My first impressions about P3D

[Maurice]

Edit: My post below in no way implies that you should  take my word for it & not try P3D for yourself. My experience was very negative but many others have had very positive experiences and my bad results are very likely a direct result of my very poor knowledge about P3D and the best way to set it up in a multi view environment.  Positive comments and positive suggestions are very welcome.

Edit #2: Since my first post, I have been able to see sizable improvements in frame rates by making a few changes.

First, let me say that this isn't really a valid review of P3D. In fact, you can't really label it as a review at all. I have just quickly tried playing with P3D and this is what I found keeping in mind that I know very little about the inner workings of P3D or how to optimize it.

Also, I installed it in my current FSX PC, so it was not a clean install as it probably should have been. I will not talk about the first default P3D flight since this is irrelevant to me anyway.

So, my testing setup was with P3D running the FSX default 737-800 with 3 undocked views. With P3D, the location was set to the default CYYZ scenery, and same thing with FSX.  I made the same tweaks in the Prepar3D.cfg file as I made in the FSX.cfg file. All my FSX display settings were duplicated in P3D to keep things equal.

The good:   Nothing I could detect. Actually, I did like the fact the various menu windows can now be moved.

The bad:   With the same flight conditions, I get an average of 22 fps with FSX while sitting on the ground in the active runway and 40% airline traffic only. With Prepar3D, I got 12 fps average under same conditions. Edit: After making the following changes, the frame rates are now the same as FSX under same conditions. The changes were:
WATER_REFRACTION_DETAIL=0, ENABLE_BATHYMETRIE=0, WATER_CLARITY=0

The ugly:  While adjusting the P3D settings, I got several BSDs (Blue Screen of Death) at various times. I also got them twice while starting a saved flight. This does not happen with FSX.

The very ugly:   Shortly after taking off with P3D and flying with just the keyboard, the center view changed to an external view first and then P3D re-started. This happened every time I tried P3D but it did not happen when I tried flying with just one view extended over 3 projectors.

Other observation:  The default P3D scenery looks very much like the default FSX scenery to me. I could not detect any improvement but then again, I was not expecting any. It is however quite possible that the scenery might look better on a desktop sim and/or with sharp LCD screens at higher resolutions.

Conclusion: 

As I said earlier, this is hardly a fair evaluation of P3D but for me and for now at least, this is the end of the road with my P3D experimentation. It is quite possible though that the 'tweaks' I made do not work the same as they do in FSX and that is maybe why I had such poor frame rates but I'm not convinced at all that P3D will ever work better in its current form when flying with 3 undocked views. The graphics engine looks to be the same so not very hopeful unless P3D code is changed significantly to take advantage of current hardware.

That's all for now. Would love to hear more from anyone else willing to experiment with P3D in a multiple views environment.

Maurice

[ivar hestnes]

I have to say that my experience is rather the opposite than yours. I also have P3D on the same computer as FSX. I ported the NGX over, undocked my windows, and went for several testflights.

And my experience is very promising. Frame rates is higher than fsx. Not very big difference, but overall higher. And the frame counter is more stable. Not so big variations as with fsx. And a really good thing... Image clarity. While FSX was blurry as fuk, P3D has clarity also far away. Also the annoying FSX menu is gone, and P3D starts straight into a flight.

I only added two tweaks to the p3d.cfg : rejectthreshold, affinitymask and highmemfix. These three were the fps boosters and best fixes in p3d as in fsx. No other tweaks needed. I also use Nvidia Inspector, as per a thread in Avsim forums, for the settings. This reduces the fps slightly, but still worth it in image quality.

Also I get fps improvements with using Activesky evolution weather instead of default weather themes.

All in all, I am very happy with P3D, and dont see any good reason for sticking with the old unsupported 7 year old FSX. LM clearly know what they are doing, and still works on improving. Thats alone a good enough reason for me.

One thing to think about... while your fsx most likely run in Dx9, P3D runs in DX10.

[bussgarfield]

Well, that's two very different but thought provoking views.

Just to add my very small 2 cents worth. As with any review of any flight sim product that you may read in the mags or on line, it all basically boils down to how good (read powerful) the reviewers computer may be. Not all systems are the same and whilst one person may get better fps on their system the other may indeed have an advantage else where.

Whilst this thread nay not have been intended as a review, it certainly seems to be turning out that way.

As for my personal preference, I will read reviews, here and else where, and if I feel the urge to make the purchase, I will - given that  'reviewers' do not have the aging system that I currently run. I can then make up my own mind whether I like it or not.

Gary

[Maurice]

To be frank, I think posting this thread labeled as "be aware, dont buy, this is shit, last impression ever" is unfair to LM, and it is really hard to read your post as serious. I would highly recommend people buying it. There is absolutely nothing wrong with P3D.

Ivar,

I don't know how on earth you could read my post & interpret it as "be aware, don't buy'. I was just relating my personal experience and I made it perfectly clear that I was not an expert on the subject and that I really do not know enough to recommend or condemn the product or even to hint that the product is no good.

And that is why I also added that I would welcome reading other people's experiences because my results made no sense to me. I was not expecting it to be better than FSX but I certainly did not think it would be any worse either especially considering the fact 2 people in this forum had good results and said the simulation was smoother.

Having said that, I stand by what I said because that was the absolute truth for me and if you don't like reading posts which you do not agree with, that's just plain too bad. A much more useful response would have been to offer some suggestions about what may have caused me to have such a bad experience instead of putting words in my mouth and accusing me of shitting on LM. Frankly, I expected much better of you.

What part exactly of my first sentence did you not understand?? "this isn't really a valid review of P3D. In fact, you can't really label it as a review at all". And in case that was also not clear to you, saying these may be my last impressions about P3D was only because I am tired of chasing rainbows looking for better frame rates when my sim runs quite well as is. In no way was that meant to even imply P3D would never be good enough for me. 

I'm pretty sure I'm smarter than that & not capable of making such a stupid statement when I have no idea why I had bad results or what LM might do in the future to make it take advantage of current hardware. I can however decide when I've  had enough and don't want to play anymore.

Maurice

[jackpilot]

Nice to have a debate on P3D.
Both of you Guys have "super computers" and high End setups.
Most of us with regular PCs are spectators, and will appreciate anything hinting to new developments based on  MSFS , considering that "Flight" is so far a builder's "flop"
For FS9 maniacs like me it would be a quantum leap but both FSx and P3D are close enough to allow other FSX users to test P3D, as Gary mentionned.
So lets keep our  eyes wide open and thank  the brave souls who dare to venture into uncharted territory.
Jack

[ivar hestnes]

I am not sure how your FSX experience is if you try it in DX10 mode. (my setup is really bad with FSX in DX10 mode). Most likely your fps get worse. Then try to do a comparison between FSX and P3D. It will give a more correct comparison when both are in DX10 mode.

As Jack say, I also welcome more opinions from P3D users. And I guess that will come now when we have the academical license, which is reasonable priced. I am still hoping that I can use bloom effect with three undocked views in the near future. Maybe with DX11 it will be possible.

[blueskydriver]

Just curious about the DX10 factor, as it was known to cause shimmering or flashing, but I pointed out a while back that you can fix the problems by placing a hidden taxiway surface. You will get an increase in fps with DX10 after the fix. So, is P3D shimmering or flashing like FSX does/did, if so, this same fix should apply.

How about the FSAltitude and FS Genesis being used in P3D, has that been tried yet? In FSX the fps using FSAltitude gives you about 40-50 in flight, now that also includes everything under the sun for add-ons. Using AS2012, it can be more or less the same depending on the weather generation. Still, the airports are in lower range between 20-30 depending on the airport.

Finally, how about you guys post your P3D.cfg files, I'd like to see how they compare with each other and differ with my FSX.cfg. I'm not using P3D, but might try it out for testing after the bleeding-edge guys get done with it, and with the fact of me trying Xplane10 out, P3D testing will be delayed for a while... In the mean time, please continue your testing/progress.

Thanks guys,

BSD

[Maurice]

You are absolutely correct Ivar...my post was massively negative. But I made damn sure to emphasize that the bad results I experienced could have been caused by my lack of knowledge about P3D, especially the tweaking aspects.

If you had experienced several blue screens & P3D crashes within a couple of hours, I'm sure you would also have felt a tad negative about your experience. Nice to know you got better frame rates, but you did not specify what they were compared to FSX.

As for me highlighting the key points, this is my way of making long posts easily readable as opposed to writing one long diatribe without any spacing or highlights.

Anyway, I'm really not interested in turning this into a conflict.  I have described my experiences and you talked about yours and hopefully others will chime in as well with their experiences. That was & still is the purpose of my post, nothing less, nothing more.

I have nothing negative to say about LM and in fact, I am thrilled that they took on the development of FSX in a different form. I have also added a comment at the beginning of my original post to further clarify my intent.

Maurice

[XOrionFE]

Thank you both for your insight as I am still thinking about switching to Prepar3d as well.    I want to point out to all that there was an excellent article written by my friend and neighbor, Doug Horton, who contributes to Computer Pilot Magazine in the November/December 2011 Volume 5, Issue 6 edition on Prepar3d features and differences with FSX as well as FSMark07 Benchmarking comparisons of the two systems running on the same hardware.   In the article Doug shows that the two systems run very comparable to each other on performance but also points out that to do apples to apples comparison one must make a couple adjustments in Prepar3d.  This is what he says:
1. On the Prepar3D menu, Options, Settings, Display, General tab set Global texture resolution to "High 512x512"
2. On the Prepar3D menu, Options, Settings, Display, Scenery tab, set Water effects to "Medium 3.x" to be comparable to FSX, and finally make sure the "Bathymetry" checkbox is unchecked.

He states with these settings on Prepar3D running on the same hardware you get frame rate results that were "so close that they were statistically the same"

I am thinking that unchecking the "Bathymetry" setting really makes a bid difference as the sim no longer has to calculate and map water depths.  Dont forget that Prepar3d adds this feature and I am sure it aint free on the CPU. 

Anyway, Doug is very hardware knowledgeable and he is very analytical when it comes to benchmarking Flight sim performance and hardware.   If you have this article you should read it and double check all settings mentioned.    I believe the article can be downloaded from PC Aviator by purchasing the electronic edition of the magazine issue.

Hope this helps.    I am not quite as brave as Maurice so havn't loaded it yet but I do plan on it.    Onee question I have for both of you (Ivar and Maurice) is I assume you used the Student edition and I saw that it puts a graphic in the upper corner of the sim....did you notice this on yours?   

Best regards,
Scott

[ivar hestnes]

Not my intention to turn it into an conflict Maurice 

Scott, the watermark LM has put in the upper right corner is very small. Not an issue at all. If you use undocked windows, it will still only be one watermark, and that is in upper right corner of the window most right in your setup.

BSD: I dont put the entire .cfg file here, but list the modifications I did. These lines marked with red is added to the .cfg  ( the affinitymask parameter will have a diffferent number for 6 core CPU`s)

[DISPLAY.Device.NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285.0]
Mode=3840x800x32
[JOBSCHEDULER]
AffinityMask=14
[BUFFERPOOLS]
RejectThreshold=126976         //128 byte

[GRAPHICS]
HIGHMEMFIX=1

[Maurice]

OK, I made some changes to the prepar3D.cfg file and my frame rates are now basically the same as FSX. The changes I made are: WATER_REFRACTION_DETAIL=0, ENABLE_BATHYMETRIE=0, WATER_CLARITY=0

I do not see anywhere where I can select DX10 (or DX9) so I assume that it runs DX10 by default but I could be wrong.

As far as image clarity/sharpness is concerned, I still don't see any difference in my setup and I don't understand how it could differ while using projectors that run at 1280x800 resolution. I projected some high resolution pictures on my big screen and the resolution is acceptable at best but nowhere near what the original pictures look like on my laptop. So no matter how good P3D may be or how good the graphics card is, you are still limited by the projector's resolution as far as I can tell.

I am not experiencing any blurries in FSX and P3D looks the same to me so the jury is still out in my case.

So, I will try some more test flights to see if my other issues (BSDs & crashes) are resolved as well with these later tweaks and hopefully they are but I still have serious doubts at this time whether I will switch to P3D.

Basically, getting similar frame rates & clarity but having to re-install a multitude of add-ons is a lot of work for little or no gains in P3D current form. Future improvements might change all that so we'll see what happens.

Maurice
ps. I will edit my first post again to reflect my new findings

[Maurice]

After trying several more test flights, I am still getting P3D crashes every time & less than 3 minutes after take-off. What happens first is that I lose the 3 undocked windows for a few seconds and all I can see is one external view stretched over the 3 projectors. Then for less than 2 seconds, I can see the correct views again but then P3D resets itself and I'm back on the ground.

There is a nice option now available to lock windows so that the focus does not change when you click on any particular window and I tried locking all the windows but still the same problem after 2 minutes.

Not very encouraging so far unless I can find or read about what might be causing this. I have reverted to the original cfg file with Ivar's tweaks only and no bathymetry or water effects and the problem is still there.

Maurice

[ivar hestnes]

Any chance it could be a old graphics driver causing the problem?
I am running on Nvidia driver around 280... something.

Regarding my frame rates... It is not a huge improvement, but slightly compared to fsx. I have around 20-30 in the area where I am testing. It is acceptable, but nothing more than that. Drooling for a 2600k cpu... My overclock is at 4.0ghz.

[Maurice]

Any chance it could be a old graphics driver causing the problem?
I am running on Nvidia driver around 280... something.

Actually, I think I fixed the problem by making a change in the Nvidia Inspector. I changed the setting named Texture Filtering Negative LOD Bias from Allow to Clamp just like I had done for FSX.

I'm pretty sure that was what fixed the problem but I have no idea why or what that setting does so it could have been a fluke or else, I changed something else & forgot what I did. Anyway, it works now.

Now that I have been able to fly more than 2 minutes at a time, It seems to me the projection has a bit more contrast in some areas but it could be because the default scenery is different in FSX than P3D. In some places no noticeable difference but in some places, the P3D scenery looked a bit better.

Anyway, too soon for me to come to any conclusions re. image quality. I have yet to see even slightly higher frame rates with P3D though. In fact, FSX is slightly better at times especially considering I have add-on scenery in most places in FSX and P3D has still the generic scenery.

So for now, I'm shelving P3D mostly because I don't feel like re-installing and/or buying new scenery for just very minor improvements if any. I'm sure that LM will continue to improve the product so wait & see seems like a good idea to me.

Thanks,
Maurice