|
|
Post by olderndirt on May 18, 2014 20:13:55 GMT -5
How many are running P3D as their primary FS? I'm starting to teeter and would like to hear how was the transition from FSX and did you have enough computer to run it at the same levels.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2014 21:11:55 GMT -5
It's 32 bit. End of story.
|
|
|
|
Post by olderndirt on May 20, 2014 20:25:36 GMT -5
It's 32 bit. End of story. Just when it was getting interesting. |
|
|
|
Post by pivo11 on May 21, 2014 1:28:08 GMT -5
So there's a bit of a problem, then, I take it?  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2014 6:50:40 GMT -5
My thinking is that until they go 64 bit, it can't really be that dramatically better than FSX. Without additional memory, you can't really improve performance all that much, and without improving performance, there are only so many new/better features you can cram in before getting OOM's. OOM's have plagued the sim from what I've been reading, although this last version seems to have improved things in that category. It might be the sim of the future, but until it can tap into the 64 bit system, there's a "lid" on it. Of course, once you do go 64 bit, you are starting over with most of your add-ons again.
Keep in mind though, the above is my opinion. I don't have it (and don't plan on having it), so if someone who does have it can refute that from experience, then I'd be taking their opinions over mine. I just don't think it has much room to grow at this point.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sandy on May 21, 2014 7:02:18 GMT -5
It's 32 bit, but then so is FSX. I don't see the issue there. At some point in the future, Lockheed-Martin may totally revamp P3D to be 64 bit. But that's well into the future. P3D is not currently a revolutionary shift to something better, it's more a minor evolutionary upgrade. If it were a full 64-bit program as mentioned a couple posts above, and all the add-on developers were re-tooling for 64bit add-ons, there would be no question. For now though, you can use most of your existing FSX add-ons and they will work. If P3D were 64 bit now, absolutely none of your existing add-ons would work.
Back on topic... Yes, I fly P3D2 exclusively.
The transition from FSX is still on-going. Initially when I started flying P3D, I experienced a bit of a let-down since the vast majority of my scenery add-ons (mostly Orbx stuff) were not compatible. Orbx is in the process of re-releasing all their titles to be P3D2 compatible, but it's a slow process. There is also the issue that most of your older FSX aircraft add-ons won't work 100% in P3D2. Some will, but you'll want to carefully check around to see if the publisher or the public has had any issues with (your favorite FSX aircraft) within P3D2.
Then there's the myriad tool additions that may or may not work in P3D2. Fortunately the ones I use most are P3D2 compatible: FSUIPC, OpusFSX, REX4 TD and PlanG.
You will find many references to a "Migrator" program, designed to make all your FSX add-ons work in P3D2. I recommend against using such tools, simply because when the publishers do update their products to be P3D2 compatible, you'll end up having issues removing the old and reinstalling the new. The migrator tools smell an awful lot like snake-oil to me. Patience works much better and is easier on the blood pressure.
There are some differences in how P3D opens up, and how you adjust settings. Unless you physically change it to open to a "scenario choice" screen, it's going to automatically load in your default flight. In fact, the first time you run P3D you will find yourself sitting in an F-35 at Langley AFB, Virginia. Only once it's loaded in can you start to access the menus to change setup options. Even at the scenario choice screen, you still have to load in a flight before you can access the various video, sound and control options. I'm used to it now, but it did drive me a little crazy at first.
P3D2, once loaded and set up, operates and flies much as FSX does. The vast majority of key commands and options are the same. What P3D2 does differently is move a big chunk of video processing from the CPU (where FSX processes everything in the sim) to the GPU - your video card. This means that you're going to need a pretty serious video card to effectively run P3D2, especially when it comes to running scenery add-ons. Scenery add-ons are very pretty, but put a lot of stress on your video card, especially the VRAM.
I recently upgraded from a 1.5gb NVidia GTX 580 to a 2gb GTX 770. I didn't opt for a 4gb card because I had repeatedly read that "nothing out there is going to require 4gb VRAM unless you're running three or four monitors at once to create a single large desktop." Bullshit. I've found that I regularly max out VRAM use on this 2gb card in many of the sims I run (especially P3D and Arma3.) But the new card does work better than the older one, so I'm relatively happy with the purchase. Just wish I would have gotten the 4GB model, just to see if the extra VRAM really does help.
You've seen my screenshots, so you have seen how similar, yet different, P3D is.
In the end, I like the way P3D2 operates. It's a 'prettier' visual experience (in my opinion), and I like the work L/M have done in optimizing the old FSX code to better handle available system memory (a recent update addressed how trees are displayed, reducing the memory required significantly.) I did a clean break from FSX, since my FSX install went belly-up on me and was going to need a complete re-install. So I've never had the full dual installation going on at once. Some folks have found it advantageous to have both. The only thing I've found I need from FSX is the registry key that tells programs where to find FSX. I've changed that key to point to my P3D install location, so some add-ons (aircraft mostly) not designed specifically for P3D 'think' they're being installed into FSX. It seems to work well enough... the issue comes if some internal coding of the add-on doesn't match P3D's current requirements. Then things don't work quite as expected.
Bottom line: If you're curious enough about how P3D2 handles your simming requirements, get it. If you're looking to move onto a platform that's going to continue to be developed, get it. If you're happy with how FSX performs on your system, and you're happy with all your years of fine-tuning FSX to be just what you need it to be, and you don't have a deep curiosity about P3D ... don't get it.
|
|
|
|
Post by olderndirt on May 21, 2014 11:49:16 GMT -5
Sandy - appreciate your 'in depth' on P3D. Much as I'm tempted, unlike you my FSX has remained healthy and it seems prudent to go with what's working. With each version, P3D is becoming more attractive but it still has that 'grass is always greener' aura with no real deal clincher so I'll wait.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sandy on May 21, 2014 23:46:59 GMT -5
I understand completely, and agree. If my own FSX installation was still operational, I would never have switched in the first place.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2014 0:41:28 GMT -5
After hearin snap, crackle & several pops..*%&@#**!!
That was so I could get on my knees and pray that my outfit don't go TU and halfta switch
|
|
