Simviation Forums

Here is a pic of FSX in early Beta (notice the bottom left):

http://djtaso.com/fsx/fsxcs.jpg

It seems the developers had plans for cloud shadows but removed it before final release. I think cloud shadows is the only thing missing from making this sim a great....sim. It would truly add that final touch of realism it's been missing.

It would also add more performance problems and just be another reason for more people to complain and say FSX is a terrible sim.

That would have been nice.  

It would also add more performance problems and just be another reason for more people to complain and say FSX is a terrible sim.

Back then maybe yeah...but not now. With the hardware out now, you would have no problem.

It would also add more performance problems and just be another reason for more people to complain and say FSX is a terrible sim.

Back then maybe yeah...but not now. With the hardware out now, you would have no problem.

OK, then go fly around Seattle, WA. Take off runway 34R with water set to 2x HIGH. Then do the same flight, this time water at 2x LOW. You will see the difference in performance.

i have little doubt that would have been implemented in fs11 (or may still be implemented if the flight sim projects get underway in the future)! cool find!

It would also add more performance problems and just be another reason for more people to complain and say FSX is a terrible sim.

Back then maybe yeah...but not now. With the hardware out now, you would have no problem.

OK, then go fly around Seattle, WA. Take off runway 34R with water set to 2x HIGH. Then do the same flight, this time water at 2x LOW. You will see the difference in performance.

Water maxed out and taking off runway 34 in Seattle.

Take Off - 32FPS
Over Seattle - 35FPS
Low pass over water - 35FPS
Low pass over airfield - 28FPS

I agree that there would be no problem with todays hardware with cloud shadows.

For your system to have those frame rates over this area tells me you have your settings turned down quite a bit... Perhaps the reason you get such frames.

Was the flight smooth with no stutters at all around any of the areas you flew over?
Do you have your autogen set to at least VERY DENSE with no autogen limit in the fsx.cfg?
Are you running at max resolution and widescreen enabled? (if you have a widescreen monitor)

What you don't understand is that there is no such thing as a free lunch. Had there actually been a cloud shadows option in the RTM version of FSX, you would have had to sacrifice some eye candy (perhaps water reflections... Hmm...) in order to get those cloud shadows with no loss in perf/frames/smoothness. Period.

By the way, you justified nothing with your response. You gave me ONE set of fps when I asked for two. Now fly that same flight with water set at 2x LOW and dare to tell me you don't get higher frames.

For your system to have those frame rates over this area tells me you have your settings turned down quite a bit... Perhaps the reason you get such frames.

Was the flight smooth with no stutters at all around any of the areas you flew over?
Do you have your autogen set to at least VERY DENSE with no autogen limit in the fsx.cfg?
Are you running at max resolution and widescreen enabled? (if you have a widescreen monitor)

What you don't understand is that there is no such thing as a free lunch. Had there actually been a cloud shadows option in the RTM version of FSX, you would have had to sacrifice some eye candy (perhaps water reflections... Hmm...) in order to get those cloud shadows with no loss in perf/frames/smoothness. Period.

By the way, you justified nothing with your response. You gave me ONE set of fps when I asked for two. Now fly that same flight with water set at 2x LOW and dare to tell me you don't get higher frames.

SubZer0

I appreciate and respect your comments.

Over the last three to four weeks I have been shaking down a new FSX PC to replace an older one I built over two years ago. When I decided to build this new system I made the choice this time to first review the latest comparison tests of PC parts and select those components that best fit a power-house FSX configuration. In selecting the i7 920 over the more expensive i7 CPUs was based on the ease which you could over-clock it. One other important factor was cooling. In addition to a good CPU Cooler, I needed a large well vented case with large fans for unrestricted airflow and a modular power supply to minimize cabling. Once I finalized my configuration, I then shopped on the internet for the best price. The result is a very fast and the quietest of any I have built. The following are my Specs.

1. Operating System: Windows Vista Home Premium 64 bit.
2. Case: Thermaltake Zaser V1 VG4000BNS Black/Red / Steel ATX Full Tower
3. Power Supply: ULT X3 1000 Watt Modular .
4. Motherboard : ASUS P6T Deluxe LGA 1366 Intel X58 ATX
5. CPU: Intel Boxed i7 Processor 920 (Over-clocked to 4.0 GHz)
6. CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-U12P SE 1366 Ultra Quiet CPU Cooler
7. Hard Drive : VelociRaptor 300GB 10,000 RPM Serial A
8. DVD: SAMSUNG
9.Video Card: BFG GeForce GTX 285 OC 1 GB GDDR3
10. RAM: Corsair XMS3 12GB DDR-3-1600 (PC-12800) CL9 Memory Kit

Now to answer your questions.

The flight was extremely smooth and no stutters. All sliders are maxed except mesh resolution set at 76m and texture resolution set at 1m. Light bloom is turned off as it interferes with the effects from REX. I am running REX, UTX, GEX and other FltSim SW. My monitor is a 25,5" ToC Samsung running at 1920 x 1200 Full Screen. As for flying with water set at 2x low, I never bothered as it's obvious in most cases that you would get higher frames. As a matter of interest, in some areas, and along coastlines, it is not uncommon for me to reach over 100 FPS.

Again thanks for your interest and please get back to me if you have any other questions.

^ Nice system!  8-)

It would still be nice to have cloud shadows for screenshots and what not.

For your system to have those frame rates over this area tells me you have your settings turned down quite a bit... Perhaps the reason you get such frames.

Was the flight smooth with no stutters at all around any of the areas you flew over?
Do you have your autogen set to at least VERY DENSE with no autogen limit in the fsx.cfg?
Are you running at max resolution and widescreen enabled? (if you have a widescreen monitor)

What you don't understand is that there is no such thing as a free lunch. Had there actually been a cloud shadows option in the RTM version of FSX, you would have had to sacrifice some eye candy (perhaps water reflections... Hmm...) in order to get those cloud shadows with no loss in perf/frames/smoothness. Period.

By the way, you justified nothing with your response. You gave me ONE set of fps when I asked for two. Now fly that same flight with water set at 2x LOW and dare to tell me you don't get higher frames.

SubZer0

I appreciate and respect your comments.

Over the last three to four weeks I have been shaking down a new FSX PC to replace an older one I built over two years ago. When I decided to build this new system I made the choice this time to first review the latest comparison tests of PC parts and select those components that best fit a power-house FSX configuration. In selecting the i7 920 over the more expensive i7 CPUs was based on the ease which you could over-clock it. One other important factor was cooling. In addition to a good CPU Cooler, I needed a large well vented case with large fans for unrestricted airflow and a modular power supply to minimize cabling. Once I finalized my configuration, I then shopped on the internet for the best price. The result is a very fast and the quietest of any I have built. The following are my Specs.

1. Operating System: Windows Vista Home Premium 64 bit.
2. Case: Thermaltake Zaser V1 VG4000BNS Black/Red / Steel ATX Full Tower
3. Power Supply: ULT X3 1000 Watt Modular .
4. Motherboard : ASUS P6T Deluxe LGA 1366 Intel X58 ATX
5. CPU: Intel Boxed i7 Processor 920 (Over-clocked to 4.0 GHz)
6. CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-U12P SE 1366 Ultra Quiet CPU Cooler
7. Hard Drive : VelociRaptor 300GB 10,000 RPM Serial A
8. DVD: SAMSUNG
9.Video Card: BFG GeForce GTX 285 OC 1 GB GDDR3
10. RAM: Corsair XMS3 12GB DDR-3-1600 (PC-12800) CL9 Memory Kit

Now to answer your questions.

The flight was extremely smooth and no stutters. All sliders are maxed except mesh resolution set at 76m and texture resolution set at 1m. Light bloom is turned off as it interferes with the effects from REX. I am running REX, UTX, GEX and other FltSim SW. My monitor is a 25,5" ToC Samsung running at 1920 x 1200 Full Screen. As for flying with water set at 2x low, I never bothered as it's obvious in most cases that you would get higher frames. As a matter of interest, in some areas, and along coastlines, it is not uncommon for me to reach over 100 FPS.

Again thanks for your interest and please get back to me if you have any other questions.

I had you and Black ZR-1 confused... I didn't read the name on that last post and I thought you were getting that performance on a core 2 duo system..

Your system and mine are very much alike. I have an i7 920 @ 4.0ghz, DDR3-1600 at 7-7-7-24, and a GTX 260 (wish I had a 285 ) I also have FSX on its own V-raptor and OS on its own.. and another drive for addons.

Flight Ace, in this case, however, you are giving up texture resolution (which makes a huge perf difference) for your autogen and water shadows. I tested my system with the same settings you said and I did get the performance I expected. It's actually quite tempting to keep it at those settings

And I do agree with Mitch, that it would be nice to have them in screenshots

Are you running all 10K drives? You indicated you tested your system with the same settings I am using and you got the performance you expected. What was that performance? Since our systems are almost identical except for the Video Card, I and probably others would like to get an idea of how the GTX 260 performs compared to the 285.

Hey Flight Ace,

For the OS and storage/FS9 drives I am running SATA I drives, 7,200 rpm. For FSX, I am using the v-raptor.

About the performance, I don't have time to do it again now but I will later today and will post images of my settings.

Until later,

Andy

I can live without it