rover Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 I dont want to be the one to complain but after running the 340a my frame rates are around 10. I was on the assumption that the frame rates would be close to the BEA and CRJ200 at 30+ with the same settings.Sounds like everyone else is having a great experience! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schorle Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 Nope.......same problem here.......Saab 340 drops my frame rate by about 15-20 fps. Especially bad in cockpit view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameron Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 Can you guys post your full computer specs by chance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWolf7 Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 I get a heavy frame hit also.. I usually run around 30 FPS.. but 20 is still smooth and flyable. What do you have your texture res at? I keep mine on high, or very high most of the time...Extreme res is pointless in my opinion, just another vram sucker on my machine that only has 1gig. Also, what did you select for your VRAM during the install process? A screenshot of your rendering options would be nice, and some basic system specs would help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schorle Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 Basic system specs: Intel i7-2600k @4.1 GHz8 GB RAMWin 7-64 ProfNvidia GTX 560 Ti 2GB Texture Res at "Very High" I did select "2 GB+ VRAM"-Option during installation. XPX runs pretty decent (mostly about 30+ fps) with all aircraft I have installed, only the Saab runs bad at about 15-22 fps even in areas without many objects (tested it on small carribean islands). What is wrong here? Any help appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGregory Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 Basic system specs: Intel i7-2600k @4.1 GHz8 GB RAMWin 7-64 ProfNvidia GTX 560 Ti 2GB Texture Res at "Very High" I did select "2 GB+ VRAM"-Option during installation. XPX runs pretty decent (mostly about 30+ fps) with all aircraft I have installed, only the Saab runs bad at about 15-22 fps even in areas without many objects (tested it on small carribean islands). What is wrong here? Any help appreciated.Please post a screenshot of your render settings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirlo1 Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 in my pc the same very low fps!!. recommendation setting please!my specs : Intel Core i7 3770K oc 4.5ram :16gb 2400mhzvideo :zotac gtx 780 3gbwin8 x64 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schorle Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 Rendering Settings: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameron Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 Intel i7-2600k @4.1 GHz8 GB RAMWin 7-64 ProfNvidia GTX 560 Ti 2GB If you're running 'Very High' and getting low fps like that, something is amiss. It should be much better. my specs :Intel Core i7 3770K oc 4.5ram :16gb 2400mhzvideo :zotac gtx 780 3gbwin8 x64 Please post your settings as well. For reference: I run this on an i5 2500k with a 4GB GTX 680 and get 45-50fps on extreme res in most scenarios. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameron Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 Rendering Settings: I am almost certain that the global shadows are causing your issues. Please try overlay or 3D aircraft shadows. As usual, HDR is a killer on most systems for the moment too. I alternate between it, but just play with these settings (I personally think HDR is too contrasty in the day anyhow). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PWJT8D Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 I'm in the same boat as the original thread starter, I don't want to be the one to complain and I understand this is a highly complex aircraft and it is definitely pushing the limits. Flies great by the way! But if you all think there may be a problem, here is what I'm seeing. My computer specs arei7 3770K @ 4.4GhzGTX680 4GB FTW+8GB 1600 RAMWindows 7 64bit FPS are significantly lower then some of my other hard hitting aircraft like the 777. I'm seeing anywhere from 14-18 FPS on the ground to 19-20 at cruise. As far as the intensive frame rate hitters are in rendering options I have Texture Res at Extreme, global low shadows, HDR on at 2xSSAA+FXAA and 16x extreme anisotropic filter. Clouds at 15%. World distance detail at medium. On a side note I installed the 2GB GPU or more option first with the installer, had such bad frames and decided to uninstall and try the 1.5GB or less option and found no real difference in performance. The frames per second that I posted above are with the 1.5GB or less option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirlo1 Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 http://www.subirimagenes.net/i/130922064801678471.pnghttp://subefotos.com/ver/?e335790ab6db26d600bafdeffde823c5o.png Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameron Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 Okay, Can you guys please test switching between various shadow settings and turning off HDR to see what kind of differences this makes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PWJT8D Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 I'm on it right now Cameron, I'll report back momentarily. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schorle Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 Changing shadow options to "None": + 5 fpsturning off HDR: + 10 fps I guess there's something wrong with HDR on that plane. Turning off HDR on other planes does no noticable negative FPS-effect on my machine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameron Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 I'm on it right now Cameron, I'll report back momentarily. Thanks. HDR seems to be the biggest common factor between all of you so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PWJT8D Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 Okay here is what I found HDR ON and shadows:Overlay 22 FPS3D Aircraft 19-20 FPSGlobal low 19-20 FPS HDR OFF shadows:Overlay 28 FPS3D Aircraft 24 FPSGlobal low 23-24 FPS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirlo1 Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 no offense ,reference only! -with another aircraft! same setting! http://www.subirimagenes.net/i/130922070533413005.png http://www.subirimagenes.net/i/130922070627238984.png Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameron Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 no offense ,reference only! -with another aircraft! same setting!http://www.subirimagenes.net/i/130922070533413005.png http://www.subirimagenes.net/i/130922070627238984.pngOnly concerned about ours. Comparing another model is like apples to oranges. Not the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGregory Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 no offense ,reference only! -with another aircraft! same setting! http://www.subirimagenes.net/i/130922070533413005.png http://www.subirimagenes.net/i/130922070627238984.pngYou cannot do comparisons this way. The Saab's 3D model, textures, and systems are far advanced than most other aircraft available. You will not get the same performance with the same render settings. JimLead ProgrammerLES Saab 340A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirlo1 Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 hdr off, gain of 10 fps in cockpit! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirlo1 Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 You cannot do comparisons this way. The Saab's 3D model, textures, and systems are far advanced than most other aircraft available. You will not get the same performance with the same render settings. JimLead ProgrammerLES Saab 340Aforgiveness is right ustedes.mis apologize for the comparison! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mario Donick Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 hdr off, gain of 10 fps in cockpit! And usually, turning of AA completly also helps a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willychn33 Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 (edited) i run x-plane on MBPR with only 8GB rambut i always get about 28~35 FPS with "ramzzess 777"、"JAR A320neo"、"CRJ200"however the SAAB 340 kills lots of FPS and it isn't acceptable :-(the low FPS has nothing to do with the HDR setting for me Edited September 22, 2013 by willychn33 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGregory Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 i run x-plane on MBPR with only 8GB rambut i always get about 28~35 FPS with "ramzzess 777"、"JAR A320neo"、"CRJ200"however the SAAB 340 kills lots of FPS and it isn't acceptable :-(the low FPS has nothing to do with the HDR setting for meAs stated earlier, you cannot make those kind of comparisons. The screenshot of your render settings is cut off, please take a screenshot of the entire window. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.