Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Blinx

Sacramento performance

Recommended Posts

Hi! Got Sacramento from Simmarket.

 

It looks good but I get really low FPS and lag. Any fix for this? Lower textures or something? I don't have this problem with any other aerosoft airport. The only airport that is this bad in performance is heathrow.

 

Sim is P3D V3.2 on Intel Xeon 1231v3, Radeon R9 380. Windows 10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree to both statements. This is on a i7-2600/GTX970 system, as well under P3D3.2. In comparison to the recently re-released Rome sporting excellent performance, framerates of Sacramento with the same settings are 1/2-1/3 (~15:40). A minor part of this may be the surrounding: FTX NCA certainly has a higher impact than just FTX OpenLC.

 

Kind regards, Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you CookieMonster, your friend is right. Switching off clutter etc. raises fps by >~25 %

 

Kind regards, Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too have poor performance at SMF.  The cars in the carpark are the major culprit.  But switching these off with the config tool only gave me a marginal increase  in performance.  I will try by turning everything else off.

 

Panman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In FSX I initially had very poor performance at SMF because I was using ORBX Northern California.  I have since unchecked ORBX NA in the scenery library and now using ORBX global and everything is running smoothly...I still have two areas of concern..There's a strange line that runs at an angle the length of both runways and the AI planes upon arrival wheels sink below the runway surface....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Folks,

I've been interested in this one as well - prefer reasonable frame rates above all else... I'll hold off on this purchase until I see some good feedback...

Regards,

Scott

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 1 hour , lhpdx40 sagte:

In FSX I initially had very poor performance at SMF because I was using ORBX Northern California.  I have since unchecked ORBX NA in the scenery library and now using ORBX global and everything is running smoothly....

Perhaps this works if you only fly airliners. I fly VFR exclusively. A trade-off between either a nice airport or a nice surrounding wouldn't be acceptable for me. But I agree, both certainly stack up in a way.

 

First I would try disabling several of the airport options, as suggested above.

 

Kind regards, Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you guys simply expect too much: People want to see most realistic aircraft, most realistic scenery with animations, flying birds, waving flags, driving cars etc.etc. But when they put together those addons like Orbx + Sacramento + e.g. a PMDG T7 in an extrem dense area like CA, they start to blame the devs for bad performance. If devs develop for such areas an airport using less memory, because the use low res textures, less animations etc, devs got blamed again. So simply think about what is realistic.

And a sceenry where you can switch between a "basic" version using only 100 MB and a "full" version using 2GB might technically be possible but nobody would be willing to pay for. ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check post #17 in the preview thread. Note that that was written well before the release. In fact, almost a year...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noticed this airport uses a HUGE amount of VAS on my system.  I get warnings from FSUIPC soon after I load it.  Even after removing everything in the config, it still loads around 3.7GB.

 

Gregg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I've noticed this airport uses a HUGE amount of VAS on my system ...

How much is huge?

It is not huge at all. I made some comparison:
P3Dv3.0 with FS Global ULimate, FTX Global, FTX Vector and FTX Northern California and the Airbus A319, no weather, AS KSMF with deafult settings in the Configurator

This is what I get with FTX Global (NCA inactive), the def. airport and the Airbus:
P3D_FTXG_KSMF_def.jpg

VAS left 1.8 GB

 

This is what I get with FTX Global and NCA active, the def. airport and the Airbus:

P3D_FTXNCA_KSMF_def.jpg

VAS left 1.4GB, so 400MB eaten up only by NCA ;)

 

This is what I get with FTX Global (NCA inactive), AS KSMF and the Airbus:

P3D_FTXG_KSMF_AS.jpg

VAS left 1.4GB, so compared to the def. KSMF needs around 400MB

 

This is what I get with FTX Global and NCA active, AS KSMF and the Airbus:

P3D_FTXNCA_KSMF_AS.jpg

VAS left 1GB. so KSMF still needs only around 400MB

 

And that's not "huge". ;)

 

But as I said above a combination of highly demanding addons (scenery and aircraft) in such a dense area, adding weather with high res cloud textures, high settings in the sim etc. this is simply too much for FSX and P3D, although P3Dv3 behaves slightly better in handling VAS.

 

So dont blame a single scenery.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On my system...which has no problem with any other airport...using the Carenado A36, from a fresh start, FTX NCA I see 3.7 GB VAS used.  I reinstalled and it didn't help.  By comparison, Orbx KRDD, right up the road, has 2.7 GB VAS used.  Same aircraft, same weather conditions.  LatinVFR KSNA uses 2.8.

 

So I don't know what is going on with this airport.

 

Gregg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any other ORBX airports(airfields in the area? FB KSFO?

 

Sacramento is quite in the center of all that nice (and heavy) airports

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only other airports I have in the area are Charles Shultz, Monterey, and a couple of small Orbx airports further north.  No FlightBeam.  It's fairly generic Orbx there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just to get a hand on it - disable Monterrey, Sonoma and the other small ORBX ones and check the VAS afterwards. (FTX NCA and Sacramento only)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

still quite much - and not coresponding to the 2 times 400MB for FTX NC and Sacramento Mopperle mentioned....

 

I don't have Sacramento (yet) but I'll try to check tomorrow what NCA + default says at my setup.

 

how about your texture_max_load and LOD_RADIUS settings ? - above 4.5 / 5 that may suck a lot of VAS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was 6.5.  I cut it back to 5.5 and that helped a small bit.  I then disabled KSMF and ran the default from NCA.  Same conditions I was running 2.3 GB VAS.  So, seems like the airport is taking 1.2 to 1.3 additional VAS.

 

Gregg

 

EDIT:  I also checked to make sure there weren't duplicate entries in the scenery.cfg...there weren't.  All of these tests are running with all optional features turned off except for FTX Compatibility which I have on.  I am running P3D v. 2.5. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish I could figure this out.  If other folks aren't using large amounts of VAS...why am I?  I took a 'drive' around the airport and it's extremely nice.  Sitting on the ground I have low-30s on the framerate.  The one thing I notice is that the VAS jumps 500 GB right after the sim screen displays.  Maybe a clue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 17 Stunden , seippg sagte:

 

EDIT:  I also checked to make sure there weren't duplicate entries in the scenery.cfg...there weren't.  All of these tests are running with all optional features turned off except for FTX Compatibility which I have on.  I am running P3D v. 2.5. 

 

maybe that's the problem. V2.5 was not very VAS efficient afaik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, data63 said:

 

maybe that's the problem. V2.5 was not very VAS efficient afaik

 

So, if I'm understanding, in 3.x it might be immediately freeing some of the VAS back for use?  I do know that they've made some significant VAS improvements in 3.2. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I bought and installed 3.2 and Sacramento.  I watched the VAS as the sim finished loading and there's a large spike right as it finishes loading and displays the airport and then it drops way down.  So, perhaps, there's something in this scenery that the simulator immediately discards.  Would be worth a look from the devs. 

 

Gregg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well... maybe that's exactly the way memory management in V3.2 works - the display engine loads a scenery, calculates what is to be seen an what not and THEN discards unseeable parts.

 

that was one of the great problems in FSX and earlier P3D versions as the display engines didn't "realize" that something wasn't visible any more and held it in the memory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...