet you're trying to "help" people. Are you trying to say that all dual cores would perform bad? I personally know this is false, as I run it very well on a dual core myself! Even still, it remains for the public to see.

[dancemad57]

You are right about one thing, the public will decide. Put a minimum system requirement up and it may help some of your customers. It's much more effective with the masses who may or may not understand your technical explanations of the whats and hows of the tester.

Blue Skies

Michael O

[sthai]

Cameron et al., it seems obvious that you know that certain processors do not have the capacity to run the plugins and this seems to be strongly related to core frequency.

So publishing a minimum processor speed would do no harm at all.

Michael,

You remind me of the people that say something like: Well, I can judge that the ingredients and the way the food was prepared is first grade. However, because I don't like fish, I will give it the lowest possible grade.

You see, being too subjective will just cause entropy by misleading those that are dependent on what they see as more experienced.

The latter is, btw, the reason for publishing reviews.

[Japo32]

If i am a new buyer right now i would see 2 reviews 5/5 and one 1/5 and i would think. 2 love it and 1 hate it, sure if that guy buys a new computer then he will raise the note. Only 1 point? Is impossible!!! Only with graphics should be the minimum 2 points.

Look Michael, your note comes from frustration, and clearly want to give us a kick in our balls. That final "sorry guys" sound me like that. Maybe i am wrong but you have seen how other costummers how they rebate your opinion, that as said even you put is too buggy when maybe you didn't have bugs of others.

So i think you review your frustration and not the real plane, but as you can see we leave your review. I never liked censorship, but your review is good because new costummers are going to see that are true reviews and will see those 5/5 points are also true. So thanks a lot le know people reviews are authentic ones and not payed or changed by vendor.

I trur believe this crj is out of 5, and hope time will demonstrate it to users.

Thanks

[dancemad57]

Like I said before, I am in no shape or form upset or angry nor am I trying to kick anyone in the balls. A review is a review and I posted my experience and took all the blame, which is typical of todays company practices of customer service.

Regarding your views on censhorship, you DID delete my one star review and I reposted. So it does seem to me that others may have been removed also for not giving you your five stars. Which is also typical of todays online marketing practices.

Look guys, I have purchased most of my addons from JRollon and xaviations and up until now givien mostly 5 stars. I've only not been impressed with the Reno scenery and this plane. So put a period on it and move on. Your CRJ is not the best plane out there, with or without the fancy plugins neither in the artwork, functionality or realism. That is my opinion at this point and time with the equipment I have and comparing to many other files available.

Blue Skies

Michael O

[Japo32]

I did not delete any review. And sorry but the crj is the best plane right now on x-plane. It is mine and I shouldn't say it but in this case is so far away from others. Soon will come better. But you posted as 1 star so one of the worst planes in xplane.

Of course your opinion will be there not deleting it (never thought about it) but please when you buy a better computer re-analize it again, please, because I still think you are not analizing the plane but your spectations frustrated because YOUR system configuration.

[sthai]

Hello Michael,

Now I am really curious, as I am constantly looking for the best.

Which are the planes you refer to as being better than the CRJ?

I am honestly curious. Please reply.

Thanks & Best regards

[dancemad57]

I really enjoy Peter Hagers A380 for a heavy. The 'Fly by wire' integration is the most complete to date where you can input and control the take off flex temps, transition altitudes where the plane adjusts speeds relative to altitude both ascending and descending. Many controls within the FMS are detailed. It is easy to fly by hand or fly by wire and will never overshoot and over correct a waypoint. The SUKHOI 100 is really nice and gives a fun reality with its ground procedures, PA announcements, and smooth flight simulation and graphics and lighting. JRolans T34c is beautifully crafted and is realistically simulated with a powerful turbprop and is a great VFR plane. Most of X-aviations planes are great in my opinion. Another fun one by them is the Corvalis which has a great G1000 unit and the Misubishi. Also the B737 from the x737 development team. Oh, and the new Q400 is very nice. These are among my faves.

Of course I can't directly compare these to the CRJ as it stutters and crashes within 5 minutes of each attempt.

Blue Skies

Michael O