Page 1 of 1

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2012 11:18 pm
by benniehanas
This is more a software question, but I guess it is hardware too.

I've seen some cool stuff with C3 rendering (Apple recently bought out) and a few others too. I was wondering that with D3D11 enabling better GPU rendering compared to relying mainly on CPU rendering, will it enable more realistic addons for scenery as well as FULLY utalizing a second or third GPU? The scenery with, for example, games like BF3 or Crysis 3 look much more realistic than even Orbx and they use GPU's heavily for rendering. The 2 exampled games do not represent real cities I know and were only used for examples. People are and will be coming to the table with 500/600/and even 700 series GTX as well as 6900/7900 and 8900 series and above Radeon in crossfire and SLI, or just as one GPU. This is especially true with professional deployments. These new systems can handle much more realism than even the latest games of today provide.

I was wondering how D3D11 will set the stage for Lockheed's developers, and also third parties to really bring more emmersion to the simulator? Flight simulators still live back in mid 2000 graphics wise because of the coding from Microsoft which is a shame especially when many users invested 1-3k on hardware bought after 2007.

I've attached a youtube link of C3 in action as an example:


maybe things can be taken even farther than C3. FSX is locked back in time, but Prepar is free to continually develop to incorporate the newest technologies.

One final question is will D3D11 utalize more than 2 or 4 cores effectively?

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2012 2:17 am
by mdenadal

I'm not a Prepar3D developer, so I can't speak for them but let me make some considerations.

Is Prepar3D a completely new product, written for scratch and therefore suitable to adopt the latest cutting edge technologies ?

No, it's not. It's an evolution of a great old product.

What will happen if Prepar3D developers break retro compatibility to be able to implement fantastic new graphic features ?

Who knows ? But I fear that many users will not be happy to throw out the window many products purchased over the years.

I bet that out there many guys are still using FS 2004.

Are we sure that the key is a new outstanding engine looking like Outerra or C3 ?

I don't think so.

I think we need an engine capable to use new hardware power to let developer pump all the contents they need.

Should we stay with mid 2000 graphic look ? In my opinion this is not a problem, especially considering what commercial simulators are offering graphic wise.

Prepar3D developers have a really hard task in front of them.

Adapting FSX 3D engine to get a graphic pipeline able to use many cores and GPUs without breaking compatibily is really complex !

Good work, guys !

Just my 2 cents.


Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 12:57 am
by benniehanas
Sorry for the confusion. I only mentioned it as I read from a Prepar developer that Lockheed was in the middle of finishing D3D11 rendering for their new system and wondered what it could open up. That's all. I know nothing about programming and was thinking that if users brought the graphics sliders down from the highest settings, the program would again utalize more CPU for processing compared to GPU. Again, I'm not a developer either, just building off what I heard. It's like when DX10 came out for FSX, I'm sure hundreds of people were wondering how it would better the game graphics wise. This is no different.

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:54 am
by mdenadal
Oh, I'm sorry too.

For sure I don't want to criticize or start a flame.

I was only writing some consideration on what, in my opinion, is legit to expect from the new version.

Our hype is really high, so the risk to be disappointed (aka Microsoft Flight) is high too.


Waiting for P3D 2.0 :-)

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 10:26 am
by Zach Heylmun
Hey Guys,

Massimo pretty much hit the nail on the head there with his assessment of the problem. We are indeed working on a new DX11 rendering system, and the goal is to allow the system to better take advantage of modern hardware. Moving from DX9 to 11 allows us to architect the rendering pipeline so that we can utilize the GPU more efficiently, but doing so while maintaining backwards compatibility with third party content is an extremely complex problem. One more thing to note is that DirectX11 is just the interface that the application uses to communicate with the graphics card. Switching to the newer API allows us to do some cool new things with special effects and the like, but it will not change the content that we are drawing.

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:09 pm
by benniehanas
What do you mean it will not change the content you are drawing? Would it be up to the 3rd parties to build patches to address the new functionality if Lockheed gives them a guideline? Sounds very promising.

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:42 am
by Zach Heylmun
What I mean is that changing the rendering system will not effect the quality of the models and textures being rendered, it will simply allow them to be rendered more efficiently. This in turn would allow for higher quality content to be used within the simulation.

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 2:36 pm
by benniehanas
oh ok. more FPS