Jersey Images FSX or P3D?

[britfrog 180]

not a lot in it but an interesting comparison between FSX with DX10 and P3D with it mostly maxed out

 

firstly FSX

 

 

 

then P3D

 

 

which do you prefer?

 

I think the fsx image is a bit sharper when you look at the shadowing of the tower, but I certainly dont see anywhere the huge difference that some P3D users see.

[MyPC8MyBrain 273]

read up Nigel

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/451123-brighter-hdr-tweak/

 

beside... you’ve tweaked the heck out of fsx to your specific hardware, not exactly a fair comparison

 

[britfrog 180]

thanks for that Chris I had read it before , in fairness to P3D i have also done quite a bit of work under the covers it is by no means stock, I find the contrast is too strong and the hdr lighting not very nice.it is too much like x plane which is just horrible, perhaps if i upgrade my graphics card I may be able to take fuller advantage.

and besides P3D is only any good for small a/c i mostly fly big stuff and p3d cannot cope with them at all, especially if you are using some heavy scenery, so for now as I have both FSX is still by far my favorite, it doesnt hang ,crash, or throw a wobbly I can make a flight to take in 10 really heavy airports with the ngx of airbus and it never falters, i still have to complete a flight from soton to heathrow using ftx scsenery and aerosoft heathrow in p3d without it crashing.

[ddavid 149]

Whilst I see your point about the sharpness of the tower shadow, what other aspects are you taking into consideration? Are there such fundamental differences between FSX and P3D that they show up with detailed photo-scenery? I'll admit to being out of my depth here - so an explanation from either of you guru's would be welcome!

The foregoing is in no way a criticism of the images or your comments - just me trying to get my head round things. Thanks.

Cheers - Dai. :confused:

[britfrog 180]

thanks for that Chris I had read it before , in fairness to P3D i have also done quite a bit of work under the covers it is by no means stock, I find the contrast is too strong and the hdr lighting not very nice.it is too much like x plane which is just horrible, perhaps if i upgrade my graphics card I may be able to take fuller advantage.

and besides P3D is only any good for small a/c i mostly fly big stuff and p3d cannot cope with them at all, especially if you are using some heavy scenery, so for now as I have both FSX is still by far my favorite, it doesnt hang ,crash, or throw a wobbly I can make a flight to take in 10 really heavy airports with the ngx of airbus and it never falters, i still have to complete a flight from soton to heathrow using ftx scsenery and aerosoft heathrow in p3d without it crashing.

[britfrog 180]

Dai I am leaving it for others to make of it what they want, personally I dont see that much between the 2 , however there has been much publicity of how much better p3d is visually and i dont see it, i will post some stuff from ftx scenery and see if that shows a bigger difference, i am starting to think it is all smoke and mirrors , i hope i am wrong because p3d is the much heralded future of our hobby, no doubt others will disagree with me but discussing the merits of the 2 sims is not as conclusive as showing photos that show the various merits. a photo is worth a thousand words, so hopefully someone else will post pictures that show the difference in p3d's favour

[Captain Coffee 2,030]

My 2 cents based on your 2 images:

 

I think the FSX land texture looks a bit sharper and slightly brighter, but it shows more "texture banding" in the water...a feature of FSX "Long Views" that has always bothered me. Is P3D overall a bit fuzzier or deal with that banding issue better?

 

Biggest difference seems to be the radically different way P3D displays that Heli...Looks like a Cessna 210 or something.

 

 

Your scenery work is looking awesome btw.

[donnybalonny 46]

I´ve been using P3D for a while and I just installed FSX sp2 a little month ago because I found it after years of absence and there are addons that dont work well in P3D. (example J4100)

I have both more or less without tweaks and to be honest, I dont really see or feel the big difference. Both have ORBX global textures etc. P3D has a bit more depth in its textures, especially the clouds. FSX looks a bit "flatter".

The standard P3D contrast is a bit to high and dark, so I have lightened the shaders 0.10 so that it looks a tad more fsx. I really like the VC shadows in P3D. 

I came to P3D directly from FS2004 because back in the old days when FSX was young, me, fsx and my pc didnt get along very well. So when I started flightsimming again I started with FS9 and moved on to P3D. A month ago I found my FSX and installed it on its own first partition of a sataII harddrive and I have no problems so far

If I had known what I know now (and if I had found my fsx before), I dont think I would have bought P3D. Especially when flying jet or turboprop liners., I dont care at all. 

The thing I like the least about P3D is all this "religious" attitude that some have with it like if it was the holy grail. And some P3D dedicated forums have members that take themselves and their P3D so serious that its unacceptable.

 

As it is now, I find P3D to be a very close cousin to FSX and on your 3 screenshots I cant really tell a difference and while flying impossible.

[britfrog 180]

Anders you reiterate many of my feelings, and yes i also like their cloud shadows which is the one noticeable thing that fsx lacks, i take it you are using fsx in dx10 mode? if not , just do it you will not regret it.

[Christopher Low 63]

The PMDG 737NGX is working just fine in P3D for me, Nigel. Nice framerates, even in dense scenery areas and with lots of AI traffic.

[donnybalonny 46]

I´m running fsx without acceleration, no tweaks, no dx10. Just sp2. At this very moment it just works and I dont feel like using my time fiddling around. I prefer simming. 

And soon the Aerosoft CRJ700 will be out and I will use a lot of time just reading manuals in this weirdo language that english is and have very little time for tweaking.