Performance

chaos81
Posts: 1

Re: Performance

Post by chaos81 » Tue Mar 06, 2018 8:32 pm

Cities X Boston didn't improve FPS for me unfortunately. It dropped them slightly in fact. For those it improved performance, did you guys select more autogen or more 3d buildings after install?

EDIT: I should add that I don't find the performance to be awful. Could be better as always, but it's inline with my other payware airports, although on the lower end.
portanav
Posts: 21

Re: Performance

Post by portanav » Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:35 am

zsolt.monostori wrote:I can confirm that something is indeed NOT right with KBOS as the performance is simply awful.

I have been using Prepar3D v4.2 and Windows 10. My rig is quite powerful, I7 6700K 4.6GHz, MSI Geforce GTX 1070 8GB GDDR5, 16GB DDR4 Corsair Vengeance 2666 MHz RAM, 750GB SSD, 1TB HDD.

No FPS issues anywhere - including complex airports such as Flightbeam's KMSP, KSFO, KIAD, or FSDT's CYVR, KCLT, KMEM, KSDF, KJFK, KIAH, T2G's KSEA, LFPG, EDDM and many others, the list is quite extensive. Long story short, when something, alone, among the many, underperforms, it is logical to suspect THAT ONE is the one to blame.

With the FSLabs A320 parked at C36 at KBOS, l only get 20-22 FPS which is very, very low. My P3D is not maxed out. I do have relatively high settings but for a good reason: no issues anywhere - apart from KBOS.

Fingers crossed the aforementioned FPS boost will help gain at least 5-8 FPS - I am not really used to the below thirty range.
I agree; as I too use FSdreamTeam and FlightBeam scenery, and have no frame rate problems with them - like KORD and KIAD and others. FlyTampa KBOS is beautiful, but there is something wrong within somewhere; in my opinion.
george[flytampa]
Site Admin
Posts: 3292

Re: Performance

Post by george[flytampa] » Thu Mar 08, 2018 6:40 am

All you guys with performance issues, try removing the jetways & note the fps before & after for me.

The jetways are jetway_A_BOS.BGL, jetway_Low_BOS.BGL, jetway_Smooth_BOS.BGL
Just MOVE[/b them temporally onto your desktop.

You can find them in Prepar3d folder\FlyTampa\Boston\scenery
Lennart320
Posts: 2

Re: Performance

Post by Lennart320 » Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:05 am

Had a look

FT Boston rebooted in 4.2 with Jetways and no Aerosoft Boston in the PMDG 777 : 15-17 FPS
Same as before but with jetways disabled I get 18-20 Fps.

Note that I have steady 25-30 FPS on the other Flytampa sceneries
fakeflyer737
Posts: 54

Re: Performance

Post by fakeflyer737 » Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:55 pm

Does Aerosofts Boston use night lighting and seasonal textures??? I dont think it does.
davidzill
Posts: 39

Re: Performance

Post by davidzill » Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:57 pm

Beautiful scenery! I have an 8700K @ 5.3gz and a single 1080Ti Superclocked, and 32gb ddr4 RAM. 4K monitor, 4096x4096textures, antialiasing @ 4xSSAA. Similar performance. On approach in weather, FPS dips to low teens. On the runway clear sky, low 30’s. My FPS is a solid 60 outside of extremely dense/hifi scenery.
B777ER
Posts: 381

Re: Performance

Post by B777ER » Fri Mar 09, 2018 4:35 pm

gregmorin wrote:
george[flytampa] wrote:I'm still working on something that will boost the performance about +5fps.
The terminals are near negligible in my tests & are optimized already.

It maybe worth mentioning Aerosofts Boston City improves performance over the Microsoft stock city.
I picked up 5-7 fps by installing Aerosofts Boston City. I have an 4770K turbo 4.2 ghz. GTX 960 with 4gbs VRAM. With the PMDG 737, Active Sky, ASCA and Orbx Vector plus NA LC. I am getting 25-30 FPS at the gate and in the air.

The additional plus to Aerosofts Boston City is that it is very detailed and accurate plus you get some great Hospital helipads. The minus is no seasons and no night lights from the custom buildings. It truly is not that noticeable on approach. See George's compatibility notes. You do have to disable some Aerosoft files. If you have Orbx freeware Na airports you also need to disable the Orbx files for KBVY and KOWD.

Greg
Can you post a pic of what it looks like at night? That is my only hesitation with buying it is because there's no night textures with that software. Is it just one big black hole?
gregmorin
Posts: 7

Re: Performance

Post by gregmorin » Fri Mar 09, 2018 9:07 pm

B777ER wrote:
gregmorin wrote:
george[flytampa] wrote:I'm still working on something that will boost the performance about +5fps.
The terminals are near negligible in my tests & are optimized already.

It maybe worth mentioning Aerosofts Boston City improves performance over the Microsoft stock city.
I picked up 5-7 fps by installing Aerosofts Boston City. I have an 4770K turbo 4.2 ghz. GTX 960 with 4gbs VRAM. With the PMDG 737, Active Sky, ASCA and Orbx Vector plus NA LC. I am getting 25-30 FPS at the gate and in the air.

The additional plus to Aerosofts Boston City is that it is very detailed and accurate plus you get some great Hospital helipads. The minus is no seasons and no night lights from the custom buildings. It truly is not that noticeable on approach. See George's compatibility notes. You do have to disable some Aerosoft files. If you have Orbx freeware Na airports you also need to disable the Orbx files for KBVY and KOWD.

Greg
Can you post a pic of what it looks like at night? That is my only hesitation with buying it is because there's no night textures with that software. Is it just one big black hole?
Here are a few pictures.

Image

Image

Image

Greg
777-Pilot
Posts: 5

Re: Performance

Post by 777-Pilot » Sat Mar 10, 2018 7:32 am

george[flytampa] wrote:All you guys with performance issues, try removing the jetways & note the fps before & after for me.

The jetways are jetway_A_BOS.BGL, jetway_Low_BOS.BGL, jetway_Smooth_BOS.BGL
Just MOVE[/b them temporally onto your desktop.

You can find them in Prepar3d folder\FlyTampa\Boston\scenery

No luck with that either - it didnt change my FPS at all (or maybe by 1-2 FPS)

Regards
davidzill
Posts: 39

Re: Performance

Post by davidzill » Sat Mar 10, 2018 4:44 pm

SecondTheory wrote:
george[flytampa] wrote:Always our fault. Sigh
I can sympathise with that. :D

Unfortunately I do experience something similar specifically when the terminals are in view (which I guess is not surprising since that's where the majority of the modelling and detail is).

For comparison default F22, parked at the end of 04L,
• i7 4790K at 4.6GHz, • GTX 1070, • 16GB RAM,
• water detail: medium, • cloud reflections: on,
• autogen: high/dense/dense (2-3 notches below max), • shadow quality: low

Default scenery: (worst case - best case)
Looking right (terminal out of view): 60-70fps
Looking towards the terminals/city: approx 50-56fps

Boston-Rebooted: almost all options turned off
Looking right (terminal out of view): 60fps
Looking towards the terminals/city: ~30-33fps

In the configurator everything is off except "Rain/Wetness", "Taxiway edge lights" and "Animated windsocks".

Boston-Rebooted: with everything on (except animated people):
Looking right (terminal out of view): 55-60fps
Looking towards the terminals/city: ~30-32fps

Note that turning everything on had almost no effect on the frame rate when looking towards the terminal. I expect you must think me a liar, but I swear that was true. :shock: Turning everything on cost maybe 1-2fps, even in the summer with grass enabled

I saw as low as 14fps in the FSLabs Airbus turning in towards gate C9. Obviously that's a very frame-rate heavy plane, but I find I get much better elsewhere.

Some other locations in the FSLabs A320, "On GPU" state:
(cut a couple of FPS off these numbers for takeoff and landing)

FB KSFO, Orbx Northern California, end of 28R: 30-40fps (terminal interiors on)
FB KMSP, end of 12R: 30-36fps (terminal interiors on)
FT CYYZ, end of 06L: 28-32fps (terminal interiors off)
FT KTPA, end of 01L: 32-40fps
FT EHAM, end of 09 panned towards terminal: 35-42fps (!)
FSDT KLAX, end of 25R: 31-38fps
IS KATL, end of 27R: 32-38fps
AS EGLL, end of 09R: 31-35fps
FT KBOS, end of 04L panned towards terminal: 19-25fps

An option to remove the terminal interiors might help, although I've no idea how much work that takes or how much impact they really have.
Very similar performance here. Today with clear skys I got 24-28 FPS on the active runway in the NGX, which was not smooth by any means. I departed and came back around for 04L, with a very stutter 12-17 FPS approach. This is with a 5.3GHZ 8700K, 32GB DDR4 (2 x's 16GB), and a single 1080 Ti SC at max superclock. Thinking my settings may be unreasonable, I headed over to Flightbeam's KSFO, where I get about a very smooth 40-45FPS (With weather on this time // almost overcast), departed runway 28R, flew the 19R approach, everything was as smooth as silk in the very dense San Francisco Scenery (Orbx Norcal, Vector, etc). I'm a loyal Flytampa customer, however KBOS is in huge need of optimizations.
george[flytampa]
Site Admin
Posts: 3292

Re: Performance

Post by george[flytampa] » Sat Mar 10, 2018 5:51 pm

davidzill wrote:
SecondTheory wrote:
george[flytampa] wrote:Always our fault. Sigh


Very similar performance here. Today with clear skys I got 24-28 FPS on the active runway in the NGX, which was not smooth by any means. I departed and came back around for 04L, with a very stutter 12-17 FPS approach. This is with a 5.3GHZ 8700K, 32GB DDR4 (2 x's 16GB), and a single 1080 Ti SC at max superclock. Thinking my settings may be unreasonable, I headed over to Flightbeam's KSFO, where I get about a very smooth 40-45FPS (With weather on this time // almost overcast), departed runway 28R, flew the 19R approach, everything was as smooth as silk in the very dense San Francisco Scenery (Orbx Norcal, Vector, etc). I'm a loyal Flytampa customer, however KBOS is in huge need of optimizations.
These numbers don't add up for that system. I have a much older i7@4Ghz, 1070 crap edition. I'm getting 40-45 @ Boston without Aerosoft's city. Enable the city & I'll get an aditional 5fps.

Stock SFO is running about 45-55fps for me with the same settings.
Boston runs better than all the NYC airports. 22fps over JFK looking towards the city.

You must have a bad setting that kicks off negatively over Boston. One new feature is the wet weather layer. If you have dynamic reflections enabled, this could rob you of 10fps; even in the dry. Move you Dynamic reflection shader full left. The wet reflections look better full left anyway.
You can disable it completly in the config tool.

FB SFO probably doesn't have any wet layers.

Our 3D characters are also very harsh so turn them off.
777-Pilot
Posts: 5

Re: Performance

Post by 777-Pilot » Sat Mar 10, 2018 6:06 pm

Hi George,

I understand that KBOS uses some new design features which might decrease FPS. However the mentioned 5 FPS improvement with Aerosofts Boston City are a measurable improvement which might actually help many of us achieving a more fluid experience fps-wise.

So as there seems to be potantial to increase the performance by changing something in the default city scenery of Boston, it would be great if you could look into that (even though it is not directly on your airport).

Even if that would mean manually removing some default buildings or textures - some users (like me) would be willing to do that for better performance.

Thanks!
David
sky_king
Posts: 13

Re: Performance

Post by sky_king » Sat Mar 10, 2018 6:39 pm

Isn't the default scenery property of LM? Perhaps your idea should be directed also to LM.
AaronMyers
Posts: 20

Re: Performance

Post by AaronMyers » Sat Mar 10, 2018 9:35 pm

I wonder if there is something specific that can be disabled in the default scenery to help. Short of that, does the aerosoft scenery improve the city scenery?
Post Reply