EDDB v2 dramatic fps lost.

[Przemek Matan 3]

Hello, 

 

Aeorosoft team thanks for destroys one of the best scenery. I have 15 fps less so it is below 30 now in 3rd part aircrafts like md82. Sutters a lot also hapenned. 

It can now rival egll for the worst scenery in msfs. We don't care that it looks nice if we can't play it because of the low fps.
It's crazy because it was a great airport and well optimized now it's crap

Mod Edit on quoted text: Cut way oversized font down to standard 14 as huge fonts come off as rude shouting, just like using all caps.

[livermeister 8]

Unfortunately, I also only end up with around 30 fps in v2 in the fenix a320. The v1 scenery was around 40 fps.

 

Rtx3070 and i7 10700k

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

2 hours ago, livermeister said:

Unfortunately, I also only end up with around 30 fps in v2 in the fenix a320. The v1 scenery was around 40 fps.

Rtx3070 and i7 10700k

 

Well yeah, a lot of details were added so it is absolutely normal that it needs more resources.

 

For some reason, a lot of people in the last few months seem to believe that there is some magic 'optimizing' possible and that more detail will not drop framerate. The simple fact is that if the modeler is a professional (as Sascha is) who knows about the latest techniques, there is an almost linear correlation between the number of polygons and textures loaded and framerate. Double the details and you cut frames in half (if you load no aircraft).  Of course, there can be errors, objects with a crazy long distance LOD for example, but these are found fast and corrected. 

 

Also, keep in mind that your FPS is determined by your setting, not what you have loaded. You can make eddb v2 damned fast or damned slow. 

[Przemek Matan 3]

 

I believe that a good scenery is not the one with animated buses and other redundant details that make it unusable on a good and expensive pc. Does everyone have a core i9 13900K? The scenery before the update was ok and had great performance and quality. Now it just can't be used even at 737 pmdg drops below 30 fps without AI traffic just like EEBR is suitable for a slideshow

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Okay, so you do not want animated vehicles, and 'other redundant' details.  And clearly, you have your settings very high. I can only advise you not to buy our products because we will simply not be able to deliver what you want. We do believe vehicles that move around are important and that there are no 'redundant details'. Personally, I got a less performant system than you have and simply set the sim settings to deliver the frames per second I want (for me the sweet spot is just over 30 fps). Still more than any movie in a theater!

 

While I am sorry you are not happy with EDDB and EBBR, we do not apologize for the massive amount of detail that is included. As I said, it is not the product, but the settings that determine your FPS. You do not like very detailed airports because your settings do not allow them to run at the FPS you want. So be it. We can never make all customers happy. 

 

As I believe there is nothing I can say that will convince you I will leave this conversation. 

 

 

 

 

[livermeister 8]

I fully get your point Mathijs, settings are crucial and should be taken into account before "complaining" about fps. The level of detail is great and I think the tone of Matan is a bit rude. Nevertheless, the performance is noticeably lower than before which seems to be due to the added details. From a user point of view, maybe you could add some sort of control center for the scenery so that we can decide which additional features should be displayed (e.g. like inibuilds with their EGLL). 

 

Side note: interestingly, compared to EDDM and EDDH, which also come with great quality and detail and the latter is even right next to photogrammetry city of Hamburg, the frames are significantly lower in Berlin. 

[Przemek Matan 3]

Maybe I was rude but the developers seem to be a bit ignorant of reality. The best, the most details, etc. It looks nice in the reviews and recommended only after you buy it, it turns out that you have to pay a pc for 5 thousand dollars to have some sensible frames. Of course, you can't please everyone, but to please the 1 percent of players who have such equipment it is ok? Eddm and eddh are very good scenery. They may not have all the goodies but still, they look great and are playable. Eddb was great before update so yes I, am angry. As Mathijs wrote, I may not buy these scemery unfortunately I bought EDDB when it was well optimazied. To be clear I dont have max settings. TLOD 100 1080p high setting not everything on max rtx 3070 8 gb ram ryzen 5800H 8 cores so it isnt, the cheapest pc. 

[barneyz_bln 2]

vor 16 Stunden schrieb Przemek Matan:

Maybe I was rude but the developers seem to be a bit ignorant of reality. The best, the most details, etc. It looks nice in the reviews and recommended only after you buy it, it turns out that you have to pay a pc for 5 thousand dollars to have some sensible frames. Of course, you can't please everyone, but to please the 1 percent of players who have such equipment it is ok? Eddm and eddh are very good scenery. They may not have all the goodies but still, they look great and are playable. Eddb was great before update so yes I, am angry. As Mathijs wrote, I may not buy these scemery unfortunately I bought EDDB when it was well optimazied. To be clear I dont have max settings. TLOD 100 1080p high setting not everything on max rtx 3070 8 gb ram ryzen 5800H 8 cores so it isnt, the cheapest pc. 

 

Try deactivating the additional road vehicles (see link to the topic). Helps a bit. I guess that there will be an update from the developer that will optimize the scenery a bit.

 

[Przemek Matan 3]

I did deactivating the additional road vehicles. It is better at first immersion 30-35 fps (i locked the game at 35 fps) with some small sutters so it is much much better In md82 witch is heavy fps airplane. Also I remove all this thinks from ebbr and looks like it is work fine.. Realy thanks forbarneyz_bln. It is crazy that we have to do that to play with 30 fps :D. 

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Your fps is not determined by the project but by your settings and your hardware. What we release is always aimed to be fully usable for the next 24 months. 

 

However, do you really feel that 30 FPS makes the sim bad? We have done extensive tests at shows where we ask people to judge framerates and there are not a lot of people who reliably can say if the sim is set at 30 fps or at 60 fps.  If you want proof, go to your local cinema, almost every movie you see there is shown at 24 fps, even if the action is far faster than it will ever be in MSFS, I mean we do not do explosions etc.

 

Locking your sim to a framerate is these days considered a rather bad idea. That's something that goes back to FSX that could only use one CPU core. 

[Przemek Matan 3]

I never mentioned that 30 fps is bad. I locked my fps to 35 and 30-35 fps is ok for the sim. But you probably know that if I start sim  at cold and dark at the gate and have 25-20 on your scenery it is realy bad. Without ai traffic also no setups for cars and other traffic in the sim. Some mix of high/ultra graphic settings (rtx 3070) 1080p TLOD 100. low settings dont change almost anything i tried.Sorry but playing in ultra low details on 3070 is a joke. Even EGGL from inibuilds have better fps form after last update. What can i do? Tlod 10? Thats is not the point? 

 

I know that there are many factors and planes also cause a drop in fps, but I compare the same conditions to other scenery and I honestly say that I have the worst fps on eddb. But it does not matter. removing these buses helped a lot and it is possible to use this scenery. 

[Danno1502 2]

Hi everyone,

 

I have my sim dialed to have a smooth performance at IniScenes EGLL with the Fenix A320 at night with some clouds. I run rather conservative settings (mindset: a good horse only jumps as high as it has to, or: why pump 8k liveries in a sim that is being displayed on a 1080p screen?).

Last night I was flying out auf MK studios Dublin scenery into Aerosofts EDDBv2. Flying into runway 07L everything seemed smooth, but after vacating the Runeay and pulling into stand A8 I had massive performance drop. I cannot say how many FPS, since I care about smoothness and never look at FPS counters, but it just got stuttery, even in external views.

 

So I am wondering what it is that is taxing my system that much?
 

I get that EGLL is heavy on performance since it is a huge airport with two runways, tons of taxiways, a sh*tload of stands sitting in a huge city full with buildings, POIs and surrounded by other airports. So „simwise“ there is a lot going on. With Berlin I just seem to not see it.

 

Thank you,

[Der Merowinger 162]

It's like in real life: things which are working well all over the world aren't working not good - worse - in Berlin.

 

Kai

[Sasa 921]

About performance:

BER has been developed on a very low spec system with performance in mind. Here you go:

 

Hardware:

CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-8400 CPU @ 2.80GHz   2.81 GHz
RAM: 40.0 GB
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER 14GB 256-bit
HDD: MSFS on Samsung 840 EVO SSD, BER installed on "ancient" Toshiba MD04ACA400

 

Comparison scenario BER / MUC (simwings):

Standard weather (Few Clouds), 12:00 noon, FlightDesign CT

 

Start position cockpit:

BER: 40 fps

MUC: 48 fps

 

Overview of whole airport (from about 500 meters AGL)

BER: 37 fps

MUC: 49 fps

 

Approach moving:

BER: 38 fps

MUC: 48 fps

 

Without a doubt BER requires more but is still flyable on a weak system like above. But why does it need more?

- Many animated vehicles and sounds

- 3D people in terminals

- VDGS docking system

- More GSE and clutter around the gates based on real life data (no criticism about MUC intended, it's very well possible that GSE and clutter is just less dense there)

 

MUC:

Please login to display this image.

 

BER:

Please login to display this image.

 

The first version of BER has been harshly criticized by many, many people because it was lacking exactly these details that bring an airport to life!

Of course, these details do not come for free.

 

As described here the animated vehicles can be deactivated. We may provide a small tool eventually to make this easier (not possible for the Marketplace and XBox version though).

 

At this point, another interesting observation from the comparisons between BER and MUC:

 

Approach moving:

MUC: 48 fps

BER: 38 fps

BER (without animated vehicles): 48 fps

 

Removing the animated vehicles looks like a viable cure for all these that need better performance when approaching the airport.

 

Last but not least, here are my settings for the above hardware configuration for reference. It would be nice if this helps one or the other to find out what is slowing things down on their own system:

 

Please login to display this image.

[Boeingman_ 0]

To my surprise, I also have the low fps experience on my system (AMD 6800XT @4K + AMD 5900X) !

 

iniBuilds' London Heathrow with SD-Textures offers me above 30 FPS in the Fenix, so does EBBR by Jo and other sceneries of that complexity (DD Newark, FlyTampa Tonronto etc.). Usually I don't care about fps as long everything is fluid, even if there are only 23 or 24 fps – which is still fluid from a cinematic point of view. But BBI V2.0 does not perform over 20 fps – which might also be coming from the swamped VRAM.

 

BUT: The fps drop only appears when massively when flying to EDDB. Loading a flight in EDDB is ok. (I did two test flights. One from EDDS, one from EGLL)

 

Well, maybe you could offer some SD-Textures or other things? I really adore the 10299349 Sofas in the terminal and the walking people and many many other moving details and easter eggs - but how about making them optional? Your choice, of course. Other scenery creators offer it, though.

 

 

 

[Danno1502 2]

vor 9 Stunden schrieb Sasa:

About performance:

BER has been developed on a very low spec system with performance in mind. Here you go:

 

Hardware:

CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-8400 CPU @ 2.80GHz   2.81 GHz
RAM: 40.0 GB
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER 14GB 256-bit
HDD: MSFS on Samsung 840 EVO SSD, BER installed on "ancient" Toshiba MD04ACA400

 

Comparison scenario BER / MUC (simwings):

Standard weather (Few Clouds), 12:00 noon, FlightDesign CT

 

Start position cockpit:

BER: 40 fps

MUC: 48 fps

 

Overview of whole airport (from about 500 meters AGL)

BER: 37 fps

MUC: 49 fps

 

Approach moving:

BER: 38 fps

MUC: 48 fps

 

Without a doubt BER requires more but is still flyable on a weak system like above. But why does it need more?

- Many animated vehicles and sounds

- 3D people in terminals

- VDGS docking system

- More GSE and clutter around the gates based on real life data (no criticism about MUC intended, it's very well possible that GSE and clutter is just less dense there)

 

MUC:

Please login to display this image.

 

BER:

Please login to display this image.

 

The first version of BER has been harshly criticized by many, many people because it was lacking exactly these details that bring an airport to life!

Of course, these details do not come for free.

 

As described here the animated vehicles can be deactivated. We may provide a small tool eventually to make this easier (not possible for the Marketplace and XBox version though).

 

At this point, another interesting observation from the comparisons between BER and MUC:

 

Approach moving:

MUC: 48 fps

BER: 38 fps

BER (without animated vehicles): 48 fps

 

Removing the animated vehicles looks like a viable cure for all these that need better performance when approaching the airport.

 

Last but not least, here are my settings for the above hardware configuration for reference. It would be nice if this helps one or the other to find out what is slowing things down on their own system:

 

Please login to display this image.

 

 

I applied Sasa settings to my sim but it maybe improved performance by nuonces. Still nowhere near to what I have had with EDDBv1. For me only removing the road traffic made the simulator smooth again. But now its silky smooth and great looking, except for the well known bug that makes the taxi lines etc. looking washed out (yeah, I know, sim bug).

 

(Just want to point out I am only reporting here; not crticising, blaming, finger pointing or anything. Still very much like the updated version.)

[Sasa 921]

Thank you for your feedback. It's still very much of a miracle to me why your high-end systems suffer while my ancient system performs so well (good point with differences between initial loading vs. flying there though).

We are planning some further performance tests and potentially a tool that lets you switch on/off content. If you would like to help out testing, please drop an support@aerosoft.de and ask it to be forwarded to me. That would be much appreciated!

 

Bests,

Sascha

[Danno1502 2]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Sasa:

Thank you for your feedback. It's still very much of a miracle to me why your high-end systems suffer while my ancient system performs so well (good point with differences between initial loading vs. flying there though).

We are planning some further performance tests and potentially a tool that lets you switch on/off content. If you would like to help out testing, please drop an support@aerosoft.de and ask it to be forwarded to me. That would be much appreciated!

 

Bests,

Sascha

Hi Sascha,

 

would very much like to help out if possible. Dropped an Email to the email adress above, but it just came back with an out reply.

 

On a further note: has it been reported yet that the remote de-icing pad on apron 3b is missing?

 

Thanks,

Daniel

[Sasa 921]

3 hours ago, Danno1502 said:

would very much like to help out if possible. Dropped an Email to the email adress above, but it just came back with an out reply.

 

No worries. I requested your email address from the admins and will be in touch!

[Danno1502 2]

Yesterday I did two flights in and around EDDB. First one was just a simple traffic pattern in the PMDG. Airport scenery was silky smooth and as I would expect it to be. Second one I flew out of EDDB to EDDK and back. Just as others reported already when I left EDDB it was performing as expected, coming back it turned into a stutter party.

 

Zitat

It's still very much of a miracle to me why your high-end systems suffer while my ancient system performs so well (good point with differences between initial loading vs. flying there though).

 

What is your testing procedure? Traffic patterns in a GA aircraft while all of us are flying heavy metal in and out of EDDB?

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

On 3/3/2023 at 9:37 AM, Danno1502 said:

What is your testing procedure? Traffic patterns in a GA aircraft while all of us are flying heavy metal in and out of EDDB?

 

Basically, there should be no difference.  If there is an inherent problem it will show in any aircraft. It is not the FPS that is important (as that is simply 100% determined by settings) it is an unexpected drop in FPS that needs to be investigated. And you do with one of our 'aircraft' that only contains a viewpoint and no code whatsoever.

 

When testing any kind of software the first thing you do is remove variables. 

[Sasa 921]

Quick Update:

 

Michael from the German forum assisted with some extensive performance tests - many thanks for that!!!

 

A beta test and a config tool are currently still on our to-do list. Hard to tell yet how long that will take as there are a few people involved here. Just wanted to give a brief progress report.

 

Current changelog (work in progress) for the planned update is as follows:

 

FIXED: Made people and custom ground traffic optional as they are heavy on performance.
FIXED: Added further options to deactivate content to improve performance when needed.
NEW: More realistic concrete ground textures
NEW: Added paved taxiway sides with more detailed textures
NEW: Added skidmarks on runways in higher resolution
FIXED: Ditch in terrain around taxiway M5
FIXED: "ENTRY NORTH" AND "ENTRY SOUTH" ground markings darker
FIXED: Removed sounds from most custom ground vehicles as too many of them can lead to crashes in German language (!) MSFS
FIXED: Lowered some bumpmap texture resolutions for further performance improvements

 

Bests,

Sascha

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Like to add a comment here...

 

A lot of the performance issues came as a big surprise to us. They did not show in the beta and we still have no idea why some of these things cause issues on some machines while they are not on others (also not why it only seems to crash German MSFS copies).  

[avduarri01 6]

With MSFS most developers ditched the "Config Tool" which was very popular back in the FSX days. In my opinion it is a mistake. We all know that MSFS takes more advantage of the CPU/GPU than FSX, but it has to be up to the customer to decide if he prefers animated traffic/objects instead FPS or sacrifice FPS in order to get more animations. Lowering the graphic settings is not always an option (not a popular one, for sure) because the customer does not want to change the settings constantly depending on where is he flying to/from. I think most of us tries to find the sweet spot where most of the sceneries works ok and keep that settings.

I prefer to reduce animations in 1 heavy airport and keep the graphics settings the same I use for the rest of airports.

 

I hope developers starts bringing back the lovely config tool. Life is very expensive to be buying insanely priced graphics cards to stay up to date with the computer setup.

 

An i7-10700k + Rtx 3070 is an expensive machine that will allow the user to play most of the games with high/ultra settings easily, but in the flightsim world... Oh boy, that machine is just an starting point to be able to see thinks good enough.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

24 minutes ago, avduarri01 said:

I hope developers starts bringing back the lovely config tool. Life is very expensive to be buying insanely priced graphics cards to stay up to date with the computer setup.

 

Keep in mind that this will only work on PC and only on non-Marketplace copies. Now it depends a lot on how you look at things and what kind of products, but I would guestimate these config tools only work for 30% of users.