[jhb_airlines] Re: FSX SP2

  • From: Gerry Winskill <gwinsk@xxxxxxx>
  • To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:59:22 +0000

Hi Paul,
A handy target / link. I flew over the same spots, with the same ScotflightX but in clear skies. With fps unlocked I was getting 34 with the same view in the frame. With the field in sight this fell to low twenties. One oddity was that when on any sort of Southery heading, I was getting flashing in the sky, which I've not seen anywhere else.

Gerry Winskill

Paul Reynolds wrote:

Following Mike's lead, Here's a couple of screenies from my set up.

www.hippouk.karoo.net/html/others.html

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gerry Winskill
Sent: 18 December 2007 23:23
To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: FSX SP2


I'm still feeling guilty about not installing SP2 but caution seems to
be indicated by forum postings.
On UK2000 GS is having problems getting his own scenery to appear. There are
reports of THTG units requiring a workaround The Goflight forum reports GF
users having Databridge errors during flights!

I'm beginning to suspect Aces have a day job, involved with the
commisioning of National Health IT systems!

Gerry Winskill


Gerry Winskill wrote:

Hi Paul,
Very interesting!
I had intended installing SP2 today but am holding off, after a
Horizon Forum report of one chap's system suffering a severe setback
and another being screwed because his FSX Registry entries were wonky.
Accepting that my own are 100% is a bit of a leap of faith!

I suppose my first problem is trying to decide "What's in it for me?".
At present I fly with fps at the locked target level of 25fps,
wherever not in close proximity to airports. On the ground, taking off
and landing can see this figure drop through a range that bottoms at
about 10fps. In FSX I find performance still acceptable at this level.
The closer I fly to the England Scotland border and the higher my
framerates and smoother performance. I don't get blurries and can live
with texture load times that don't exceed three minutes. I have a
selection of scenery, Freeware and Payware, that may be adversely
affected. Ditto for a reasonably effective AI setup.

My settings differ from yours in relatively few areas, as follows: FPS
locked at 25 Lens Flare  off
AA On, via FSX
Aircraft Global Settings at Custom
3D Cockpit  off
Aircraft Shadows on Self  off
Scenery Complexity  Extremely Dense
Autogen  Normal
Special Effects Details   High
Airline Traffic  80%
GA Traffic   80%
Airport Vehicles  low
Road Traffic  31%
Ships and Ferries  74%
Leisure Craft   73 %

Via nVidia Control Panel I have Anisotropic at  x4.

So, overall, my sliders are probably a bit higher than your own with
framerates that sound as though they might be comparable. I guess that
puts me in a position where the only incentive to instal SP2, apart
from an emotional pull in that direction, is if it offers the prospect
of higher framerates and / or significantly improved appearance. What
I've read so far suggests it's unrealistic to expect it to do either
of these things, so I may well instal and take half a step forward and
a couple back; by way of problems with existing scenery  and aircraft.

It even seems reasonable to assume that SP2 is in part designed to
minimise the effect of what are, for FSX, underspecified systems. I'm
all in favour of that but it would have been nice if Aces could have
been a bit more specific on their targets. That isn't a moan, just an
attempt to clarify the circumstances, for myself.

Until today's report(s) of OS damage etc, I'd intended to try it since
I understand that SP2 (not the Acceleration Pack version) can be
removed via the Control Panel. The reported problems of a few make me
much more undecided.

Beyond SP2 and DX9, I don't see myself taking the next step, to DX X.
That involves switching to Vista. Since the DX X related promised step
change in visual quality has now been withdrawn, I don't see the point
of replacing my expensive 8800GTX with an even more expensive one and
changing to a new OS.

I can see the logic of drawing a line after FSX and saying FSXI will
have no backward compatibillity. I'm not sure what they can offer that
would make it attractive to ditch most existing scenery and aircraft;
perhaps that's down to a lack of vision on my part. So it looks as
though I'll pull up the drawbridge and stop at FSX.



Gerry Winskill



Paul Reynolds wrote:

I've been running the Acceleration pack for a few weeks and generally
I'm
impressed.  I'm getting stable frame rates in the mid 20's.  I have
to say
that I think we're in that phase where the real benefits are yet to be
realised.  OK so there are backward compatability issues but, I'm led to
believe, these are where designers have deviated from the FSX SDK
standard.

OK so this is really irritating if, like Gerry, you have designed
scenery
which is running OK but then throws a wobbler when the software is
patched.
I can understand how frustrating that is but I think these are teething
troubles that as SP2 settles down we'll leave behind us. Gerry's
issues of
incompatability with SP2 are because of elements being combined using
drag
and drop software for placement.  As he has only have partial control
over
the initial design elements, any problems with those not specifically
designed by him can cascade down causing problems with the finished
product.
Where he is controlling the design, he can update to account for
changing
standards.

Actually I find it interesting that as Aces design FS11 they've
already indicated they do not intend to support backward
compatability. So any hopes of designing work to carry over is dead
before it's started!  Or is it? If
any design you do moving forward is done on a modular (object
orientated)
basis it should be relatively easy to update to reflect changing
standards.

For those who wonder how I'm getting the stable mid 20's frame rates,
here's
how my set up using the 8800GTS:

Within FSX:

Graphics:
Frame Rate : Unlimited
Global Texture : V. High
Lens Flare : On
Light Bloom : Off
Avanced Animation : On
Info Text : Continuous
Filtering Annisotropic (see Graphics Card settings below)
Anti-Aliasing : Off (see Graphics Card settings below)

Aircraft:
Set Ultra-High
3-D Virtual Cockpit : On
Aircraft Casts Shadows on ground : On
Aircraft casts shadows on self : On
Aircraft landing lights illuminate ground : On

Scenery:
Level of detail Radius: large
Mesh Complexity: 100
Mseh Resolution : 1m
Texture Resolution: 7cm
Water effects: Max. 2X
Land Textures : On
Scenery Complexity: Sparse
Autogen density: Sparse
Ground Scenery Shadows : Off
Special Efects Details : Medium

Weather:
Cloud Draw distance : 60mi/96km
Thermal visulaization: Off
Detailed Clouds : Maximum


Traffic:
Airline Traffic: 7%
General Aviation: 7%
Airport vehicle density: minimum
Road vehicles: 0%
Ships & Ferries : 15%
Leisure Boats 15%

Other graphics settings (set outside FSX):
Anti-Aliasing : On, Supersampling 4xS with Gamma Correction
Anisotropic Filtering : On, 8x Texture Quality : Quality
Trilinear Optimization : On
Negative LOD BIAS : Clamp

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of franklyn
fisher
Sent: 18 December 2007 13:43
To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: FSX SP2


Somehow I do not think that SP2 is the culprit.

It has to be something else on his sytem triggered by it.

I have been running SP2 for 3 days now, with narry a problem.

FF











Other related posts: