---> Framerate issues (combination topic revisited)

[llama1910 0]

Here are my test results:

Scenario 1: Aerosoft EGLL Gate 101

Default A321, ASN live weather: 40 / clear skies: 45+
A321 wx backgroundscan on, ASN live weather: 21 / clear skies 28
A321 wx backgroundscan off, ASN live weather: 28 / clear skies: 33-35

Scenario 2: Aerosoft EGLL runway 27R

Default A321, ASN live weather: 30 / clear skies: 32

A321 wx backgroundscan on, ASN live weather: 14-16 with glitches from 10 to 28, clear skies no change

A321 wx backgroundscan off, ASN live weather: 17 with glitches from 12 to 28 / clear skies: 22

Scenario 3: EDDM default, clear skies

Default A321: 65+
A321 wx backgroundscan on: 38-47
A321 wx backgroundscan off: 40

What was notable was a drop of at least 10 frames when entering runway 27R at EGLL and less variable fps readings with the backgroundscan disabled

My specs:
FSX
i5-4670k @ 4.4 GHz
16 GB RAM
GTX 770 with 2 GB
DX10

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

That all does not sound too abnormal. A drop in FPS of 25% to 50% between a default aircraft and a our Airbus is what we expect to see. You are closer to the 50% then the 25% though so I think the simConnect bus is still being taxed rather a lot. There is not much that can be done about that in an aircraft that needs to calculate it's flight modeling on a frame by frame base.

I do find 32 fps with the default Airbus to be rather low for that condition though. I really would have expected 40+ there. But of course that all depends on your settings. I just tried your rwy 27 clear weather scenario and got 51 fps on the default bus and 34 on ours. Just as we would expect.

My hardware is a modest sub $800 machine with a 3 year old CPU and 4 year old GPU. No tweaks at all to anything. All 100% standard just with our Bus and our Heathrow.

[Francescom 4]

Hi again,

here below some other tests.

Scenery:

LIRP (Pisa S.Giusto Airport)

FSX Default

Sky Clear

System:

Intel Core I5 4570 3.40 GHZ

RAM 8 GB

Radeon R7-200 Series 2GB

Antivirus Dinamic Scan Disabled.

A319 CFM

WX Radar ON and OFF stable at 30 FPS (Blocked at 31 FPS).

A319 IAE

Wx Radar ON and OFF

Engine 1/2 OFF: FPS Stable at 30 FPS (Blocked at 31 FPS)

Engine 1 ON: FPS varies from 19-20 to 29 FPS.

A320 CFM

Wx Radar ON and OFF

Engine 1/2 OFF FPS Stable at 30 FPS (Blocked at 31 FPS)

Engine 1 ON: FPS varies from 19-20 to 30 FPS

Engine 1 OFF: FPS stable at 30 FPS (Blocked at 31 FPS)

A320 IAE

Wx Radar On and OFF

Engine 1/2 OFF: FPS Stable at 30 FPS (Blocked at 31 FPS)

Engine 1 ON: FPS Varies from 19-20 to 29 FPS

Engine 1 OFF: FPS stable at 30 FPS (Blocked at 31 FPS)

I also tried to switch off the ECAM Engine Display to check if maybe the different representation could impact the FPS, but nothing is changed.

Could the sound of the engine impact on the FPS?

Help please...

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Sure if your sound depends fully on CPU (as on some of the cheaper motherboards) the sound creation will use some CPU cycles. However your results are exactly what we would expect and not bad at all! Are you expecting a higher FPS?

And without a comparison with the default A321 it would be hard to see if there is any issue with your system and our bus. As you can see in a previous post the user has 32 fps in the default and extremely simple bus. Expecting 25+ fps in the our complex airbus is then just not justified. If you get 32 fps in the default bus you should expect something between 16 and 22 fps under the same conditions.

I strongly suggest NOT to limit FPS as that almost always causes some of the simConnect channels to collide. Only when I get very variable FPS of 70+ I will set a limit as it tends to make life a lot easier for complex aircraft.

[Francescom 4]

Sure if your sound depends fully on CPU (as on some of the cheaper motherboards) the sound creation will use some CPU cycles. However your results are exactly what we would expect and not bad at all! Are you expecting a higher FPS?

And without a comparison with the default A321 it would be hard to see if there is any issue with your system and our bus. As you can see in a previous post the user has 32 fps in the default and extremely simple bus. Expecting 25+ fps in the our complex airbus is then just not justified. If you get 32 fps in the default bus you should expect something between 16 and 22 fps under the same conditions.

I strongly suggest NOT to limit FPS as that almost always causes some of the simConnect channels to collide. Only when I get very variable FPS of 70+ I will set a limit as it tends to make life a lot easier for complex aircraft.

Hi,

what I Would expect are the same performance as per A318/A319 that works fine also with the FPS limiter. Without Limit the performance are around 45 -50 fps with a minimum of 27. A320 without limit varies from 45 -50 to a minimum of 19 and this is very strange.

I thought that A320 was very similar to A319 so, i don't understand these difference.

[llama1910 0]

Mathijs,

I can live with the fps and will find further tweaks to get them up somehow. But what I find strange about the A320/321 are the varying frames. AXE and the A319 behaved equally - lower frames around the airport, high framerates in flight. Not so the A320/321 - it keeps these variable fps from takeoff to landing. On my flights it constantly races up and down between as low as 10 up to 30+ frames. And this definitely is not normal.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Hi,

what I Would expect are the same performance as per A318/A319 that works fine also with the FPS limiter. Without Limit the performance are around 45 -50 fps with a minimum of 27. A320 without limit varies from 45 -50 to a minimum of 19 and this is very strange.

I thought that A320 was very similar to A319 so, i don't understand these difference.

We have not seen any other report then yours that the A320/A321 is slower then the A318/A319. I have no explanation for that as the files are actually less demanding.

[ThomasMetter 5]

llama1910, if you get 32 fps in the default (!) Airbus without any weather showing what are you expecting from the Aerosoft bus? I get around 60 fps on that runway with the default bus on my machine and am rather happy to get around 40 fps in the A320.

[Francescom 4]

Sure if your sound depends fully on CPU (as on some of the cheaper motherboards) the sound creation will use some CPU cycles. However your results are exactly what we would expect and not bad at all! Are you expecting a higher FPS?

And without a comparison with the default A321 it would be hard to see if there is any issue with your system and our bus. As you can see in a previous post the user has 32 fps in the default and extremely simple bus. Expecting 25+ fps in the our complex airbus is then just not justified. If you get 32 fps in the default bus you should expect something between 16 and 22 fps under the same conditions.

I strongly suggest NOT to limit FPS as that almost always causes some of the simConnect channels to collide. Only when I get very variable FPS of 70+ I will set a limit as it tends to make life a lot easier for complex aircraft.

My mother Board is an ASUS H87M-E with a RealTek ALC887 8-Channel Audio Codec. This Audio on motherBoard use the CPU to process the Audio?

If Yes I'll try to install an Audio Card.

[llama1910 0]

Ok, did some more tests.

EGLL 27R again in clear skies, this time AI traffic disabled:

default A321: 45
A321 wx off: 22

@ThomasMetter: it would be no problem to reduce my settings to get 60 fps with the default Bus, but why should I want that ? My FSX is normally locked to 30 fps and the settings adjusted accordingly that it looks best at that framerate.
But I would like to point out again, that I am not complaining about the fps as such, but that they are unstable and constantly runing up and down during flight (with wxbackgroundscan enabled). And as you can see from Francescom's post, I am not alone with this effect. And - no other of my payware addons does that.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

My mother Board is an ASUS H87M-E with a RealTek ALC887 8-Channel Audio Codec. This Audio on motherBoard use the CPU to process the Audio?

If Yes I'll try to install an Audio Card.

You might gain one or two frames, not more. Sound is not hard for the CPU.

The fluctuating fps has to do with the background calculations, not something that can be fixed. We rather not load up the CPU when there is no need for it. Fluctuating FPS are also not a problem unless they go below 15 fps.

[Francescom 4]

Hi to all,

here below other tests.

TEST 1

In order to be sure that the sound was the problem ,I replaced the Sound_CFM of the A319 in the A320 Folder. Nothing is changed, there is not specific Sound the could lead in a decreasing of FPS.

TEST 2

I thought at the panel. So i Replaced the "Texture_Fallback_VC" folder of the A319 into the A320. Nothing is changed.

TEST 3

I added the text string related to the Wx radar "Wx Background Scan=2" and tested the options 1, 2, 3. Nothing is changed.

It seems that there is some process that cause the variation of the FPS, sometime they drop to 13 from 45 FPS, and it is evident because the SIM losses fluidity, especially during turns, or when I change the view (dinamically with the Joystic) in the VC.

All these events don't occur with the A318/A319 CFM where the FPS are stable above 30 FPS with a maximum of 60.

What are the difference with other models? I thought that, apart the dinamic model (like performance, flight dinamic), the other features were very similar...

If you have something to suggest i will be happy to test it.

Thanks for support.

[wiebe 6]

My baby bus runs fine, bit the 320 is quite stuttery fps between 13 and 32

[uadriver 6]

team

perhaps my observations should be in this topic ??

http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/86844-change-weather-scanning-options-solved/?p=631632

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

My baby bus runs fine, bit the 320 is quite stuttery fps between 13 and 32

Is that with background scanning on or off?

[maxhades 15]

for me the same problem! Constant fps with pmdg and the old AXE! with airbus 319 and since the update for the 320 i have bad frames and jumping form 13-23 (locked at 25) with a high variance! since i fly with the fsx never had such problems with a addon!

A320 standard clear weather 25fps variance 0.1

A 318/19/20 clear weather between 13-22fps variance from 1.0-20.0 no weather rader

with weather radar ON and clear weather a lost of 2-3fps

all on a standard airport, medium settings ins fsx, no tweaks

pmdg(all aircrafts), captain sim,... never had a problem and always smooth.

system

win7

i7 2600k

geforce 660

8 gig ram/1600

clean instalation

thx

[maxhades 15]

with the old AXE 25fps always and variance 0.5

could this be the ned 2D graphics for the cockpit?

[wiebe 6]

I am not sure. I switched it off for the 319, not for the A320. I don't know if I did it right either. I will check it out.

Is that with background scanning on or off?

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

for me the same problem! Constant fps with pmdg and the old AXE! with airbus 319 and since the update for the 320 i have bad frames and jumping form 13-23 (locked at 25) with a high variance! since i fly with the fsx never had such problems with a addon!

A320 standard clear weather 25fps variance 0.1

A 318/19/20 clear weather between 13-22fps variance from 1.0-20.0 no weather rader

with weather radar ON and clear weather a lost of 2-3fps

all on a standard airport, medium settings ins fsx, no tweaks

pmdg(all aircrafts), captain sim,... never had a problem and always smooth.

system

win7

i7 2600k

geforce 660

8 gig ram/1600

clean instalation

thx

But as I explained there are some new processes that only have to run a few times a second/minute. If these would run continuous the framerate would be smoother but a lot lower. So there is not a lot we can do about that. Why that has a lot more effect on the systems of a few users is not clear to us.

Of course we see part of this effect on our machines (as we expect that) but the variance is around 20% to 25% max, something we do not see as a problem

[wiebe 6]

with background scanning off it still stutters about every second

[maxhades 15]

what i know and what i see with such high variance is because of stutters! thats why i run my sim not unlimited!

but nice bus so far!

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

what i know and what i see with such high variance is because of stutters! thats why i run my sim not unlimited!

but nice bus so far!

So you see the variance decrease with a limited FPS? I never noticed anything like that and it would be very hard to see why a FPS limit would influence the rate at which some processes in the gauges run. In fact it seems impossible.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

with background scanning off it still stutters about every second

Well your reported variance between 13 and 32 is very wild and we got no serious idea why that is so on your system. Most likely something to do with the simConnect channels.

[uadriver 6]

team

perhaps my observations should be in this topic ??

http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/86844-change-weather-scanning-options-solved/?p=631632

mathijs

thanks for your notes to my above .... which i will separately answer in that "other" topic !!

i'm keen however to hear from any of the posters herein that:

1. they are using online download updates of either current or historic weather
2. have they tried turning that off (during taxi for example) to in effect have static but the same weather.

cheers

john

[Kort 3]

Hello,Mr. Mathijs,

1.PC specs:

OS:WIN7 64bit

CPU:Intel i7-2600 (3.4GHz)

RAM:16GB

Video Card:Nvidia GTX660

2.Other addons running while using FSX;

FTX Global (Base)

No weather engines running

3.FPS in Virtual Cockpit, on ground,clear sky,EL Formosa RCTP scenery.

Default A321: 60fps up

New Aerosoft A321 (With Configurator set to no web server,ECAM Force software rendering disabled,WX Radar backscan all off ) : Drop to around 24~28fps

Could Aerosoft provide us with some recommended Nvidia Inspector settings ?
The new airbusses seemed to not behave smoothly in the current version.Hope we can sort it out with AS' development team.

Greetings
Kort