• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

FS2004 Gauge resolution and performance assistance (SOLVED)

antaris

antaris

Messages
1,451
Country
mexico
Hello lads

When I start the Bell 429, I honestly belived that she deserved a "super nice" and high resolution gauges (I was wrong...) and still I am. However, I fell in a turmoil and I am paying with blood for being so naive!

The combination of 3D gauge eye candy, details in the VC and gauges are killing the model. I began taking in mind the top resolution in FS9: 1024x1024 pixels per image. Looking the instruments, the "more logical" gauge size to think of were the LCD's.

Based on that size limit and taking in mind that "there are no limits for XML gauge images (wrong...)", I decided to take a background with an arbitrary resolution of 772 x 1028 pixels (well... not necessarily).

In my model, they have the next dimensions:
Base: 20.11 cm (0.2011 m)
Height: 27.46 cm (0.2746 m)

Collectively with the dimensions, I have the following resolutions rounded to two decimals:
Horizontally: 772 pixels / 20.11 cm = 38.38 pixels/cm
Vertically: 1028 pixels / 27.46 cm = 37.43 pixels/cm

Also, I layout the polygons to place the gauges in eleven sections:
Panel_layout.jpg

All have texture sizes of 1024x1024 pixels, with the exception of the 3 smallest (512x512)

The 2D panels with guages in place look like this:
429_gauges_80.jpg


and the complete VC:
3D_VC_09.jpg


In short, what could I do to enhance the performance?
a) Reduce the gauge size? Bear in mind that my XML code is SUPER BAD and it may be a factor as well... :duck:
b) Remove details from the cabin and VC?

c) delete all 2D panel entries?
d) Delete the helicopter files from my HD (including gmax models)? :yikes::yikes::yikes:

I ran some test in the simulator (FS9) without gauges and my fsp are steady at 40 (that value has been set and fixed by me within the simulator). On the other hand, with the most basic animations and gauges in place, the fps dropped dramatically between 8 - 12 fps in the Seattle Tacoma area (with 0% of AI traffic present o_O). I really want to bring you the best I can create, constrained only by my lack of knowledge; however I don't know the limits for FS9 very well and I badly need to do something about it.

Any thoughts or commentaries would be very appreciated.
In advance, thank you all.
Sergio.
 
I think you could fit the 2 PFDs on a single texture, and the MFD and GPS units on another. That would be a good start.
 
If the panel.cfg have more than two VCockpit sections, the VC gauges will be refreshed very slowly (in fs9, regardless of the FPS).
 
as above... 1 vccockpit entry is great 2 is fine 3 you start to see lag...its a compromise especially on glass cockpits...build as many gauges switches ect as you can in 3d and keep the 2d gauges for the panels only
 
Naruto-kun said:
I think you could fit the 2 PFDs on a single texture, and the MFD and GPS units on another. That would be a good start.
Click to expand...

Naruto:
I was thinking that since the beginning. Will try to do that. However, the polygons for both PFD's are placed in the opposite corners. Perhaps If I split the dashboard in two large polygons will help.

Luka:
I didn't knew that! Now I have a new clue on this. In a matter of fact the panel.cfg calls eleven VCockpit sections . Now I am understanding why she is flying like a brick... o_Oo_Oo_O

I will experiment spliting in two polygons the dasboard and the central console. In that way, I will have only 4 VCockpit sections in the panel.cfg Let's see if it helps.

Thank you both and have a wonderfull day.!
Best regards,
Sergio.
:D
 
Last edited:
Au-MaV said:
as above... 1 vccockpit entry is great 2 is fine 3 you start to see lag...its a compromise especially on glass cockpits...build as many gauges switches ect as you can in 3d and keep the 2d gauges for the panels only
Click to expand...

Hello Au_MaV
Thank you for the head up! I will combine the three ideas given by you, Naruto and Luka. Wish me luck!.
 
Hi
Im assuming you know you can map as many individual pollys to a single 1024x1024 texture..if me id do $P1 2 3 and 4 to one texture and the rest to 2nd 1024x1024 texture..the fun part is using the texture real estate to the best possible res..its all a compromise :) if you have a mixture of rectangular and square mappings you can lay the rectangular one on their side for a better fit and rotate the axis to suit when mapping
 
Au-MaV said:
Im assuming you know you can map as many individual pollys to a single 1024x1024 texture..if me id do $P1 2 3 and 4 to one texture and the rest to 2nd 1024x1024 texture..the fun part is using the texture real estate to the best possible res..its all a compromise :) if you have a mixture of rectangular and square mappings you can lay the rectangular one on their side for a better fit and rotate the axis to suit when mapping
Click to expand...


That's more like it! I will experiment using better my "real estate" LOL. Thank you.
 
Hello lads!!! I am working on this and it will do the trick!!!!!!! Now I only have two entries for VC gauges and I can't tell the difference (regarding graphics); however The performance is HUGEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

THANK YOU ALL :D:D:D:D:D:D
Kindest regards,
Sergio.
 
Last edited:
I've finished the VC!!!

Now, can you tell the difference? (See the images above) ;)
VC_performance_01.jpg

VC_performance_02.jpg

VC_performance_03.jpg

Cheers!
Sergio.
:D
 
Hehe. You would be surprised how much you can economise on resolution without losing anything, yet increase the performance considerably.
 
Naruto-kun said:
Hehe. You would be surprised how much you can economise on resolution without losing anything, yet increase the performance considerably.
Click to expand...

Perhaps is there more? Awesome and thank you.

All the best and Happy Easter!
Sergio.
:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top