212 FRAME RATES!

[manhattan]

Not sure if anyone wants to know, but with ONE computer, I am running 3 to go outside views, 3 instrument monitors and two left and right views at an average of 190 frame rates if I want them.
My cockpit is totally stable and all sliders are across to the right!
My PC has Asis 2gb serving 3 to go and all instruments, and an Asis 1gb serving both sideview monitors.
Some people say that you cannot have 8 monitors running properly from one machine! Why bother with "Wideview?"

Win7
8g ram.

TONY.

[fordgt40]

Is your plane stationary in the middle of a very large field :D

[manhattan]

QUOTEhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#71798641)=fordgt40;158676]Is your plane stationary in the middle of a very large field :D[/QUOTE]


What a stupid question!
Do you fly in fields?

I fly a Twin Otter all over the world and in different circumstances. The frame rates never vary, and are frequently over 200 - although I set them at 35.

Perhaps you would let me in on the joke that is behind your question?

TONY

[fordgt40]

Tony

I thought that the "smiley" might have been a clue?, Published frame rates are meaningless unless the context is also given. There is a world of difference between being on the runway at Heathrow or flying in cloudless skies at 30,000 over a desert. However, clearly my humour was lost or not appreciated :D

David

[manhattan]

Tony

I thought that the "smiley" might have been a clue?, Published frame rates are meaningless unless the context is also given. There is a world of difference between being on the runway at Heathrow or flying in cloudless skies at 30,000 over a desert. However, clearly my humour was lost or not appreciated :D

David

See your point now!
On runways or flying in the clouds, the frame rates never vary much below 180. I fly in all conditions day and night - frame rates stay roughly the same!

TONY

[kermit]

You use add ons like megascenery, other payware programs,
I`m very interested how to get those results,
I`m flying cessna`s with dutch scenery, real weather ,mega airports with Aes ,
but I`m getting not more then 28 fps on a good day,
What are your pc specs and how what did you change to get these results
greetz

[manhattan]

You use add ons like megascenery, other payware programs,
I`m very interested how to get those results,
I`m flying cessna`s with dutch scenery, real weather ,mega airportshttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#28432213) with Aes ,
but I`m getting not more then 28 fps on a good day,
What are your pc specs and how what did you changehttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#49394267) to get these results
greetz

Windows7.
Asus 2gb for 3 to go front views and 3 instrument screens.
Asus 1gb for both side views.
(total monitors = 8).
8gb ram.
3.5gb processor.
SSD drive.

All graphics sliders on full.

I don't use any add on's apart from my own airport here in Plymouth, and the Twin Otter that I fly.
Real weather can be used without altering the frame rates.

I think that people have been so used to using Wideview and multiple computers, that they have not bothered to see if it will work with just one machine. My system was built by my local engineer without any tweaking at all. It was put together exactly as you see it.

What's all the fuss?

TONY

[Matt Olieman]

Thanks for the info Tony. I think most of us would like the same results, that's why the questions.... Please share with us how you are able to do that. :)

Thanks,
Matt O.

[manhattan]

Thanks for the info Tony. I think most of us would like the same results, that's why the questionshttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#91088450).... Please share with us how you are able to do that. :)

Thanks,
Matt O.

Hi Matt.

Some years ago, when I first built a sim, I managed to provide using Matrox Parhelia, and two small graphics cards, 3 front outside views, and three instrument views. At the time this was a bit unusual as I had 6 monitors working. This "old" setup is shown in the old avatar.
Using a more powerful computer, and powerful graphics cards, and using 8gb of ram I am now able to run the 6 monitors plus two side monitors at very high frame rates.
Previous posts show my setup if you are interested?
If you have any specific questions, please free to ask.

TONY

[fordgt40]

Tony

I use wideview, not just for better frame rates (which is proven on my machine), but also because it gives me accurate side views which can be properly lined up with the front view.

If I recall correctly, Triple head togo enlarges the front view only and then spreads that across three monitors, that gives a distorted view. So we are not comparing apples with apples.

In respect of frame rates, I cannot achieve anything like yours even on a single 4.4ghz machine - indeed I would love 30fps when banking over London. It all depends on the use of addons eg photorealistic scenery, cloud draw distances, screen resolution, airport and 3d building density, AI traffic and weather engines etc. These addons are down to personal preference and expectations. Doubtless I could get much better frame rates, but the visual experience would be inadequate to me.

David

[manhattan]

Tony

I use wideview, not just for better frame rates (which is proven on my machine), but also because it gives me accurate side views which can be properly lined up with the front viewhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#20041634).

If I recall correctly, Triple head togo enlarges the front view only and then spreads that across three monitors, that gives a distorted view. So we are not comparing appleshttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#30912817) with apples.

In respect of frame rates, I cannot achieve anything like yours even on a single 4.4ghz machine - indeed I would love 30fps when banking over London. It all depends on the use of addons eg photorealistic scenery, cloud draw distances, screen resolution, airporthttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#67964236) and 3d building density, AI traffic and weather engines etc. These addons are down to personal preference and expectations. Doubtless I could get much better frame rates, but the visual experience would be inadequate to me.

David

Thankyou for your comments.
My front monitors match exactly with the resolutions required to display correctly with the outside view. My side monitors are built from "new window" and undocked and moved into position. Adjustments are made to match in with the front views. The overall front and side views lock together to provide a seamless 180 degree view. Bank angles are handled extremely well, but there are of course limitations.

I am experimenting with addons and it does not seem to matter what I do in this regard, the frame rates never drop below 170.

Happy flying!

TONY

[fordgt40]

.
My front monitors match exactly with the resolutions required to display correctly with the outside view. My side monitors are built from "new window" and undocked and moved into position. Adjustments are made to match in with the front views. The overall front and side views lock together to provide a seamless 180 degree view. Bank angles are handled extremely well, but there are of course limitations.


My comments about a distorted front view with TH2Go were based on posts by a number of other enthusiasts who tried and discarded TH2Go because of their dissatisfaction with the "spread view"

Perhaps you have solved it and/or have a different view :p

David

[manhattan]

Tony

I use wideview, not just for better frame rates (which is proven on my machine), but also because it gives me accurate side viewshttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#84032550) which can be properly lined up with the front view.

If I recall correctly, Triple head togo enlarges the front view only and then spreads that across three monitors, that gives a distorted view. So we are not comparing appleshttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#89917430) with apples.

In respect of frame rates, I cannot achieve anything like yours even on a single 4.4ghz machine - indeed I would love 30fps when banking over London. It all depends on the use of addons eg photorealistic scenery, cloud draw distances, screen resolution, airporthttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#9051051) and 3d building density, AI traffic and weather engines etc. These addons are down to personal preference and expectations. Doubtless I could get much better frame rates, but the visual experience would be inadequate to me.

David

"spread" or "stretched" view with 3 to go does not seem apparent with my system? A local top flight engineer built it for me and as far as I know, did nothing spectacular apart from installing good grade materials etc. When I first set up FS, the outside view appears on all three screens unstretched. No tweaking is required.

I think that it should be borne in mind that this is after all just a very sophisticated "game" and very close to real is good enough for most simmers.

TONY (ex pilot)

[fordgt40]

Tony

I think we all know that FSX is a game. There is a balance between performance and visual candy, we will have differing expectations. As a "non pilot" I must clearly have a different view to you as an "ex pilot"

Rather than dredge up links to illustrate some earlier points, I will take your assertion that your th2go system is free from perceived inadequacies that others have experienced. It is all in the eye of the beholder. I think this aspect of the thread has run its course.

Happy flying

David

[manhattan]

Tony

I think we all know that FSX is a game. There is a balance between performance and visual candy, we will have differing expectations. As a "non pilot" I must clearly have a different viewhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#44395646) to you as an "ex pilot"

Rather than dredge up links to illustrate some earlier points, I will take your assertion that your th2go system is free from perceived inadequacies that others have experienced. It is all in the eye of the beholder. I think this aspect of the thread has run its coursehttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#73924749).

Happy flying

David

I guess the thread will die as and when? Just thought I would mention my sim to those that are struggling with frame rates.

Thanks for your contributions.

TONY

[kermit]

HI Tony,
could you make a screenshot from your fsx cfg file ,and list your pc components
I have a top end pc , dont use wide view ,
have a watercooled system that doesn`t go further then 55 degrees full steam overclocked at a stable 4,6 Ghz and no bsods.
spend last year 3500 euro just for ssd,s (1 for OS and one for FSX)
memory , motherboard , processor and videocards all watercooled.

OS and FSX tweaked by proffessional in the IT industry,
using all the most proofed tweaks and also
try and discard procedure by spending a lot of time to fiddle the files.

I find it very hard to believe that you have 212 frames , without any tweaking at all.

I have made serious attempts to config fsx to the upper fps, never gone beyond 125 fps with a few essentials add ons like weather, Aes , some dutch scenery and using flight 1 cessna 172( because I have build a cessna 172 sim in a cessna frontsection
My wet dream is to use my set up with A2a Cessna 172 but its not working with Simkits usb devices)

using a second pc for driving the instruments,radio`s and downloading weather/routes , so all the power from the main Pc is used for FSX , and still not getting near your framerates

also looking at the fsx community the main question that goes around is framerates, framerates and framerates

looking at your quote``Just thought I would mention my sim to those that are struggling with frame rates``
Not explaining how You come to those fps more technical,
I`m wondering , what`s the point.

I have read a lot of statements like yours, but never backed up with proof.

Please don`t feel offended, but with a statement like yours especially when you say that you experimenting with add-ons not dropping under 170 fps ,

I would like some proof that backs up your statement, as I`m struggling with framerates ,have spend a lot of time and money for some decent framerates.
Am I fixated on framerates and good working pc/fsx ,
I would think so, its a hobby so I would like to get the most of it

Kind regards
Kermit

[fordgt40]

Tony

What version of FS are you using?

David

[brianwilliamson]

Yes and there are fairies at the bottom of the garden..............................

Brian W.

[manhattan]

Thanks for the info Tony. I think most of us would like the same results, that's why the questions.... Please share with us how you are able to do that. :)

Thanks,
Matt O.

Hi Matt.

Further to my frame rate discovery, I run FS2004 as oppose to FX10 which may be the reason why so high frame rates? I doubt this but it is food for thought?
Apart from this, a clean computer with good graphics cards and digital monitors and high ram are all that I have and I am sure that most members have this?
Even in full screen, the frame rates don't drop below 80 - but I don't use full screen.

Frame rates as of today - 190.

TONY.

[fordgt40]

Tony

The difference between 2004 and FSX frame rates is VERY significant indeed as is full screen, or not, and screen resolution.

I can get 400 frames a sec, ah but that is with sublogic 1. :)

If you are going to make statements such as why "bother" with wideview then you need to be very clear about your configuration. Particularly as FS2004 users are now a minority.

David

[manhattan]

Tony

The difference between 2004 and FSX frame rates is VERY significant indeed as is full screen, or not, and screen resolution.

I can get 400 frames a sec, ah but that is with sublogic 1. :)

If you are going to make statements such as why "bother" with wideview then you need to be very clearhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#77278936) about your configuration. Particularly as FS2004 users are now a minority.

David


The "why bother" comment was aimed at those who are looking for extra monitor views without having to go to the trouble of using ad-on programs such as "wideview". Why because of this comment, do I necessarily need to be "clear" or otherwise about my configuration?
FS2004 users may well be a minority, but I am enjoying excellent graphics, high frame rates and 8 monitors. This is more than enough for me, but I appreciate that those on FSX are looking for even more but with the down side of low to average frame rates. I know what I prefer.

TONY.

[fordgt40]

Tony

I am glad you are happy with your system, but you have inadvertently misled others in your enthusiasm.

David

[Fan of Flying]

FS2004, in my opinion, is still the way to go with multi-monitor setups. Simulation is all about immersing the pilot into an environment which he/she feels is true to life.

That said, Ive been in 3 different commercial motion simulators. I don't recall once seeing a pastel colored outside world nor did I ever recall "stutters".

I have yet to see one high end FSX-based flight simulator (in videos) represent what pilots see in real world. There are not stutters in real life. Even the latest gentleman, see Avsims page, with high end Flightdecksolutions hardware running FSX has failed to accomplish this. I mention FDS because the hardware is truly amazing and the gentlemen obviously has the means to purchase the best. Unfortunately the videos I've seen fail to accomplish a believable, seamlessly smooth, outside world in which I believe Tony was referring.

Mitch

[kermit]

Hi in the first reply s he never said what flightsim he is using,
only after some comments and questions .
we found out he is using fs2004 , with todays technology it is not hard to get
160 fps on the modest pc system
fsx is different matter , why not state your flightsim when asked
regards

[manhattan]

Hi in the first reply s he never said what flightsim he is using,
only after some comments and questions .
we found out he is using fs2004 , with todays technology it is not hard to get
160 fps on the modest pc system
fsx is different matter , why not state your flightsim when asked
regards

I don't recall being asked, but I did offer the information when I realised that I might have mis-led people into thinking that I was using FSX. This was not intentional. Providing my aircraft flies properly as commanded, and a combination of existing and add-on scenery is used, I see no need for FX10. I have constructed a full size cockpit designed for one aircraft only which combined with high frame rates (courtesy of 2004) is a joy to fly.
Each of us has our own way of enjoying flightsim.

[Fan of Flying]

Kermit,

good points.

Mitch

[manhattan]

QUOTEhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#66882377)=brianwilliamson;158723]Yes and there are fairies at the bottom of the garden..............................


Brian W.[ QUOTEhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#88416031)]

Hello Brian.
I am 73 years old, have been successful in business all my life, and until recently, the owner of a light aircraft and held a PPL.
I find your comment about "fairies at the bottom of the garden" suggesting that I am a liar most offensive and hope that it is picked up by Matt.

If you (and others) insist on using FSX then you will not achieve the frame rates that you desire. 2004 has a lot to offer and things that only FSX can offer, begin to look less important when you realise that you can use as many monitors and add ons as you want with high frame rates and only one computer with FS2004.

There will always be flightsim snobs in this game, who just have to have the latest whatever it is - but sometimes, there is a price to pay for this - and frame rates at the moment is it!

TONY

[kermit]

Hi Tony , at reply no 14 David Talked to you about fsx , you responded with no mentioning about your fs2004 ,
therefore we thought you talked about fsx.
If your header stated 212 frame rates with fs2004 nobody would asked you about systems or fsx ,
as fs2004 is a low end game with todays pc systems.
I think I would get even higher framerates with my system and fs2004 , but I`m using fsx .
I have thrown fs2004 with all its addons away ,couldn`t get it sold for 10 euro .
the remark fairies at the bottom of the garden by Brian , was based on the assumption that you were talking about
FSX not FS2004 .
regards Kermit

[manhattan]

QUOTEhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#69672503)=kermit;158950]Hi Tony , at reply no 14 David Talked to you about fsx , you responded with no mentioning about yourhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#85150711) fs2004 ,
therefore we thought you talked about fsx.
If your header stated 212 frame rates with fs2004 nobody would asked you about systems or fsx ,
as fs2004 is a low end game with todays pc systemshttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#76308586).
I think I would get even higher framerates with my system and fs2004 , but I`m using fsx .
I have thrown fs2004 with all its addons away ,couldn`t get it sold for 10 eurohttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#50865116) .
the remark fairies at the bottom of the garden by Brian , was based on the assumption that you were talking about
FSX not FS2004 .
regards Kermit[ QUOTEhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#92556963)]

Knowing how restrictive FSX is, I am not now surprised by his comment - even though it was a bit blunt!
I willhttp://cdncache-a.akamaihd.net/items/it/img/arrow-10x10.png (http://www.mycockpit.org/forums/#12425116) let you all plod on withFSX - I had a copy, but threw it in the bin.

"Each to his own"

TONY.