There is little you can do to avoid halving your frame rate if you want to maintain high image fidelity. Apparently, this "cartoonish" look is exactly what happens in nature, for some folks. This will likely change - although for some reason, a LOT of people really like the lack of blending and low color depth for cloud interiors. Second, the 圎 cloud depiction is awful, for the moment. First, the 圎 1.09 atmosphere does look great - best I have seen. It's hard to compare ATM because 圎 is unfinished. Since I just purchased SMP, I thought I'd add to the discussion. There's a growing possibility 圎nviro may be better than ActiveSky, by relying on feature count.
#Skymaxx pro 4 settings update
I think this update adds the missing link in my simulator, and I believe 圎nviro has filled the last gaps and made my simulator complete.Īlso keep ActiveSky in the back of your mind, although we've heard nothing from it since FlightSimCon last year, and 圎nviro is slowly getting better and better. It may be a better idea to wait for 1.08, which is being polished as you read this. I personally like the shading the clouds have in the new version too - a few preview screenshots look like the real thing at times. SkyMaxx Pro received its last update in August last year, and it was a somewhat small update, whereas 圎nviro in September had that big 1.07 update.ĭon't forget it's not all about the clouds - 圎nviro's new atmosphere model in 1.08 is second-to-none, and worth a lot of money on its own. OK, so it's more expensive, but now that 1.08 detaches it from Laminar Research's code, we should have more frequent updates. I've never had anything but smooth flying with prop planes at low levels and low speeds., and never had a glitch during final with slower plane speeds on approach.I'd be more inclined to go with 圎nviro. I could put everything on my SSHD, but that's reserved for the OS, and the slight pauses over extremely dense scenery/clouds is not a problem. My 4 cores do not seem to be helping load scenery from my fast HDs. I know that cloud settings, especially cloud draw distance in SkyMaxx settings and scenery draw distance in XP10 settings are killers.īottom line is that no matter what you have, you can, with the right settings, bring any computer down to 20's for fps or lower. I suspect the occasional pauses over very dense scenery with heavy clouds is due to data transfer, not CPU/GPU limitations. This is a rig that generates over 450fps in FSX under light clouds and sparse scenery with default textures. My CPU is an Intel 4790K with 4 cores, (8 cores hyperthreaded) and HTing is not turned off. In normal flight over London (for example), in heavy clouds, I'm getting somewhere around 45fps with about 22% CPU and 22% GPU usage shown, yet there is a loading pause on rare occasion. I'm using the HD mesh V2 which is much more dense than the default mesh, and I have SkyMaxx Pro and UrbanMaxx installed, both of which are spooled up toward the high end. Even combined with a 4GB nVidia GTX 970 superclocked VRAM card, the data is not always able to load the CPU smoothly on rare occasion. My XP10 is loaded onto an extremely fast Seagate 4TB hybrid drive with 64GB of cache, running on an Asus Maximum VII Hero ROG motherboard with SATA3 6GB data transfer. I do see a few pauses during flight in which it is obvious that textures are being loaded. I have an extremely fast system that I just built. It does answer the question of more cores being utilized if they are there. He is also careful not to recommend specific CPUs, address the results of hyperthreading, or commit himself to the better of speed vs. Good link, but not very definitive answers since it was written during, not after, development of XP10, and the hardware was 2010 vintage.
0 kommentar(er)
