If XP could have terrain and atmosphere like this...

[Hueyman]

only a fool would think so

 

 

Fool yourself   Put them all to the left if you want then tell me you have a great visual experience.

Running your refresh rate at 144hz will eat some performance.

 

 

 

 

Okay Ben, will try to use 60Hz. No 3D glasses.

[Tom Knudsen]

Try reading this 

 

http://developer.x-plane.com/2013/11/performance-analysis-by-subtraction/

[Hueyman]

Thanks, so hope to see those said improvements in 10.30

[Hueyman]

In a last word, I made this quick comparison between two absolutely different softwares ... X-Plane 10.25RC1 64bits and Arma III

 

For sure both don't work the same way at all, I just noticed two things : Arma III has amazing graphics, huge size etc etc ... with everything ( including AA ) maxed out I got around 80FPS ( if not more ), all the time , and tools I have in my hands to monitor the GPU show it is under high load, and XP10 got neat graphics ( but not to die for ) no AI planes, no complex plugins or scripts running in the background except the sim itself, and the CPU is running idle 10% ( as shown previously )

 

 

Now, X-Plane, in a medium sized city and a very simple scenery, with the Baron 58, and following settings, give me real bad FPS, for a GPU that is almost at idle ( see the freqs, temps et  )

 

 

 

 

No, I know I'm not a specialist in the matter, but isn't it evident that there is a big problem here ? all my drivers are up to date, all my other apps/games/sims are running flawlessly and I got that... Tried all resolutions and refresh rate, same results within +/- 2%

[alpilotx]

A little bit of this: http://developer.x-plane.com/2012/01/fill-framerate-and-shooters/

... and a lot more ...

[Hueyman]

Ok so that explain why my X-Plane copy see catastrophic results while, DCS, IL-2 CoD, FSX, Silent Hunter, Crysis etc never drops below 75 FPS at max settings ?

 

Don't get me wrong I'm fully supporting X-Plane since V8, and it's now my favorite civilian sim, for sure, but I have really the feeling it is a constant Beta with many changes between each updates...

 

I understand their " platform " philosophy, but there are limits aren't there ? Anyway, I'm sure you could understand my statement a bit more if you had spent several thousands of bucks in the best hardware, and getting those results in return ...

[Ben Russell]

You spent the cost of X-Plane and got those results. For everything else your machine seems pretty amazing.

[alpilotx]

Well, this kind of discussions are not new .... there are gigantic threads about this already, and they rarely lead to an end where everybody is happy. Maybe you try to read over there, as there are already lot of things mentioned:

http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=56736

[Hueyman]

I can not go to the org, I'm Banned ( ahah ) like the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, they call if the Hall of Shame

 

Anyway, there is no logic in producing a software that only a computer from 10 years on the future will handle, and it's even more frustrating when you see your shiny bright sleek hardware sleeping while the sim is also sleeping ...

[Cameron]

I

Anyway, there is no logic in producing a software that only a computer from 10 years on the future will handle...

Sounds to me like MSFS X is your sim!

[Hueyman]

Not at all Cameron

 

But I remember it was same for this one on the early times ...

 

Could you guys report your configs, settings and results ?

[Tom Knudsen]

Whats that graph thingy in the last picture?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Hueyman]

With the Baron ? it's Gigabyte supplied OC manager " OC Guru II V1.45 ", and here it show the sleeping GPU frequencies, temps and core voltage ... I think it's a proof the GPU isn't solicited at all, but everyone tells me all these tools show nothing ... OKay ..