OS X X-Plane Settings, comparing like for like

I was hoping to start an X-Plane thread specifically for mac users to post the settings they use. But not just any settings because the frame rate is affected by so many variable that often are not taken into accoutn like the particular view out the window.

So I wanted to be able to agree on certain standards, for example flying around the grand canyon. So we are all on the same page. Full view with no cockpit.

So then we will be able to compare like for like in a meaningful way. So Imac 3.4GHz users with a 6960m can get a proper comparison with say a 5780 desktop or a 6750m, that actually has some meaning. Especially with regards to screen res.

Especially interested in seeing a like for like with the new iMacs and the 680mx compared to a 6970.

Does this sound like something worth doing? It does to me because it's never been done properly before and everyone wants to know that they are getting the best they can.

EDIT: 29TH DEC Some files and settings.

OK here's mine. 2011 iMac 3.4GHz Radeon 2GB Vram 6970m 32GB RAM full

I've not used HDR because I cannot see any difference and the hit that it give the FR is ridiculous like down to 7FPS for example.

Download 'Situations' for Chambery (Alps) Grand Canyon and Katoomba

https://www.dropbox.com/s/s9kandkot6ew0ck/situations.zip

In X-Plane go to File>Load Situations to load up the Sit file. To get to sit files in order to upload your own to this thread they can be found in the X-Plane folder > Output > situation

All screenshots and situations have the exact same renderings as per the images below.

X-Plane 10.20 beta 9

CESSNA 172. Please everyone use the Cessna 172 as the standard.

The first few views are after taking off from Chambery Airport to get there go to Location>Select Global Airport> then dial in "LFLB" into the airport field.

For Grand Canyon you can enter "1G4" into the Airport field.





















Actually HDR with FXAA is not too bad. Taking the clouds from 51% above down to 10% adds about 7fps

The grand canyon image below unlike the ones above has HDR and FXAA ON plus the clouds down to 10% as per rendering screen shot.

MacsRgr8 said:

Yep!
Sounds a good real life comparison test to me!

I have to wait until the weekend before I'm able to fly.

We are talking about X-Plane 10?

Click to expand...

Yeah X-Plane 10 makes sense. Especially now that it is nearing a final 64bit version.

There was a good plug in that had the frame rate only but it seems to have stopped working in the 64 bit beta but the standard included one in x-plane can still be turned on, instructions for this is in the manual.

Probably good to use the standard Cessna with a view looking out the front with no cockpit. It would be good for people to upload a situation if they want so another user can test their settings in an identical situation. I'll load up a few standard situations with maybe The Alps, The Grand Canyon and perhaps The Blue Mountains (in Australia).

The whole POINT of this thread is an exact like for like comparison. Rather then people posting frustratingly large frame rates without mentioning some vital clue and other people then wonder what they are doing wrong.

Good idea to post a screenshot of the setting to go with it.

I'd like to keep all other discussions out of this thread and just keep it only as a place where settings and situations can be compared in identical situations. But hey, I'm not a thread nazi, really post whatever you think is useful as long as it has enough information for a like for like comparison.

These situations could also include anything that anyone wants to compare, like for example how REX clouds affect frame rate (when they bring out an xplane 10 version for mac)

xav8tor said:

Halfway down the page and on from there. The old standard XP FPS test is still broken but this one works and there are current posts:

http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=63787&page=3

Click to expand...

You see, that is why this thread exists, those tests do not tell people what they really want to know which is, is someone with the same specs getting better results. Knowing the settings tell you nothing, because the view out the cockpit has a huuuuuuuuge and vaaaaaaariable effect on the FR.

One problem I have found is that 'Situations' which can be saved and shared seem to suddenly become obsolete but we can work around that.

Therefore anyone who would like to post some figures, then please post all your settings, with a screenshot including FR PLUS a saved situation at the time the screenshot was taken.

I'll see if I can get something up in the first post to start.

voyagerd said:

I can submit results with a GTX 480.

Click to expand...

That would be great to check an earlier desktop gpu against a 6970 mobile I have added some files in the first post, but feel free to post anything as long as you can include ALL relevant information. Note that the cloud setting is important so it's good to have screen shots for both clouds and rendering settings as per original post.

xav8tor said:

I agree there needs to be consistency on ALL settings and location, but this MUST be done through a standard FPS test in XP with as many variables as possible controlled by the command line. The place for that, however, is on the XP org forums where the XP user base is exponentially higher. You won't get ten correctly performed replies here. It is hard enough over there.

Click to expand...

If it hasn't been done after all those years it won't be done now. And anyway, this is a mac forum and TBH I could not give a damn about PC systems anyway ;¬)

There's a frame rate button in X-Plane and for the purposes of this thread that is, I think good enough. I've started this here specifically for the mac x-plane community. Especially now that the iMac gpu's are getting very powerful.

Also I think that as long as people post screenshots of their renderings (including cloud settings) plus the shot is out the front of the standard cessna and if not using the situations in the top post that they at least post their own situations so other users who wish to test their set up against what was posted, then it's all good.

xav8tor said:

I didn't say it hasn't been done. It has, many times.

Click to expand...

It has not been done at all in the way I am suggesting in this thread which is why it exists.

In fact there's at least one Mac-centric active thread on page one of the hardware forum right now. (see link) If Macs are your only concern, you can save yourself a lot of trouble and visit barefeats. He has already used reasonably standard methodology to test most Macs in the last three years on XP 9 and 10. Better info is already there to be had.

Click to expand...

I'm really at a loss as to being able to work out what your problem is. This is nothing at all to do with testing macs, it's just a thread for mac users of xplane to be able to compare like for like frame rates under as good as identical conditions. That's all.
There is nothing on barefeats that has anything to do with this thread which is about precisely what it says in the first post. No need to talk all this rubbish and scaring people off with command line bollox.