Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
6FingerSays

Experience X. Get it.

Recommended Posts

So, I just purchased experience X night lights.

 

I bought it expecting it to be another FPS heavy night lighing product.

 

But AMAZINGLY, it isn't. Now, I know I was a big downer on night lights. I just needed to try this one out. I got the SAME 30 fps with the NGX at Flightbeam KPHX with the night lights at the gate! Amazing!

 

Now I don't know about OOM's yet. Havn't tested it that much.

 

But if you have a DECENT system, I would highly recommend trying Experience X.

 

Experience X is extremely smart. Much different than UTX night lights. The lights dissappear at a certain altitude. Because at 30,000ft there is no need to have them showing. Saving FPS, and memory.

 

They also disseappear after a certain distance. So no unnessecary waste of anything!

 

Seriously, it's pretty cheap, just try it. It is worth it. Highly customizable too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a huge thread about it a few weeks/months back...

 

Seemed some had real fps issues. I considered it but decided against it based on the negative feedback. Also the preview video was taken with bloom on, which a lot of people don't run...

 

Are you running DX9 without bloom?


| FAA ZMP |
| PPL ASEL |
| Windows 11 | MSI Z690 Tomahawk | 12700K 4.7GHz | MSI RTX 4080 | 32GB 5600 MHz DDR5 | 500GB Samsung 860 Evo SSD | 2x 2TB Samsung 970 Evo M.2 | EVGA 850W Gold | Corsair 5000X | HP G2 (VR) / LG 27" 1440p |

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, even on my system Experience X runs fine, DX9 without light bloom.


Current system: ASUS PRIME Z690-P D4, Intel 12900k, 32GB RAM @ 3600mhz, Zotac RTX 3090 Trinity, M2 SSD, Oculus Quest 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you running DX9 without bloom?

 

Yes.

 

Seemed some had real fps issues. I considered it but decided against it based on the negative feedback. Also the preview video was taken with bloom on, which a lot of people don't run...

 

No. There is no Fps issues. I have tested it on 3 different systems now, and the results all came back the same. The people who reported the "fps issues" obviously had the combination of a billion other addons running at once, with bloom, and probably with sliders too high. And most likely a system that was not adiquite for FSX. It was *not* experience x.

 

Key words, *decent system*, meaning an Intel Core, properly overclocked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. There is no Fps issues. I have tested it on 3 different systems now, and the results all came back the same. The people who reported the "fps issues" obviously had the combination of a billion other addons running at once, with bloom, and probably with sliders too high. And most likely a system that was not adiquite for FSX. It was *not* experience x.

 

Key words, *decent system*, meaning an Intel Core, properly overclocked.

 

I hardly know how to address this remark, so I'll just leave it for other people with much more patience than myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hardly know how to address this remark, so I'll just leave it for other people with much more patience than myself.

 

Well obviously if you had valid points to make, you would post them. Not just say "so i'll just leave". Other than the fact that all of what I said is true, based off my tests off 3 DIFFERENT computers.

 

And again it seems you didn't read my previous post.

 

Key words, *decent system*, meaning an Intel Core, properly overclocked

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FPS issues starts with higher autogen settings (higher than dense) and extreme light density setting in Experience X. I've tried max autogen with extreme light density, it's stunning how real the cities looks at night, but the fps hit was big, from 30-35fps to 18-20.


Current system: ASUS PRIME Z690-P D4, Intel 12900k, 32GB RAM @ 3600mhz, Zotac RTX 3090 Trinity, M2 SSD, Oculus Quest 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well obviously if you had valid points to make, you would post them. Not just say "so i'll just leave". Other than the fact that all of what I said is true, based off my tests off 3 DIFFERENT computers.

 

And again it seems you didn't read my previous post.

 

I read everything you said, and reading comprehension has never been a weak point for me. I have plenty of valid points to make, I just didn't feel the need. But since you asked, I could easily point out that while it's nice you're enjoying Experience X, simply saying "It's amazing!" isn't a very compelling argument for buying it. How about screenshots? Drawing comparisons to stock FSX? Or to competing products? Even explaining what it does, as a start?

 

Also just saying "It's pretty cheap" is just as worthless an endorsement. It can be argued that almost all FSX addons (the billions of them?) are "cheap". Some of us have spent hundreds of dollars or more on this hobby, and tend to weigh our purchases with at least a little scrutiny.

 

Most importantly, implying (or in your case, outright stating) that any one of the many people who have experienced FPS losses with Experience X have done so because they haphazardly install "billions of addons" and don't bother to manage their FSX installations is naive, borderline insulting. Believe it or not, things are not so cut-and-dry in the world of applications. Congratulations on having no issues. Despite what you think, FPS issues often affect users through no fault of their own.

 

And....a decent system is not necessarily an "Intel Core, properly overclocked". You are aware of the AMD chipset, aren't you?

 

Lastly, if you experienced no FPS losses or issues of any kind with Experience X, I'm curious as to what on earth compelled you to "test it on 3 different systems"? If you did, please list the detailed specs of each of those systems, so those of us with "indecent" systems can have a real-world comparison to draw from. Or, are you just trying to support your own assertions by distorting the truth?

 

I realize that you're in all likelihood a 12 year old boy, so I don't expect any real answers to the questions I've asked, and that's okay. You did however press me to ask them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read everything you said, and reading comprehension has never been a weak point for me. I have plenty of valid points to make, I just didn't feel the need. But since you asked, I could easily point out that while it's nice you're enjoying Experience X, simply saying "It's amazing!" isn't a very compelling argument for buying it. How about screenshots? Drawing comparisons to stock FSX? Or to competing products? Even explaining what it does, as a start?

 

Well if you are really that internet incompitant to simply GO to the page where they sell it to actually READ what it is, it's quite amazing, they actually provide screenshots there too!

 

And you obviously didn't read my *FIRST* post, because I actually did compare it to UTX night lights.

 

Most importantly, implying (or in your case, outright stating) that any one of the many people who have experienced FPS losses with Experience X have done so because they haphazardly install "billions of addons" and don't bother to manage their FSX installations is naive, borderline insulting. Believe it or not, things are not so cut-and-dry in the world of applications. Congratulations on having no issues. Despite what you think, FPS issues often affect users through no fault of their own.

 

In FSX, they are cut-out-and "dry". Actually, that's how FSX works. Add on too many things, and it's simple. POOR PERFORMANCE. Don't believe me? Try it. IF you are *wise*, try to understand that word. *wise* with your number of ADDONS, you fps will be fine, and this includes the FSX sliders. And this is exactly the case. Do you think they would have performance problems after turning autogen down? Certainly not, and, as i've said 2 TIMES now, after testing on 3 DIFFERENT computers, this is certainly the case here.

 

And....a decent system is not necessarily an "Intel Core, properly overclocked". You are aware of the AMD chipset, aren't you?

 

Of coarse not limited *to* an Intel Core. But CERTAINLY not an "Amd Chipset" model compared to an Intel Core i5 or i7.

 

Lastly, if you experienced no FPS losses or issues of any kind with Experience X, I'm curious as to what on earth compelled you to "test it on 3 different systems"? If you did, please list the detailed specs of each of those systems, so those of us with "indecent" systems can have a real-world comparison to draw from. Or, are you just trying to support your own assertions by distorting the truth?

 

If you would care to drop down the "TAB" on the left next to my profile. You can see my specs of my current system. AND the other systems in my computer shop, that all contiain DIFFERENT processors.

 

I realize that you're in all likelihood a 12 year old boy, so I don't expect any real answers to the questions I've asked, and that's okay. You did however press me to ask them.

 

Clearly I am not the one coming to this topic, looking for a fight. Clearly the only 12 year old "girl", would be you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The people who reported the "fps issues" obviously had the combination of a billion other addons running at once, with bloom, and probably with sliders too high. And most likely a system that was not adiquite for FSX. It was *not* experience x.

 

Key words, *decent system*, meaning an Intel Core, properly overclocked.

 

Um, no, actually. I had a significant performance hit. This is on a new FSX install on a newly built, freshly tuned rig (click on "my PC" on the left margin for my specs). Only add-ons installed during the test were GEX and UTX (testing systematically with UTX lights on, then off). System tuning according to Nick Needham's tuning guides over at Simforums. If you don't know him, you should.

 

Now, steering clear of the ad hominems and the absolute statements - what I found was that Experience X was fine in some tests and very burdensome in others. My test area is in default Washington DC and environs (my local area IRL). In general, performance can vary in DC depending on whether you're flying toward, parallel to or away from the Federal City. In the most challenging settings (flying toward the Mall), Experience X made things worse - the performance hit was at least 10 percent and sometimes as much as 30 percent.

 

Now, it's possible that DC is one of the less efficient FSX locations (not quite as bad as New York, but not good). And in a location without its own performance issues, Experience X might be fine. I'd be happy to give it another try at some point. But I think that, as with a lot of things in FSX, there are major variables depending on how, what and where you fly, and it's hard to generalize.

 

Now, to all - how 'bout we act like adult people trying to figure out how an add-on performs, and turn down the zingers a bit.

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have plenty of valid points to make, I just didn't feel the need.

 

Then why post anything at all? :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't be without them. No FPS issues and I have them set at extreme.

 

It does appear that some are experiencing FPS Issues whilst others are not. It seems that some variable is intervening here!

 

Rather than arguing about the details of what someone has said would it not benefit everyone to debate why for some their is no problem and others experience issues?

 

Their must be a reason for this!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a huge thread about it a few weeks/months back...

 

Seemed some had real fps issues. I considered it but decided against it based on the negative feedback. Also the preview video was taken with bloom on, which a lot of people don't run...

Good point, Ryan. I had the same impression, a mixed one.

 

Here's the thread. http://forum.avsim.n...-light-for-fsx/ Or this one. http://forum.avsim.n...1-experience-x/

 

Rather than arguing about the details of what someone has said would it not benefit everyone to debate why for some their is no problem and others experience issues?

I fully agree. It would help judging if it's worth the investment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um, no, actually. I had a significant performance hit. This is on a new FSX install on a newly built, freshly tuned rig (click on "my PC" on the left margin for my specs). Only add-ons installed during the test were GEX and UTX (testing systematically with UTX lights on, then off). System tuning according to Nick Needham's tuning guides over at Simforums. If you don't know him, you should.

Thanks.

 

Well what other "addons" were you running. Did you have a complex aircraft? Did you have heavy weather? What were your sliders at?

 

Their must be a reason for this!

 

There is. It's not being wise on what you are putting your computer though. Like sliders, for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...