I'm frstrating to find a compromise with skymaxx3.1.1 and rwc..the ayre real fps killer

[asyscom]

Hi at all,

simple problem, incredible FPS drop with V3.1.1 and RWC

With skymaxx3 i was between 20/23 fps on very dense scenery, and over 50 in default zone, while now i'm, in flight, no over 18 pfs with lowered renderig settins...sorry but is not aceptable!

 

To help the developer to find a solution i describe my Specs and attach my old rendering settings (before 3.1.1) and new setting of rendering, skymaxx and Nvidia.

Any help is very apreciated...i don't want to rollback to skymaxx3

 

Specs

OS: Windows 10 Pro 64bit CPU: Intel Core i5 6600K skylake 3,5ghz MOTHERBOARD Asus B150 PRO GAMING D3 GPU:NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 TI RAM:Corsair 16,0GB Dual-Channel DDR4 SSD: Samsung 256gb SSD SATA 3 2.5 for Xplane  HDD: WD-RED 2TB HDD2: WD-RED 1TB

[Tinamus]

Me too. .. I think I will rollback not to v3 but I will downgrade to v2 wich is much more fps friendly and worked very well

Inviato dal mio SM-A300FU utilizzando Tapatalk

[sundog]

asyscom: Your cloud draw area setting is rather high. Are you sure you're comparing comparable settings with what you had in SMP 3.0? You can't crank up a setting in 3.1, observe it's slower, and then say 3.1 is slower than 3.0.

Here's a good test to do: turn up your "cloud detail" setting tp 80% so you can get default clouds again. Then, go to the plugin admin menu, and disable the "SilverLining" plugin. That disables SkyMaxx Pro. Is the FPS much different? If not, then your performance problem isn't SMP.

Tinamus: how much available VRAM does the Skymaxx Pro configuration screen say you have?

[Tinamus]

Never much more than 200-300 mb....but with v2 I had no problems of fps. I hope it will be again good after downgrade. 

[sundog]

40 minutes ago, Tinamus said:

Never much more than 200-300 mb....but with v2 I had no problems of fps. I hope it will be again good after downgrade. 

Just to be clear, running low on VRAM is the "FPS killer" here, not SkyMaxx Pro. 3.1 does take a little bit more memory than 3.0 did, but it only causes a problem if you were on the edge of running out of memory to begin with. You might be able to do something simpler, like reduce your texture resolution setting, to reclaim some of that VRAM and give SMP the room it needs.

[Tinamus]

12 hours ago, sundog said:

Just to be clear, running low on VRAM is the "FPS killer" here, not SkyMaxx Pro. 3.1 does take a little bit more memory than 3.0 did, but it only causes a problem if you were on the edge of running out of memory to begin with. You might be able to do something simpler, like reduce your texture resolution setting, to reclaim some of that VRAM and give SMP the room it needs.

simply, you should say on manual, that the minimum requirements to run SKYMAX+RWC must be : Titan GTX 12 GB 
I'm your customer from 2013, from the first release of skymax and till now i was one of the biggest fan of this product, but today i must say no, it's a bad product for me because  it's unusable on my pc (that is a medium pc, not old pc).

Yesterday i downgraded to 3.0 version, last stable for me.

I'll use SMP only for GA (so i don't need for RCW) and for the IFR flights i'll see for ULTRA WEATHER XP. 

Edited April 18, 2016 by Tinamus

[asyscom]

HI,

after lot of hours of test i've found a good compromise to have good FPS and aceptable rendering settings. Ok, i could be satisfied but not totaly. First because i've a GTX980TI that is an hight and GPU but nevertheless i can't use skymaxx to max settings but medium/high, second because if i get a plugin is for increase the realism but if to use it i need lost quality...well this no the right way...about me

I don't say that the plugin is not valid..absolutely, i mean that should be right advise all customers that to have advantage with RWC and Skymmax the minum requirements is a GTX970..minum.

If a customer need to set the covered area to 4000nm to avoid drop FPS he can't  get any improvement from RWC.

 

Thank

Davide

[TimeTraveler]

Hey everyone...I noticed y'all have TERRAIN BLENDING in the mid to high range on the slider. Bring it down to half that. You will see a good improvement in fps. If that's not good enough, half it again!

 

 

1 hour ago, asyscom said:

 

 

HI,

after lot of hours of test i've found a good compromise to have good FPS and aceptable rendering settings. Ok, i could be satisfied but not totaly. First because i've a GTX980TI that is an hight and GPU but nevertheless i can't use skymaxx to max settings but medium/high, second because if i get a plugin is for increase the realism but if to use it i need lost quality...well this no the right way...about me

I don't say that the plugin is not valid..absolutely, i mean that should be right advise all customers that to have advantage with RWC and Skymmax the minum requirements is a GTX970..minum.

If a customer need to set the covered area to 4000nm to avoid drop FPS he can't  get any improvement from RWC.

 

Thank

Davide

 

Edited April 18, 2016 by TimeTraveler

[TimeTraveler]

Hey everyone...I noticed y'all have TERRAIN BLENDING in the mid to high range on the slider. Bring it down to half that. You will see a good improvement in fps. If that's not good enough, half it again!

[Cameron]

simply, you should say on manual, that the minimum requirements to run SKYMAX+RWC must be : Titan GTX 12 GB

Stop being ridiculous. Right now you are. Very few X-Plane users have such a card. An overwhelming majority of our customers are extremely happy with this product on much lesser cards.

[Tinamus]

43 minutes ago, Cameron said:

Stop being ridiculous. Right now you are. Very few X-Plane users have such a card. An overwhelming majority of our customers are extremely happy with this product on much lesser cards.

Cameron, be quite and don't be offensive please, i'm not offensive with you.

I'm 42 years old and i'm not a baby.

I just paid 75 euros for smp+rcw and i had alway spoken very well about SMP, till now.

I think i need to be happy for a product that i paid so much, but it's not.

I happy to know there are "so many" people who are very happy, probably all guys who are not are crazy as mine.

Probably it's only a coincidence that the most part fo people who say "yes, i'm happy" has minimun GeForce GTX 980 Ti G1 6GB in their signature....

Bye cameron, be happy and have a good life.

 

Edited April 18, 2016 by Tinamus

[Cameron]

7 minutes ago, Tinamus said:

Cameron, be quite and don't be offensive please, i'm not offensive with you.

The comment I quoted from you was offensive. Quit making inappropriate, non-factual slights and you won't be told to stop being ridiculous.

Your CONCERNS are fine. Saying this takes a NASA computer or some card that's stupid expensive to run is not...and it's HIGHLY inaccurate.

 

9 minutes ago, Tinamus said:

I think i need to be happy for a product that i paid so much, but it's not.

Me too. Compromises may come with that until you upgrade your hardware a bit more since you're not satisfied at the moment. There ARE happy mediums out there.

 

9 minutes ago, Tinamus said:

Bye cameron, be happy and have a good life.

You as well, sir!

[Jakob Ludwig]

Here are some user "advises" from me and my god, I don't have a monster GPU.

For the X-Plane rendering settings:

- shadows to 3d on aircraft or lower

- water reflections to low or even to off

- texture resolution to very high

- objects and other settings to what your hardware can handle, but one notch lower

Another good advice from my side, is to use a little script for FlyWithlua called "Auto LOD". Grab it here http://x-plane.at/drupal/node/385

The script adjust rendered objects in distance by changing the LOD level (basically world detail distance in X-Plane) in connection to a preset FPS value.