• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Frame rate problems with Carenado C90B King Air

goshawk45 said:
Hi,

I am having a major problem with the Carenado C90B King Air (http://www.carenado.com/CarSite/Portal/index.php). The frame rates are going at about 5-10 maybe at most and its basically unflyable due to the fps.:banghead: Is there a solution out there to this problem, because I haven't found one yet. Any help is appreciated?
Click to expand...

Wow, that's an older plane, not the GTX version with the glass panel. I use this older one too and have zero fps problems with it and I'm on a laptop. I do go in and lower all the 16mb texture files way down to 1024x1024 and guage files to 2048x2048, but that's jsut because im on a laptop. But this old steam guage plane shouldn't be causing you any problems. I have had many a problem with Carenado G1000 and G600 planes, I can't run them unless I change out the G1000, like I had to with the 208EX, and the TBM850. I have the old Lionheart Quest Kodiac and I use that G1000, (an old easy on the frames unit) in those Carenado planes and it made the fps jump right up there as if they had normal steam guages. But the old C90 has normal steam guages so I can't understand why you would be having problems with that concerning fps.
 
Carenado's HD aircraft can be pretty hard on a computer, especially when they are equipped with any of their glass panel instruments/gauges. The Avidyne 500 of theirs is known to be a real frame rate hog, especially when it is in terrain mode.
 
Carenado C90 FPS

goshawk45 said:
Is there something I can do?
Click to expand...

I have found that the fps is also dependent on what freeware/payware fps intensive airports you are flying from and landing at. That with any HD aircraft can be a problem. Check out your fps at the airport with something like the default Cessna 172 and see what you have. Also unless you are using Join FS in a multiplayer mode, you can make your frames "unlimited" to see if that helps too. I'm no expert, these are things that others have told me to do.
 
Try contacting Carenado?
Try applying for a refund?


I'll always fail to understand how rendering performance is prioritized way lower than detailing and smoothness (using the term loosely here) and I've returned three of my last four payware purchases due to unacceptable framerate impact and my hardware is by no means weak.
To be fair, development environments might not make any impact obvious since they're most of the time bare bone configurations optimized for quick startup times. But in an average configuration (lots of autogen, detailed weather, lots of AI, using other add-ons concurrently), it will become evident very quickly how well a work-in-progress add-on will perform.
More demo versions of payware add-ons and a change in philosophy would be a tremendous help in improving compatibility with sim setups.
 
goshawk45 said:
Is there something I can do?
Click to expand...

Tell us your computer specsto start with. You shouldn't be having trouble with this old plane. If I can run it smoothly on my laptop with just a 1 gig video card anyone should be able to run it. The link you provided just went to the front Carenado page. Are you sure you are running the C90B and not the GTX?

Something is setup wrong somewhere in fsx or you have an ancient computer or something. Have you looked at the fsx tweka an the various forums and tried them? Are other planes running fine? If they have steam guages just like the Carenado does there shouldn't be anything much different in performance. What other paid addons do you have? We need far more info in order to help.
 
My computer specs are:

Vram: 2gb
ram: 8gb
Processor: quad core 3.5ghz

I have my fps set to unlimited, if I go to say friday harbor (default airport) the fps varies in the VC from 5-10, outside view 7-22. If I go to Austin Bergstrom Airport (My home airfield), with addon scenery that works with every other aircraft I have (payware or freeware), I get more like 3-10 fps from VC, and slightly better from outside view. I submitted a support ticket yesterday, so we shall see what comes from that. Would Reinstalling the aircraft help possibly?
 
goshawk45 said:
My computer specs are:
Vram: 2gb
ram: 8gb
Processor: quad core 3.5ghz
Would Reinstalling the aircraft help possibly?
Click to expand...

I doubt a reinstall would help.
You might have to set your scenery etc lower and move your FPS settings down to 25 FPS.
Given your specs I think (just me, myself) running max FPS could be dragging your performance down.
Nothing else I can suggest.
:encouragement:
 
wombat666 said:
I doubt a reinstall would help.
You might have to set your scenery etc lower and move your FPS settings down to 25 FPS.
Given your specs I think (just me, myself) running max FPS could be dragging your performance down.
Nothing else I can suggest.
:encouragement:
Click to expand...

Thanks, I'll give that a shot
 
Your system is not that much different from mine. Perhaps you need to adjust some settings in FSX. The following are my settings and they work pretty well with my aging Core2Quad 9650, overclocked to 3.8 GHz, 4GB RAM, and 1 GB VRAM nvidia 560Ti SOC. I did recently move FSX to a SSD and I can say that it helped my old computer.

Graphics tab:
Frame rate target: Unlimited (but try limiting to 20, 24, 30 and 60 as these limits work better on some computers).
Filtering: Anisotropic
Anti-aliasing checked (you can experiment with filtering settings to see what works best for you).
Global texture resolution: Very high
Advanced animations: check

Aircraft tab:
High-resolution 3-D virtual cockpit: check
Aircraft landing lights illuminate ground: check

Scenery tab:
Level of detail radius: Medium
Mesh complexity: 70
Mesh resolution: 10m
Texture resolution: 7cm
Water effects: High 1x
Land detail textures: check
Scenery complexity: Very Dense
Autogen density: Normal
Special effects detail: Medium

Weather tab:
Cloud draw distance: 60mi/96km
Thermal visualizations: None
Cloud detail: Detailed clouds, cloud coverage density: Maximum
Rate at which weather changes over time: Medium

Traffic tab:
Airline traffic density: 0% (I use Ultimate Traffic 2 which uses its own density).
General aviation traffic density: 0% (Ultimate Traffic 2 here as well).
Airport vehicle density: Low
Road vehicles: 5%
Ships and ferries: 30%
Leisure boats: 10%


AI traffic, LOD radius, autogen, shadows, light bloom, and animated jetways tend to be the biggest resource hogs in FSX, especially when using DX9 graphics. DX10 overcomes a lot of these issues, but to use DX10 you really need Steve's DX10 Fixer as MicroSoft never finished implementing DX10 in FSX.
 
stansdds said:
Your system is not that much different from mine. Perhaps you need to adjust some settings in FSX. The following are my settings and they work pretty well with my aging Core2Quad 9650, overclocked to 3.8 GHz, 4GB RAM, and 1 GB VRAM nvidia 560Ti SOC. I did recently move FSX to a SSD and I can say that it helped my old computer.

Graphics tab:
Frame rate target: Unlimited (but try limiting to 20, 24, 30 and 60 as these limits work better on some computers).
Filtering: Anisotropic
Anti-aliasing checked (you can experiment with filtering settings to see what works best for you).
Global texture resolution: Very high
Advanced animations: check

Aircraft tab:
High-resolution 3-D virtual cockpit: check
Aircraft landing lights illuminate ground: check

Scenery tab:
Level of detail radius: Medium
Mesh complexity: 70
Mesh resolution: 10m
Texture resolution: 7cm
Water effects: High 1x
Land detail textures: check
Scenery complexity: Very Dense
Autogen density: Normal
Special effects detail: Medium

Weather tab:
Cloud draw distance: 60mi/96km
Thermal visualizations: None
Cloud detail: Detailed clouds, cloud coverage density: Maximum
Rate at which weather changes over time: Medium

Traffic tab:
Airline traffic density: 0% (I use Ultimate Traffic 2 which uses its own density).
General aviation traffic density: 0% (Ultimate Traffic 2 here as well).
Airport vehicle density: Low
Road vehicles: 5%
Ships and ferries: 30%
Leisure boats: 10%


AI traffic, LOD radius, autogen, shadows, light bloom, and animated jetways tend to be the biggest resource hogs in FSX, especially when using DX9 graphics. DX10 overcomes a lot of these issues, but to use DX10 you really need Steve's DX10 Fixer as MicroSoft never finished implementing DX10 in FSX.
Click to expand...

Thank you so much, that worked really well, get almost 60fps in low scenery areas and 25-30fps in scenery rich areas!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top