ARTIK

Sure low fps at night was an XP9 speciality. I bet that's why Austin on the FSweek told us "we'll love to fly at night"... Because XP10 can't render shadows with artificial light source. regards arti

Some interesting XP10 AI and shadow charts? regards arti

Not exactly. GTX580 is a single processor GPU. GTX590 (also AMD6990) are double processor GPUs. XP10 can't take advantage from such a design. PCI 3.0 motherboard are easily available now, but we're still waiting for the PCI 3.0 GPUs. Of course we'll need PCI 3.0 GPU in PCI 3.0 motherboard.

Just don't hold your breath it'll take (long) time to bring the SLI/CrossFireX fo XP10. It's much easier for them to rely on PCI3.0 GPUs in 2012. I'm asking for serious sound architecture for years...

5770 is a half of 5870 roughly in many aspects. No multiGPU support, unfortunately wrong assumption: http://www.x-plane.com/blog/2011/10/x-plane-sli-and-crossfire/ http://www.x-plane.com/blog/2011/10/whats-this-whole-pcie-thing-about-anyway/

Let them improve optimization first... I think GTX580 or ATI5870/6970 or similar should work fine with HDR now. Simply XP10 without the HDR is 1/3 of visuals (and HDR is easier GPU wise than shadows). HDR is the new standard for rendering in XP10. The old AA is only for those older >2 year old gen GPUs. I'm not going to accept "wait for the PCI 3.0 GPUs, Ivy Bridge" just to turn HDR on with acceptable framerate. "We turned on pretty much every effect that isn’t CPU/bus based (that is, the GPU pixel effects) and found that we could run with all of them at 20-30 fps" - typical MacPro with 5870. regards arti

Some interesting data here...

Sure, no way to disable multicore/HT in OSX preferences... as you can see each HT core. 20AI, HDR FXAA, shadows enabled. 5fps. 11% load..... regards arti

XP10 CPU core load fast test with up to 20AI airplanes...

http://www.x-plane.c...-and-gpu-power/ Excerpt from the Ben's blog: "Last week I had a chance to bring X-Plane 10 to ATI and run the sim on a few different modern GPUs (…)We ran X-Plane on a current-generation Mac Pro with a single Radeon HD 5870, driving a 2560 x 1440 display. The 5870 is a very solid card – to do better you have to spend a lot of money. First: geometry and 3-d. I could turn up almost everything that creates geometry. To keep fps smooth I had to turn down something ONE notch – either world LOD, visibility, or autogen density – but only ONE notch. This is a big step forward from X-Plane 9. (But also remember this is a current generation CPU.) Shadows took a big bite out of the geometry budget – basically the sim has to draw geometry again to build the shadows, amplifying the cost of your objects and trees. Current generation hardware simply doesn’t have enough kick to max shadows out and max all of the 3-d out. Not yet. We turned on pretty much every effect that isn’t CPU/bus based (that is, the GPU pixel effects) and found that we could run with all of them at 20-30 fps. If you’ve been using a “medium” tier car (e.g. a GTX 560 instead of a GTX 580, or a 5650 instead of a 5870), this is going to mean less “stuff” in X-Plane 10: less eye candy, or less resolution, or less fps." =================================================== Wiki's comparision of some GPUs: "very solid cards" and "medium tier cars" ATI5780 fillrate 27GP/s, 68 GT/s, memory bandwith 153GB/s, bus 256bit, 2720GFLOPs AMD6970 fillrate 28GP/s, 84GT/s, memory bandwith 176GB/s, bus 256bit, 2700GFLOPs GTX560Ti fillrate 26GP/s, 52GT/s, memory bandwith 128GB/s, bus 256bit, 1260GFLOPs ==================================================== One of my systems is very similar: MacPro Xeon (4cores, 8HT cores), 16GB RAM, ATI5870, 2560x1600. My framerate is 10-15fps with no HDR, and 7-8 with HDR on. IMO Someting is not right with the optimization. Popular hiend choice XP10 GPU's in Mac/PC 5870 is still one of the fastest single processor GPU card. But it looks like Nvidia's runs smoother in this 10.01r1 beta XP10 release. regards arti

I love your app Benny it's a milestone in flight simulation quality. Do you plan to use XP10 "real lights" on street lights feature? regards arti

My drivers on the PC are super fresh Catalyst v11.11 Nov15. No change in fps between v11.10 I guess it's not the drivers fault just not optimized enough (XP9=40-50fps vs. XP10= 6-7fps), as we know on the Mac side we can't upgrade the drivers at all.

1. Someone on dev blog told us we can use our modern fast GPU's like ATI5870. On this public beta it's not yet possible. Very low difference (<3fps) between HDR on/off. [keep in mind the new AMD7970 with PCI 3.0 will be only +-2x faster on paper] 2. They suggest to invest in multicore/multiCPU for best visuals. I get 45% CPU load of 800% (+6AI planes) 3. GPU is not melting either, even GPU fan is dead idle like with the XP9 (2000rpm) 4. GPU load is similar or even little less than extreme settings in XP9 (80% vs 75%) 5. Where is the "Report Bugs to Laminar Research" button? My systems are system 1:MacPro 3GHz, 5870, 16GB RAM, Lion 10.7.2. System 2: custom PC 4.2GHz i7, 5870 Eyefinity6 OC latest driver v11.11, 12GB RAM (I get 40-50fps on extreme settings in XP9, 5500x1920. XP10=6-7fps (with no Anti Aliasing). Without the proper framerate it's too early to talk about the nice visual eye candy (we know, the sound is same as fantastic as before). regards arti

I prefer monochromatic look

...

I like that idea...

Looks nice, quite narrow bezel (not bad for your extended 3 monitor setup:). What's the screen distance threshold before you'll see the pixel raster? regards arti

Simon I know it's not yet fully optimized but if it's Austin video = 2x6core Xenon MacPro 5870. No I'm not complaining about the camera work, I know it's just a rough WIP sample but X-Plane doesn't have simple nice&slow smooth camera move at all (can you agree?). That's why we can't get a truly cinematic/dramatic camera dollys. But I'm happy to see the first official video preview!

nice shadows, highway, but the fps was well below acceptable on the 747, I don't like too fast still non-cinematic camera movement. But for WIP it's a nice preview. Killing fsx-Prepare3D stuff;)) don't think so, not yet IMHO.

Fast disk or SSD can help. BTW I've spend a lot of time adding buildings and forests to openscenery Oahu. Do the osm2xp conversion and you'll see how much fun it's now. regards arti

keep working!!! it will be fantastic airplane...

Hi Arno, I couldn't agree with almost any of your statements. ad1. "Initial quality" means quality of location sound recordings, after first A/D conversion on your audio recorder. It could be 44.1kHz, 48kHz, 96kHz or any sane of even insane Sampling Frequency, 16 or 24 bit word lenght. [As we know according or thanks to Nyquist law we can percieve only half frequency range of the sampling rate (e.g. 32kHz sampling rate <= 15kHz freq range etc)]. You can't have high initial sound quality with low sampling frequency. It's just not possible. No, upsampling, playing low sampling frequency (e.g. Fs=11kHz) poor cracking sound at 88kHz will give you the same weird cracking sound quality. it's simply misundestanding. You simply can't hear the difference after upsampling process. BTW Carenado have those 44.1kHz sampling rate sounds and is doing the sampling rate down conversion without the reason, as if out of spite. ad2. I don't have a clue what do you mean by therm "restitute". If you're saying people don't have speakers with tweeters I wouln't agree. High frequencies are much easier to emit than low frequencies. Also every healthy person (except really old man) can hear approx. 15-16kHz frequency range without the problem = they actually hear the difference between Fs=32000Hz and Fs=44100Hz I don't even bother poor tiny laptop speakers (which high frequency range is quite good!), or pilots headsets used for full frequency range playback (which is funny but non realistic assumption). ad3. Of course simmers sensitivity to sound quality may vary. Not everyone has trained ears, on the other side some well known flight simulator developers are quite deaf. But my goal is to have a good sounding airplane to very closely emulate the sounds from my real life flying, not a buzzy toy (just look for every embarrassing default sound and X-Plane sound architecture). X-Plane is intended for sound processing. Believe me the old days ('80) of digital audio infancy are gone... The CPU sound load is so minimal even using (not perfect) but high quality DreamEngine plugin or similar. BTW I appreciate your sound invention and ideas in T28.

Thank you. I have several soundpacks on my toolbench but I'll not forget Jason's airplanes for sure...

I'm so sorry it's hard to satisfy my requirements. I thought we're using simulator not a game. Sure not a flight model fix related but "HONOR FIX..." because they announced 44.1kHz on first version of their ads... and they are using 44.1kHz sound in the FSX version. I know poor X-Plane users can have half of the frequency range. They are joking. So I'm buying carenado airplanes but personally I don't like such a people.

Really? They promissed Archer 44.1kHz sounds and never released an upgrade... http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=52104