Can Somebody Explain Me Prepar3D Please?

[vgbaron]

Rupert - I don't take it personally. No matter what ANYONE says, the decision as to which is better is purely personal. For me, P3D is second to none. I had my FX set up perfectly an the same with P3D - no comparison IMHO. Others see it the exact opposite.

 

 

 

Please do. That IMO was exactly the question that the OP asked.

 

Just two off the top of my head

 

LM removed all assembly code from the sim - the effect is to free up CPU time and smoother program flow. It also allowed LM coders to do things internally they couldn't do prior.

 

They switched huge amounts of graphics processing to the GPU - that ALONE is worth the price of admission. Again freeing up the CPU and giving the programmers more leeway with the "eye candy" which is how most seem to judge.

 

Smooth is smooth - if it's at 20fps or at 60fps - it makes no difference *IF* it's smooth.

 

The majority of problems that I have seen in many forums are caused by add-ons not by P3D.

 

Other things also - LM is using new third party libraries for various visual graphics, they've made P3D more compatible with multi core processors, etc.

 

IMHO, FSX:SE is the best FSX but it still falls short of P3D. Now, that said - it STILL comes down to the type of flying you do. If you fly tubes at FL30, you are not going to SEE as big a difference although what's going on under the hood will be affecting your flights for the better. If you fly low and slow you also get the benefit of the stunning visuals you can get with clouds and shadows and rolling waves, etc.

 

And to me, the most important benefit - it has LM behind it, under commercial development and the response from their commercial clients is what drives the improvements and WE, the "casual" simmer get to reap the benefits.

 

Vic

[JennaKS777]

Would be nice if you shared your thoughts here when you have P3D and spent some time with it.

 

That would IMHO be a great help to others who are on the fence too.

I already Tried P3D and for me is quite better than FSX... I'm gonna get This week p3D

[Rupert]

Why? Is the boxed set worth money? I got the Box and the Acceleration pack box.

 

I also have the FS2004 in the Metal Tin.

 

Yes, it's worth money. A whole lot more than you ever paid for it. But DO YOURSELF A FAVOR, KEEP IT! I'M SURE KEEPING MINE! If P3D version 4, if it ever comes out, is better than the version of it I have, I might change my mind. But for now P3D is the one I'd gladly sell if I could.

[alverthein]

Hey Rupert....I think I remember you flew in Viet Nam but I may be wrong....anyways...I landed in Viet Nam on a commercial Continental on my way back to the States after my tour in Thailand (Korat) ended...I used to spend my days off at the USAF Base there watching the Phantoms take off to bomb Viet Nam and then come back and land....so I must be in your age group LOL...take care al verthein, tucson

[evm]

LM removed all assembly code from the sim - the effect is to free up CPU time and smoother program flow. It also allowed LM coders to do things internally they couldn't do prior.

 

Assembler or Assemblies? As a compiled C++ source file basically is Assembler code, then you are saying, that there was managed code in there too? So as a consequence they have rewritten modules to make them more efficient. Probably those that they could safely touch without breaking the whole thing. TBH, I would expect nothing less if they sell me a new version of anything. Sadly, this improvement did not change the functionality in any way - it remained exactly the same. It is more like a "meta-benefit". But if actual Assembler code is what you mean, then the only reson to get rid of those is maintainance cost, not performance. Nothing runs as fast as Assembler done well. It is just a beast to implement and maintain because of the massive size and complexity of the source code. You don't want that if you have to pay programmers for doing it.

 

"They switched huge amounts of graphics processing..." people always make this sound like a big deal and some kind of great architecture decision. IMHO this is a normal result of switching to the next generation of DirectX. Of course DX11 does more processing on the GPU, that is what it was designed for. The GPUs back then could not even do that type of job, so FSX never had that choice (except with the DX10 mod). The funny thing is, that the sim now has a lot more graphics processing to do than before, and while it is really done by the GPU, if your system is not top of the line up-to-date, then the effect on FPS is minimal. You could argue that what you see is better now - but that "better" IMHO opinion depends on your personal preference. I am one of the few who does not like the visual appearance (of anything DX11 and beyond) - it is looking too fuzzy for my taste. And I cannot see those "huge amounts" in any circumstance. Before I had the CPU at 100% and the GPU at 85% - now I have both at 100% - for something that for me is not that important or desireable...

 

Smoothness: All I'm saying is, that (me personally, I) cannot get smoothness on my system with 30 FPS or lower. I have different requirements.

 

Vic, I'm sorry, I don't want to aggravate you. It is just that I get high blood pressure too when I read statements that have been reiterated on the net until everyone believed them - without reflecting on the technical background (and I don't think the manufacturer even claimed this themselves - these statements AFAIK came up on the forums first, uttered by beta testers - but I may be wrong of course). Anyway, this makes people believe, that no matter what requirements and what system they have, they just switch to "the new" and the brave new world starts. I tried to convey that it could be advisable to think hard about the own requirements first, then decide which software is the right one. Of course "I want the NEW" is a requirement too, no doubt.

 

"We the casual simmer" reap benefits because they let us. Must be an oversight on their part; they are saying quite clearly that this application is for professional use only and that we are not their intended target audience.

[Rupert]

Hey Rupert....I think I remember you flew in Viet Nam but I may be wrong....anyways...I landed in Viet Nam on a commercial Continental on my way back to the States after my tour in Thailand (Korat) ended...I used to spend my days off at the USAF Base there watching the Phantoms take off to bomb Viet Nam and then come back and land....so I must be in your age group LOL...take care al verthein, tucson

 

Yes Sir, two tours, got med-evacced to the states both times.

 

My avatar was taken at Dong Ha. I'm standing on the open clam shell door of a CH-46. If you look close just off the fingers of my left hand you'll see a .50 cal. bullet exit hole in the rotor head. It's right next to the shiny rotor blade cinch bolt. Those armor piercing rounds will go through almost anything.

[criticalmass]

You buy the version you qualify for. We do not discuss that here.

 

Oh? Why not? IMO, the various "versions" of P3D are ripe for a lot of discussion.

 

The term "qualify" is mis-leading; LM does not ask for proof of any sort that a prospective customer "qualifies" for a particular "license". They're just glad for the business.

[vgbaron]

Oh? Why not? IMO, the various "versions" of P3D are ripe for a lot of discussion.

 

The term "qualify" is mis-leading; LM does not ask for proof of any sort that a prospective customer "qualifies" for a particular "license". They're just glad for the business.

 

 

It is along story - suffice it to say, if you start to discuss the eula and which product you or anyone else should qualify for on many forums, including this one, the topic will be locked. If one continues to post, they will be banned.

 

That's all for this one.