Debate

[jackpilot]

Hi Guys
Just a small note, not to Hjk the FSX and Xplane comments here.
All the info we get on two important subjects (visual and Xplane) thanks to our pioneers is very interesting.
As an FS9 user with outdated PCs (and 40fps) I sort of take a backseat and watch (carefully)
I am nevertheless certain that visuals will evolve dramatically in a short time span (no bezel TVs, curved LCDs, HD laser projectors ) and that a new Flight sim plateform will show up.
Thanks again for the research/info/ videos/ comments.
Very alive forum indeed!
Jack

[Bob Reed]

Well I for one am not so sure we are ever going to get a new FS platform and with Austin throwing all in with this lawsuit, we may lose one of the choices we now have. I think the hobby will growing very stagnant with lack of choice. You have really only 2, One that is dead in the water and one that does not stay stable long enough to enjoy.... So how much are we spending? Maybe it is time to take some of our hard earned funds and see about getting new software programmed.

[jskibo]

Waiting to see what comes of P3D 2.0, even though I'll need a new license for it.......

[Garys]

I don't think we have to worry about Austin not being able to afford the legal fees to cover this.  He donates millions to animal welfare charities. He's no bill gates but you don't donate that sort of money if you cant afford it.

Gary

[fsaviator]

Well I for one am not so sure we are ever going to get a new FS platform and with Austin throwing all in with this lawsuit, we may lose one of the choices we now have. I think the hobby will growing very stagnant with lack of choice. You have really only 2, One that is dead in the water and one that does not stay stable long enough to enjoy.... So how much are we spending? Maybe it is time to take some of our hard earned funds and see about getting new software programmed.

Thank you Bob, exactly the point I've been trying to convey over in the Prosim forum.  It is not unheard of for a genre to just disappear with the exception of a few eclectic hangers on.  If we don't get together and support an alternative to FSX, ten years from now we will still be flying FSX and only getting 15 FPS on our i23-4580045K 5nm processors.  I don't care who it is (P3D, XP, AeroFly, Flightgear, whoever).  I'm hoping that since Prosim is at the point of going Pro provider, they relook the emphasis on Xplane.  Most FSX users that need it have already bought the suite.  the new guys that don't have it...  this is the perfect time for them to go straight to something else.  Skip the whole FSX and build around X-Plane or something.

I'm I that far off?

15 years ago I would have said that there was no way Jane's was going to stop putting out there Simulation games.  They were top notch...  where are they now?

[jskibo]

Time to go find my copy of US Navy Fighters....

Actually I really miss Tornado and Strike Eagle III

[727737Nut]

I just don't get the low FPS in FSX comments???  I have a simple I5-2500K at 4.3G, 8g ram, SSD drive, 460GTX video and with the PMDG 737, photoreal scenery, real weather via Active sky,Traffic at 65%, all sliders full right except boats, and Autogen,,,, I get 24.9 steady on my 25fps lock.      Just don't get it.  1000.00 PC running FSX just fine.   Oh, my resoluttion is 1440x900 on a 42" led tv.   

I run xplane as well with HDR on with no issues. Just don't use it much as there is no support for my Cessna Mustang.   

Rob

[blueskydriver]

Hi Rob,

The FPS killer is the multiple windows that are required to show the views in the correct circle projection. Thus, we are actually running four large window views all at once. The background window is the full span of the projection, but no images displayed within (imagine a placeholder), and the other three views are 1/3 each of the fullsize.

So, with that in mind, just about any processor cannot handle that without killing the FPS. The only way around it is too use 3 or 4 computers. If 4 is used, 1 is a FSX server and the other 3 would be FSX clients that are connected to one projector each (the server is not connected to a projector). Now, if you use just 3 computers; 1 will be a server to the other 2, as well it would have 1 projector connected to it and the other 2 would each have a projector. You can put LCD TV's in the places of the word projector because it is the same concept.

With X-plane it is similar. You either have 1 computer, but you cannot do the four window views method, so you will not/can not get the corrected circle. Or, you use 3 computers with each one having a projector connected to it. Although, with X-plane, you have to own three seperate copies of it or at least buy the USB dongles to allow this (called) "Pro Version" too work. I think it's about $400 each... With FSX, you would need 3 or 4 copies as well.

In both cases, you can use the TH2GO, but with FSX it is 4 window views it is again a killer, and with X-plane you cannot do the extra window views. Furthermore, the thing about the window views, is it might sound confusing because with the TH2GO you hook it up to 3 displays (LCD or Projectors), not 3 views. So, it's not really the TH2GO that kills the FPS, it is the three window views I mentioned already. If you hook up 1 computer to a TH2GO, with 3 projectors, and only 1 large window view, FSX will be smoking fast...I can get over 100fps...but that is only 1 large view (same with X-plane).

Both will look great and be fast, but it's not correct in the way it should be...being a correct circle that is.

John

[jskibo]

Keep in mind also that 3 window view is pushing 4+ times the pixels that your setup is moving.  5760 x 1080 on the HD Monitors (Plasma)

Using 1 monitor on an i7, 12GB, and Dual GTX275's (they are going away soon) I get 14 on the ground at KDFW with DreamTeam airport and My Traffic at 30%, I get 24 in the air at 6K over the airport.

Two more TV's arrive Wednesday and I'm sure I'll be in Slide show mode until the 670 arrives

I did get Nvidia and AMD to play nice together as I'm using the AMD4550 to drive my Lower EICAS as a temp solution

[727737Nut]

Hate to dissappoint you but I run 4 windows! 2 video cards in my PC. When flying the PMDG 737, I undock the  PFD, ND, CDU, EICAS and move to the separate displays.  See my sim is set up for the Cessna Mustang and I have the Emuteq G1000 setup and the 15" display in the center.  SO i use those displays when not flying the mustang to display the 737 stuff.  Granted it's not outside views but none the less it is 4 displays.    Not trying to brag or nothing, just don't get why people can't get good framerates.
Rob

[Garys]

Your comparing apples to oranges. Open up 4 screens - one over the other and see where your frame rates are at.

Gary

[fsaviator]

Rob,
we are talking about main views.  Go ahead and open up three more front views on your TV so that you have a total of four view screens open.  keep one in the back, and put the other three side by side (on your main monitor).

What FPS do you get.

We're not doubting...  but if you can maintain those framerates with four undocked front/side views, then I'd appreciate a tutorial on how you built your system.

[jskibo]

Rob, I run all my PFD / ND/ EICAS / CDU windows too, but that's not the point, I could run dozens of those off a set of low end cards as they are simple graphics, with very little changes.

Its the FSX world in 5760 x 1080 and 4 window views that kill the frames

[727737Nut]

Your comparing apples to oranges. Open up 4 screens - one over the other and see where your frame rates are at.

Gary

Why in the world would I do that.  When I had my 737 i just used the TH2GO and PJ's, no need to 'stack' windows.   Still had great frame rates

[Garys]

For no other reason than what you stated to be true. As suggested by me warren and John, go ahead and open up 3 extra external views on your monitor to simulate the FWD L/H, Centre, and Fwd R/h  then report back your results. You seem to be in a different conversation to the rest of us right now.

Gary

[XOrionFE]

With X-plane it is similar. You either have 1 computer, but you cannot do the four window views method, so you will not/can not get the corrected circle. Or, you use 3 computers with each one having a projector connected to it. Although, with X-plane, you have to own three seperate copies of it or at least buy the USB dongles to allow this (called) "Pro Version" too work. I think it's about $400 each... With FSX, you would need 3 or 4 copies as well.

John

This is not a correct statement John.  You dont need the $400 "Pro" version of X-plane.  Only need that if you want to use their warping capability.  If you are using your own warping software like Nthusim or FlyElise then you dont need Pro version.    I use the Global version.  I think it is $69 a copy and you could do 1 full Global copy and 2 dongles which are like $39 each.

Scott

[jskibo]

Your comparing apples to oranges. Open up 4 screens - one over the other and see where your frame rates are at.

Gary

Why in the world would I do that.  When I had my 737 i just used the TH2GO and PJ's, no need to 'stack' windows.   Still had great frame rates

I think I see the disconnect here.  If all you did was open one large (say 5760 x 1080) window with your TH2Go, then you had the "stretched" fisheye left and right extremes.  It does provide a faster FPS, but at the penalty of things being all out of whack at the edges.

What we are doing is taking that triple screen view and aligning three undocked windows in it so all objects stay in perspective and we get a larger FOV without huge zoom numbers and fisheye.  That can bring the system to its knees, but provides better visuals.

[jskibo]

With X-plane it is similar. You either have 1 computer, but you cannot do the four window views method, so you will not/can not get the corrected circle. Or, you use 3 computers with each one having a projector connected to it. Although, with X-plane, you have to own three seperate copies of it or at least buy the USB dongles to allow this (called) "Pro Version" too work. I think it's about $400 each... With FSX, you would need 3 or 4 copies as well.

John

This is not a correct statement John.  You dont need the $400 "Pro" version of X-plane.  Only need that if you want to use their warping capability.  If you are using your own warping software like Nthusim or FlyElise then you dont need Pro version.    I use the Global version.  I think it is $69 a copy and you could do 1 full Global copy and 2 dongles which are like $39 each.

Scott

Those dongles are on sale now for $29 if anyone wants one.....

[Bob Reed]

With X-plane it is similar. You either have 1 computer, but you cannot do the four window views method, so you will not/can not get the corrected circle. Or, you use 3 computers with each one having a projector connected to it. Although, with X-plane, you have to own three seperate copies of it or at least buy the USB dongles to allow this (called) "Pro Version" too work. I think it's about $400 each... With FSX, you would need 3 or 4 copies as well.

John

This is not a correct statement John.  You dont need the $400 "Pro" version of X-plane.  Only need that if you want to use their warping capability.  If you are using your own warping software like Nthusim or FlyElise then you dont need Pro version.    I use the Global version.  I think it is $69 a copy and you could do 1 full Global copy and 2 dongles which are like $39 each.

Scott

Glad you got that Scott. I was unable to until now. Need the correct information ou there.

[727737Nut]

I understand what is going on now with the guys who were looking to get the true wrap around. 

But that being said, they shouldn't be saying you can't get good FPS out of FSX as most users it is quite easy.   Just not us crazy pit builders

Rob

[blueskydriver]

Scott, you're right and I stand corrected. I had the warping part my mind when I typed that out, but I forgot to mention programs like NTHUSIM, FlyElise or etc for FSX, even though I was thinking of that being compared to X-Plane...

Hey Rob, if your still with us on this and get what we're all doing that's great. If not, here is another way to see this. I mentioned "corrected circle", so what I was getting at, is the fact that we're trying to avoid the fisheye effect that John Skibo spoke of. Thus, if I take one fullsize front view and look at it in VC mode, it only covers about 90 degrees (45 left of center line and 45 right of center line) (that might not be the very exact value, but I believe it is close as too what the limitation view is, so bare that in mind). Now, if I want my projectors to project a true 180 degrees, the 90 would get stretched and misconstruded; thereby, giving the fisheye, even though I will only be seeing what is in that 90 degree space. That means you're not really seeing 180.

Therefore, we have to use 3 windowed views, and those are left of center, center and right of center. Each window view will be enough to cover 60 degree each to achieve 180. Let's say I was trying to correct for a fullsize of 225 degrees. I then would need each window to cover 75 degrees each to equal 225. The main point is you're using the 90 degree limitation of FSX, and by staying under that value for one window view each, times it by 3, you'll get your fullsize. Speaking of fullsize, even with the 3 window view division, we still have to use a fullsize window as a container for the 3, and that is another limitation of FSX. However, you get to change that container's view to something useless and very small, like zooming way in the ground to the pixel level, so it will not need resources to render anything within it.

You're likely used to making undocked windows and using them as you said, in PMDG and etc, but like the other guys are saying, it is totally different then that. It's not in the process of opening, placing or moving an undocked view. It is more about what is showing in that undocked view and how big it is in pixels or resolution. If can live with just one big fullsize window and the fisheye effect, you'll have no worries. I actually flew for a year or more before correcting the fisheye. At first, I thought that is the way it looked in real life and in a cockpit. After I made the correction, it was an eye opener too say the least!

Before, when I taxied or was turning for base before final, the runway was not 90 degrees to my right or left when looking out, it was more like 30-40. After the change, it was 90 and it made perfect sense. I thought "why didn't I do this sooner?". Sadly, that is when I learned what others did...more views means less FPS! And that my friend, is what we're all chasing...too have that true corrected viewing and to have the FPS that we had before the corrections...

John

[blueskydriver]

Rob, you posted while I was typing, but I went ahead and posted mine. It'll help the next person to understand a little further. You're right about the crazy pit builders...we're crazy yes, but we're all crazy smart, you included...

John

[fsaviator]

But that being said, they shouldn't be saying you can't get good FPS out of FSX as most users it is quite easy.   Just not us crazy pit builders

Rob

Rob,  We probably should be more specific, but most of us here are aware of each others setups and know what we are referring to.  You are right though, anyone looking in on the forum from the outside would not know we refer to full wrap around visuals when we say we need more FPS.

I for one am have a great time flying my NGX on my laptop when I travel and have no issues with FPS or turning everything up to just about maxed.  The only issue I have is the Intel HD integrated graphics just don't cut it.  Beautiful water, and clouds bit wheel smoke and contrails look like crap.  It may just be a texture issue though.

[jskibo]

Well I broke down and bought a GTX680.  I was looking at the 670, but newegg popped up a batch of EVGA 680 refurbs for $20 more than the card I was looking at.  Only one year warranty, but over two decades I have only warranties one card, so willing to take the chance. The GTx275s will go on the shelf until I get the urge to build a couple more PCs for xplane