OSM + orthophoto

[manuthie 242]

Unfortunately my computer is not able the handle this with a usable frame rate (at least at the settings these screenshots where taken). But it's still nice for some impressive screenshots :biggrin:.

 

 

 

 

 

[Phantom88 3,284]

Beautiful!!! Where are We???

[manuthie 242]

Beautiful!!! Where are We???

 

Near Stuttgart (EDDS).

[MdMax 233]

Awesome shots. :Applause:

 

OSM2XP + X-Plane rules !

[Pascal_LSGC 298]

Great shots Manuthie, thanks ! :smile:

[Comanche 417]

Awesome looking shots! Rob

[cenkcnk 24]

what about fps and what is your current rig?

incredible shots. you really make me think of swiching to xplane

[manuthie 242]

what about fps and what is your current rig?

incredible shots. you really make me think of swiching to xplane

 

Frames where somewhere between 6fps and 10fps.

 

My computer is an Intel i5 2500K with HD7870 graphics card and 16GB ram (but ram was not the bottle neck here - only about 2GB where needed) using Windows 7. Certainly not high end but not the bottom end as well. Don't know if Nvidia-Cards are better for handling something like this.

[Humpty 751]

wow stunning, you better get a higher end GPU the 7870 may just not cut it, why don't you try the CCC 12.11 Beta 8 as these are meant to increase performance on the GCN architecture starting from 7xxx series.

 

How are the trees placed ? are they part of OSM ?

[dolf8857 8]

Nice ones!

[cenkcnk 24]

Wow 6 fps with 2500k and 7870 , this is too low to be considired as playable.

[Humpty 751]

the low fps could be due the 7870.

 

Why not try the 12.11 beta 7 or 8. I am using the Beta 8 I feel improvement in FSX is there.

[manuthie 242]

wow stunning, you better get a higher end GPU the 7870 may just not cut it, why don't you try the CCC 12.11 Beta 8 as these are meant to increase performance on the GCN architecture starting from 7xxx series.

 

How are the trees placed ? are they part of OSM ?

 

I Haven't tried the latest beta drivers but sure will check them.

 

How trees are places ... I have no idea actually. I used this OSM file but I don't know if it contains forests or if the forests are from default scenery. MdMax might be able to answer that as he seems to have a lot of expericen with OSM scenery.

[Pascal_LSGC 298]

Forests are included in the OSM2XP scenery. It's usually better than default forests. Btw, I'm a bit surprised by your low framerate. Do you use the 64bit beta version ?

[manuthie 242]

... Btw, I'm a bit surprised by your low framerate. Do you use the 64bit beta version ?

 

I used the latest beta (10.20 Beta 2) but the 32 bit version (which doesn't really matter, since memory usage was slightly below 2gb).

 

Resolution was 1920 x 1200 and settings where almost maxed out (everything on max) except

• number of cars: "Kansas Residential"
  
• HDR anti-aliasing: "4x SSAA+FXAA"
  
• water reflection detail: "default"
  
• cloud detail: "100%"
  
• AI Traffic: "none"
  

I did a little investigation today. For all the following figures I tried to use the same spot and viewing direction. First I used the same settings that where used for the screenshots above which gave me about 9.5 fps. I then reduced settings a bit (number of cars: "none" instead of "Kansas Residential", HDR anti-aliasing: "FXAA" instead of "4x SSAA+FXAA", shadow detail: "overlay" instead of "global (melt your GPU)") and fps went up to about 28.

 

After this I updated my graphics card drivers to the latest 12.11 Beta 8 and tried again. With the higher settings I got about 11.5 fps and with the lower settings fps went up to about 31. So indeed the latest beta driver seems to results in slightly improved performance.

 

With the beta drivers I then checked how much performance penalty these three settings had when enabled individually. With traffic set to "Kansas Residential" instead of "none" fps went from 31 down to 22 (I didn't expect traffic to have that much of an influence - that sure will stay off in future). With HDR anti-aliasing set to "4x SSAA+FXAA" instead of "FXAA" fps went down from 31 to 18.5. With shadow detail set to "global (melt your GPU)" instead of "overlay" fps went down from 31 to 20.

 

Please keep in mind: the fps figure does change quite a bit even when the view isn't moved - so all figures are average values and might be a little higher or a little lower at times. Since I used clear weather fps will be lower if there are clouds. The plane was standing on the ground while I was testing so fps might be lower if the plane is actually flying - not sure how much of an impact that will have.