Jump to content

V5.1HF1 or V4.5HF3


Predrag Danicic

Recommended Posts

Predrag Danicic

Ladies and gents!

Maybe this comes answered for a thousand times, however I am stuck with a dilemma about what to do.
V5.1HF1 provides smoothness, better frames rendered, however with limited VRAM I am having (6GB, usable 5.1GB on 1660Super) I have to deal with visuals downgrades in order to get suitable and decent VRAM usage to avoid DEVICE_HUNG errors.
V4.5HF3 is stable, VRAM is not something you take into account with DX11, and everything works perfectly, albeit with FPS being at cost if settings are not dealt with correctly.
Next to that ENVTEX+ENVSHADE+AS16 is what I generally use on day to day basis.

As most of you are long term simmers, same as myself, what would you say is better to stick to? Stay on V5 or roll back to good old 4.5HF3?

Thanks!

Link to post
Rafal Haczek
3 hours ago, Predrag Danicic said:

6GB, usable 5.1GB

I'm no expert, but with this little VRAM, I would stay with 4.5.
I'm on 5.0 (I do not think VRAM usage has significantly improved between 5.0 and 5.1) and in some intensive scenery areas (I like flying big airports in FSL airbuses) I get around 6-7 GB usage to begin with. It won't go higher, but down to around 3-4 GB while departing, climbing and cruising, and rise again when approaching the destination airport. But I have 12 GB VRAM, so I don't get CTD's.
That is my experience.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Koen Meier
13 minutes ago, Rafal Haczek said:

I'm no expert, but with this little VRAM, I would stay with 4.5.
I'm on 5.0 (I do not think VRAM usage has significantly improved between 5.0 and 5.1) and in some intensive scenery areas (I like flying big airports in FSL airbuses) I get around 6-7 GB usage to begin with. It won't go higher, but down to around 3-4 GB while departing, climbing and cruising, and rise again when approaching the destination airport. But I have 12 GB VRAM, so I don't get CTD's.
That is my experience.

i agree with you on that one. running 8gb of vram is the bare minimum for v5 of p3d. 

Link to post
Predrag Danicic
i agree with you on that one. running 8gb of vram is the bare minimum for v5 of p3d. 
Thanks a lot.

Most likely will go back to 4.5 due to the fact that everything in 5.1. has to be downgraded in order to get VRAM to 3.1-3.9 at the Airport with GSX and between 2.2 and 2.7 during Cruise.

Poslato sa YAL-L21 pomoću Tapatoka

Link to post
Dmitriy Toropov
1 hour ago, Rafal Haczek said:

I'm no expert, but with this little VRAM, I would stay with 4.5.
I'm on 5.0 (I do not think VRAM usage has significantly improved between 5.0 and 5.1) and in some intensive scenery areas (I like flying big airports in FSL airbuses) I get around 6-7 GB usage to begin with. It won't go higher, but down to around 3-4 GB while departing, climbing and cruising, and rise again when approaching the destination airport. But I have 12 GB VRAM, so I don't get CTD's.
That is my experience.

Yes,

4.5HF3 is the most stable platform after FS2004. EA that is so famous with the 5.1 is easily replicable by PTA edits + REX. 

Unless major add-one developers give up on the 4.5, I will stay on it.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
António Abreu

Hey,

I posted this on ActiveSky and Prepared3D forum over topics concerning the DXGI error.

I think I now understood that the issue with DXGI is related to the way DirectX 12 handles VRAM. I had my textures at 4096 resolution which was consuming lots of VRAM. I decided to reduce it to 2048 and performed a flight from LFPG (Taxi2Gate) to EGLL (OrbX TE + Aerosoft EGLL) and monitored how match VRAM was being used all the way. It was clear that when getting low on EGLL approach the number rose to around 6.1 GB (GPU is a 1080 with 8 GB VRAM). This alowed me to complete the flight without a DXGI error. The VRAM at LFPG was around 4 GB but the scenery is no so "hungry" and no OrbX TE there.
This was only one flight, I know, but it hit the most complex combination of scenery I have (OrbX + AS + ASP3D + ASCA + FSLabs A320 + night flight) so I have some confidence (only some!) that DXGI errors won't happen many more times.

Enjoy!

PS1: after closing P3DV5.1 the magic number came down to 0.2! It is amazing the amount of VRAM that the simulator consumes.
PS2: It is a step back that now we have to manage VRAM ourselves if we don't want to have crashes when with DirectX 11 that was done automatically. It could get slow but wouldn't crash due to lack of VRAM.

Taking this into consideration, with 6GB of VRAM I would probably stay with 4.5 HF3 but I know we all hate the feeling of "getting behind" on these things so it is a tough decision ... unless of course you ask Santa for a new GPU!

Happy landings!

Link to post
K. Serhan Onur

I'm using V4.5 HF3 still. I tested V5.1 but I don't like it. Some things didn't satisfy me (really. I don't know what is it exactly!) So I am using V4.5 still. And some times XP11.50 And I don't think to "go back" V5 for a long time. If Fslabs products (A32X) works XP, I never back to look at P3D any version.

Link to post
Markus Burkhard
On 12/17/2020 at 1:43 PM, Dmitriy Toropov said:

Unless major add-one developers give up on the 4.5, I will stay on it.  

Just for the record, I would like to add that people with GPUs having 10GB of VRAM or greater have zero reason to stay with P3Dv4. Those who do stay at v4 miss out on the substantial performance increase, plus some other goodies such as better PBR handling.

Even those using 8GB GPUs can consider an upgrade IF they go easy on the photoreal landscape covering and could live with a global 2048 pixel texture setting if some unoptimised scenery requires that.

The markets will get flooded with second-hand 2080Ti GPUs in the coming months, which will eventually be dirt cheap since the successor's MSRP was halved by nVidia. Right now 2nd hand 2080Tis are still expensive as many try to squeeze out some money out of their expensive purchase and can succeed since 3080 availability is so low. But this will change rapidly in 3 months or so and prices will fall, resulting in the perfect opportunity for a cheap upgrade to run v5.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Predrag Danicic

Thanks guys for your replies.

I am definitely looking forward towards upgrading MoBo together with a 30xx GPU within the following monhts. That should give both the performance boost and also make me not think about VRAM usage for the sim :D

  • Like 1
Link to post
Daniel Saffran

Don't forget the new Radeons (Big-Navi). Since VRAM is the new main concern, AMD has the much better offer for P3D v5 imho. (And I'm a typical Nvidia-Buyer ^^)
 

Link to post
Predrag Danicic
Don't forget the new Radeons (Big-Navi). Since VRAM is the new main concern, AMD has the much better offer for P3D v5 imho. (And I'm a typical Nvidia-Buyer ^^)
 
Open to suggestions

Poslato sa YAL-L21 pomoću Tapatoka

Link to post
Koen Meier
42 minutes ago, Daniel Saffran said:

Don't forget the new Radeons (Big-Navi). Since VRAM is the new main concern, AMD has the much better offer for P3D v5 imho. (And I'm a typical Nvidia-Buyer ^^)
 

But also consider driver support.

Link to post
Rado Sutto

I tested on my machine Ryzen 7 3700X @4200, 32GB RAM and GTX 1060 6GB v5 and v4. I had not any performance gain, only trouble with DXGI. EA in v5 is not in final stage, can't depict towering cumuluses, clouds cover is flat and uniform with waffle looking clouds from above. Many times I seen strange artifact on terrain edges, or windshield borders. 

I still have not any reason to switch from v4.5 to v5.x

Link to post
Markus Burkhard
5 hours ago, Rado Sutto said:

I tested on my machine Ryzen 7 3700X @4200, 32GB RAM and GTX 1060 6GB v5 and v4. I had not any performance gain, only trouble with DXGI. EA in v5 is not in final stage, can't depict towering cumuluses, clouds cover is flat and uniform with waffle looking clouds from above. Many times I seen strange artifact on terrain edges, or windshield borders. 

I still have not any reason to switch from v4.5 to v5.x

Performance gains in v5 are real. But your video card generated all those DXGI errors due to low VRAM. v5 with 6GB of VRAM can only be used with low settings and without any non-optiomised scenery. So I guess in your use case you'd need a new video card first before being able to enjoy v5.

I agree though that EA is not usable at this time. I turn it off and simply enjoy the enormous performance gains and lighting/PBR improvements. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Rado Sutto

Markus :

I found config, when v5 did not crashed on DXGI even on long flights. You can compare this v5 short test (from cca 39:18) :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eS1_OlUu10U

with this one v4.5 (from cca 17:29) :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJ_rIqUR-EY

In v4.5 I have much more complex scenery than in v5, I use more complex airplane, but performance is very similar. Reason may be in my not very good CPU - Ryzen 7 have low singlecore performance with slow memory controller :(

Link to post
  • 1 month later...
Dmitriy Toropov
On 12/27/2020 at 8:20 AM, Markus Burkhard said:

 

I agree though that EA is not usable at this time. I turn it off and simply enjoy the enormous performance gains and lighting/PBR improvements. 

Well, the V5 is all about EA mostly. I really hope they would fix it in 5.2 or 5.whatever

Link to post
Rob Carlassara

Happy with 4.5 HF3

Did try 5.1 HF1 and was impressed with the performance increase, but visually just did not do it for me.

4.5 rock solid stable. 5.1 - even with EA off and VRAM usage under 40% - 3 DXGI crashes.

No Tomatoshade/PTA is a deal breaker for me. Tried ENVDIR and not much of a difference . I found the ground mesh and the scenery to be kind of dull. And no REX either. There is a tweak in Tomatoshade that adds more shadow to the mesh terrain, thus increasing the detail  . Flying in and around KLAS and desert Southwest- it makes things more real. 

If somebody can pick up Tomatoshade and continue development even if it becomes payware, I would probably upgrade. 

 

But MSFS is looking very tempting at the moment. Just have to get my hand on a 3080TI GPU first

Link to post
Koen Meier

Rex is compatible by means of beta version. I doubt tomatoshade gets an update since v5 changed pbr. There is a new version on the horizon of v5.

Link to post
  • 1 month later...
Jude Bradley

I rolled back to 4.5 yesterday and today because the screen textures were driving me nuts. 

4.5 has better text and screen displays on both PMDG and FSLabs. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Predrag Danicic

Yep, can't agree more.

V4.5HF3 has it's charm, although V5.1 is way better regarding performance and EA shaders are absolutely lovely. Unfortunately, due to only 6 Gb of VRAM I have to opt out of V5 because I would have to reduce almost every option in order to have it run properly :(

  • Like 1
Link to post
×
×
  • Create New...