Board index FlightGear Support Graphics

Per video card configuration

Graphics issues like: bad framerates, weird colors, OpenGL errors etc. Bad graphics ar usually the result of bad graphics cards or drivers.
Forum rules
In order to help you, we need to know a lot of information. Make sure to include answers to at least the following questions in your initial post.

- what OS (Windows Xp/Vista, Mac etc.) are you running?
- what FlightGear version do you use?
- what graphics card do you have?
- does the problem occur with any aircraft, at any airport?
- is there any output printed to the console (black window)?
- copy&paste your commandline (tick the "Show commandline box on the last page of FGRun or the "Others" section on the Mac launcher).
- please upload a screenshot of the problem.

If you experience FlightGear crashes, please report a bug using the issue tracker (can be also used for feature requests).
To run FlightGear on old computers with bad OpenGL support, please take a look at this wiki article. If you are seeing corrupted/broken textures, please see this article.

Note: If you did not get a reponse, even after 7 days, you may want to check out the FlightGear mailing lists to ask your question there.

Re: Per video card configuration

Postby vnts » Wed Feb 14, 2018 12:47 am

Hooray wrote in Mon Mar 21, 2016 1:01 pm:but that would assume that we actually spread the word and ask people to share their GPU-specific settings, probably aiming for ~30 fps.

Is there a 'safe' hardware level beyond which settings can be turned 'right up' for 2018.1 release?

Perhaps(?) multiple settings levels & 'safe' hardware performance benchmark levels is a shortcut. People can submit per GPU refinements later. Current gen GPU+efficient rendering means mostly the refinement I can submit is only 'turn everything on'..

(Not sure what came of this idea..found thread searching for pre-configured defaults. Apologies if invalid or obsolete now.
Saw quick video review of (new?) heli in media section, but didn't look like FG on a somewhat recent system with settings configured, or /remotely/ like FG at it's recent best. AIUI that's from a reviewer familiar with setting up sims, with a gaming GPU (running DCS/XP). As a newcomer what bits I've seen & some little conceptual understanding of approach to problems solved by FG, even for power users, FG has some UI discoverability, cues, & communication issues (improved recently). Includes things like the right way to conceptualise things & clear up ways of looking at things from applications that don't simulate things (e.g. METARs being incredibly incomplete& re-applying METARs till randomly-filled-in blanks give desired results(AIUI.. right?), live weather shouldn't be used unless needed for a purpose (vague,limited+slow+non-interactive), environment settings use, renderer selection, turbulence model availability/suitability(??)). It's a different complicated topic (just impression so far, may have missed some reasoning).

For reviews, maybe the quick easy solution is just giving settings&files for multiple review scenarios: AW&environment menu settings to suit location /not/ set to default, OSM links, good AW METARs/turbulence, test scenarios, even recommend nightly or copy materials/effects/textures folders from nightly). (Also reviewer missed FG actually gives weather based on terrain, turbulence profiles).)

What I can contribute to 'safe' max settings:

Hooray wrote in Mon Feb 08, 2016 2:19 pm:25-30 fps is probably the lowest we should aim for to have some margin for lag

So guessing at a reasonable 'maxed' settings level@ ~25-30+ FPS (c.f. open ended settings w/o real maximum: eg. LoD ranges). Reasonable resolution (1080p?).

..NVIDIA GTX960 or better @ 1080p? This is also the standard 1080p GPU 1 generation ago (AIUI). Someone with a 960 could probably confirm max settings performance(?).

Performance of settings I can add to:

New overlays: fine. Max the usual settings. All AW settings: on (cloud shadows/terrain effects/realistic visbility etc).
Tree+shadows: very high (min CPU spec??). Not familiar enough with FG to recommend ultra trees: RAM?/CPU usage. GTX960+ should be fine. Any issues likely to come from setting NVIDIA control panel overrides: mostly transparency AA settings, while MSAA has smaller hit. Texture filtering quality with ultra trees may have a hit(fillrate bound?)). Decent LoDs: ??: Depends on situation(default 1500/9000/30000 fine).

Rough min benchmark score: All GPUs with perf. score higher than:site: 7500??. Going by performance score these should be OK (Mostly fragment-shader-bound FPS with vsync & throttling off is an OK metric to -very- roughly extrapolate? Performance roughly valid for ATI cards too?). Being conservative: no ultra trees should leave enough headroom, possibly suitable setting for GPUs immediately below this.

Maybe(?) some relevant google results (No idea how good sources are &not a programmer):
OpenGL capabilities database from FOSS project (Full renderer strings in: Driver details->driver type->GPU pageup to late 2015.)
Device ID lists: Nvidia 2, ATI. Survey of GPU popularity (Gaming it seems. Not restricted to simming/power users). More benchmark lists

Perhaps UI telling people what the deal is with performance: multiple bottlenecks, different situations & different stresses on different parts, resolution, driver control panel settings.. and advising that a minimum rough guess @1080p was taken from the start may(?) reduce problems and support requests mentioned in other linked topic.

erik wrote in Sat Mar 19, 2016 12:20 pm:both good performance and decent rendering quality when starting FlightGear (for the first time).

First impressions &lower safe settings for slightly older GPUs: maybe(?) prioritise keep-grass overlays over other settings (newcomers often spending a while figuring out controls landed at airport).

Minimum 'safe' checks might need: CPU/RAM(e.g. trees or OSM)/VRAM. Min number of pixels in resolution (1920*1080=). Systems with high end recent GPUs may be assumed to have demanding use cases and not need checking.

Just a starting point (from someone with limited familiarity with FG).

Kind Regards
Posts: 284
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 12:29 am

Re: Per video card configuration

Postby legoboyvdlp » Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:14 am

For what it's worth, a GeForce 920M with an i5-7200U is perfectly capable of high shader and ALS flight at Prague with the c172p. The transition shader seems to have the most effect on performance, but I get a stable 25-30 fps with landmass, water, model, and urban turned up.
User avatar
Posts: 7859
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 1:28 am
Location: Northern Ireland
Callsign: G-LEGO
Version: next
OS: Windows 10 HP


Return to Graphics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest