Why is the Super Hornet 3.5 bird harder on framerates than other SF2: NA aircraft I have?

[Dillon 2]

Is there a conclusive reason why the Super Hornet 3.5 package is more performance challenged than other aircraft (F-14, F/A-18A/B/C/D, and older Super Hornet offering).  If there's an answer for the performance hit in the sim is there something I can do about it (disable a feature).  I really like the aircraft and I thought it was the cockpit until I slaved it to the older Super Hornet which in that aircraft works smooth and without issue. Can't say what's going on with this model that requires more from my PC but it's unfortunate.  The older model has issues with displaying drop tanks which I haven't had time to resolve.  Just wondering and thanks in advance for any feedback on this.

Edited January 4, 2015 by Dillon

[Fubar512 1,350]

What are your system specs?  I'm particularly concerned wit your graphics adapter.  For example, if you are using an onboard Intel graphics adapter, that would explain your low frame rates when using the aforementioned model.

[Dillon 2]

Specs:

 

Dell Duo Core 3.33 1333FSB - Windows 7 Pro 64Bit 4Gigs Ram

EVGA GeForce GTX760 SuperClocked w/EVGA ACX Cooler 2GB GDDR5 256bit

 

I run Flight Simulator 9 (with high end add-ons even by today's standards), P3Dv2.4 (with add-ons), Falcon BMS, and every other SF2 aircraft I've chosen so far with no issue. I doubt it's my machine concerning this one aircraft. Yes with my rig I can't turn every graphic option up with titles like P3Dv2.4 and even with SF2 things like shadows is turned down. There has to be some feature only with this model I can disable to bring it's performance back to normal.

 

Thanks for the feedback.

Edited January 4, 2015 by Dillon

[Fubar512 1,350]

Then I suggest that you read about and apply the following tweak (if you haven't already done so):

 

http://combatace.com/topic/84199-frame-rate-tweak-for-nvidia-users/

Edited January 4, 2015 by Fubar512

[Dillon 2]

Then I suggest that you read about and apply the following tweak (if you haven't already done so):http://combatace.com/topic/84199-frame-rate-tweak-for-nvidia-users/

 

Didn't affect performance one bit but thanks for the tip.

Edited January 4, 2015 by Dillon

[+Dave 2,322]

Does that SH have a high poly count?

[Fubar512 1,350]

I have just installed the package and tried it.  My average FPS is in the mid-to-high 60's range, though it dipped as low as 31 FPS when sitting on the cat in SF2NA.  If this is what you're experiencing, then there is no issue at all. If you're not achieving at least similar frame rates, then you have an issue, as my specs are as follows:

 

Pentium G3258 @ 4.0 Ghz

16 GB of DDR3-1600 RAM at XMP-1600 timings

GTX 750ti @ default clock speed

Windows 7-64 Home Premium

 

As you can see, it is a rather modest system.

Edited January 4, 2015 by Fubar512

[Dillon 2]

I have just installed the package and tried it.  My average FPS is in the mid-to-high 60's range, though it dipped as low as 31 FPS when sitting on the cat in SF2NA.  If this is what you're experiencing, then there is no issue at all. If you're not achieving at least similar frame rates, then you have an issue, as my specs are as follows:

 

Pentium G3258 @ 4.0 Ghz

16 GB of DDR3-1600 RAM at XMP-1600 timings

GTX 750ti @ default clock speed

Windows 7-64 Home Premium

 

As you can see, it is a rather modest system.

 

 

Compare it to other aircraft you have in your hanger under the same scenario.

 

Does that SH have a high poly count?

 

 

On the surface the model seems to be the same as the older F/A-18E WoX model.  Even the paints from the old model work on the new model.  I tried taking the cockpit from the newer BlKII model and slaving it to the old model to see if the cockpt was the issue.  It worked flawlessly in the older WoX model (which was supposed to be for SF1).  So it's not the cockpit or the paints that's at play here.  I wouldn't make an issue about this and just use the WoX model but the fuel tanks don't show up on the older F/A-18E/F in SF2: NA.  I can't imagine what was put in a new model that would/could affect in sim performance this way.  I could see a whole new model doing this that's not optimized but this model seems to be an upgrade with settings more than anything else.  The BlKII model has some nice features but it's performance sucks.  I can't be the only one seeing a difference with this bird and other models in SF2: NA.  There's a big difference in how this plane performs in the sim versus other aircraft.  I just wish whatever 's causing this I could shut off (most likely can just need to find it).

Edited January 4, 2015 by Dillon

[Wrench 9,811]

from the Blk II out file

 

Num Nodes: 241
Total:    (55306 polys, 165918 verts)
Mesh Max: (4114 polys, 12342 verts)

[Fubar512 1,350]

Compare it to other aircraft you have in your hanger under the same scenario.

 

 

 

On the surface the model seems to be the same as the older F/A-18E WoX model.  Even the paints from the old model work on the new model.  I tried taking the cockpit from the newer BlKII model and slaving it to the old model to see if the cockpt was the issue.  It worked flawlessly in the older WoX model (which was supposed to be for SF1).  So it's not the cockpit or the paints that's at play here.  I wouldn't make an issue about this and just use the WoX model but the fuel tanks don't show up on the older F/A-18E/F in SF2: NA.  I can't imagine what was put in a new model that would/could affect in sim performance this way.  I could see a whole new model doing this that's not optimized but this model seems to be an upgrade with settings more than anything else.  The BlKII model has some nice features but it's performance sucks.  I can't be the only one seeing a difference with this bird and other models in SF2: NA.  There's a big difference in how this plane performs in the sim versus other aircraft.  I just wish whatever 's causing this I could shut off (most likely can just need to find it).

 

The older models don't use normal maps (bump mapping), as bump mapping is only supported by SF2, under DX10. 

[Dillon 2]

from the Blk II out file

 

Num Nodes: 241

Total:    (55306 polys, 165918 verts)

Mesh Max: (4114 polys, 12342 verts)

 

 

???

The older models don't use normal maps (bump mapping), as bump mapping is only supported by SF2, under DX10. 

 

 

Is that's what's going here?  Does the latest SF2: NA compatible F-14, F/A-18A/B/C/D have the same features?  If they do I don't have this issue with them. 

 

 

As always thanks again for the help guys and suggestions. 

[Caesar 305]

For comparison, the F-14A's out file shows:

 

Num Nodes: 259

Total:    (28586 polys, 85758 verts)

Mesh Max: (1087 polys, 3261 verts)

 

or about 1/2 the total polys and verts (one quarter the mesh max).  So, the F-14 is less graphically intense than the Super Bug.  The legacy F/A-18A is:

 

Num Nodes: 275

Total:    (22048 polys, 66108 verts)

Mesh Max: (865 polys, 2595 verts)

 

I'm not entirely certain why it's stuttering for you, though.  The Super Bug never really gave me problems when I was running my 560Ti's (just till about two weeks ago).  I am running on 16GB of RAM; wonder if that has anything to do with it (I saw you're running 4)? 

[Wrench 9,811]

the A, B and C's have about half that poly count

 

Num Nodes: 286
Total:    (23228 polys, 69648 verts)
Mesh Max: (865 polys, 2595 verts)

 

 

I test the Es, and I got no stuttering; full everything, off the boat on the most stressful terrain in the game -- IcelandNA. I actualy had a frame rate drop with the carrier in view (a Nimitz class, iirc). With just the aircraft, sky and water, it was fine

 

as to 'why do the skins fit?' is because the lod's mapping is identical

[Dillon 2]

Looks like I just need to those external fuel tanks visible on the WoX model in SF2: NA.  I'm at my whits end trying to figure this out.  The 3.2 performance on my end is terrible around/on the carrier.  Once in the air it's better and not bad over the Iceland terrain.

 

 

Long shot question alert:   

 

Anyone have a mod for the WoX F/A-18E/F external fuel tanks to make them visible on the model in SF2: NA???     

Edited January 5, 2015 by Dillon

[Dillon 2]

from the Blk II out file

 

Num Nodes: 241

Total:    (55306 polys, 165918 verts)

Mesh Max: (4114 polys, 12342 verts)

 

 

I see what the issue is or should I say the difference is compared to the other models I have.  On a full carrier on takeoff this could be a problem.  The biggest problem I'm finding with the Blk II birds is getting off the carrier and landing. Once in the air things are somewhat fine.  Thanks for posting this.

[+EricJ 4,217]

I think you're just not realizing the name you should be looking for:

 

F-18E/F/G 480 Gallon Tank

 

Open the game, and go through the pylons and you should see that name above as the "Name" for the tanks.

[Dillon 2]

I think you're just not realizing the name you should be looking for:

 

F-18E/F/G 480 Gallon Tank

 

Open the game, and go through the pylons and you should see that name above as the "Name" for the tanks.

 

The name is there, they just don't show up on the bird when chosen. The tanks are accounted for on the fuel gauge but the pylon is empty when looking at it both inside and outside the bird.

[Wrench 9,811]

then, I respectfully submit that YOUR install of the aircraft is porked

they appear for me!

 

everything you see here was right in this package.

 

http://combatace.com/files/file/9401-super-hornet-package-for-sf2-v32/

 

perhaps you should delete ALL the Hornets, and start fresh??? WITH the correct SF2 Versions??

[+logan4 847]

I might understand you wrong, but....

The SF2 SH model has its built in fuel tanks into the AC's lod file. If you try to use the SF1 lod in place of the SF2 one in your SF2 games the tanks would never show up as those are not part of the SF1 AC lod.

In order to load the SF1 lod in your SF2 game you will have to create your respective tank folder entries in your SF2:NA "weapons" folder. After that you will have to block out the "FuelTankNodeName=" entries on the relevant pylons in the Ac's_data.ini

 

 

If the performance issue is your biggest concern, then I advise you to use this setting in your FA-18E.ini:

 

//[LOD001]

//Filename=FA18Ed.lod

//Distance=100

 

[LOD001]

Filename=FA18Edr1.lod

Distance=500

 

[LOD002]

Filename=FA18Er2.lod

Distance=1000

 

[LOD003]

Filename=FA18Er3.lod

Distance=2000

 

[LOD004]

Filename=FA18Er4.lod

Distance=12000

 

This makes your highest lod a bit lesser system intensive one '....dr1.lod" and you can still enjoy all the features the Ac has, not mentioning the skipping of all other file/folder creation-editing dance you would have to do with the SF1 lod to get it work properly.

[Dillon 2]

then, I respectfully submit that YOUR install of the aircraft is porked

they appear for me!

 

everything you see here was right in this package.

 

http://combatace.com/files/file/9401-super-hornet-package-for-sf2-v32/

 

perhaps you should delete ALL the Hornets, and start fresh??? WITH the correct SF2 Versions??

 

 

Eric was asking about the older WoX model I have (the older SH).  The tanks show up correctly on the BlK II model which I guess is the official SF2 version.  The BlK II version is the one I'm having performance issues with in SF2: NA. 

 

Is that screenshot SF2: NA?  Very nice pic... 

This makes your highest lod a bit lesser system intensive one '....dr1.lod" and you can still enjoy all the features the Ac has, not mentioning the skipping of all other file/folder creation-editing dance you would have to do with the SF1 lod to get it work properly.

 

 

Thanks, I'll give this a try.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Dillon

[+EricJ 4,217]

Okay what you need to do is look at the format for the SF2 tanks and mirror it, name it differently, then edit that aircraft's specific data_ini. and add that name so the game knows to look for that model.  Personally I have no clue why you're so hot to use older model versions of the same tank in SF2?  I mean the cool thing about the SF2 version is you can do custom tanks with custom insignia and stuff, but it literally is the same model in SF2.

[Dillon 2]

Okay what you need to do is look at the format for the SF2 tanks and mirror it, name it differently, then edit that aircraft's specific data_ini. and add that name so the game knows to look for that model.  Personally I have no clue why you're so hot to use older model versions of the same tank in SF2?  I mean the cool thing about the SF2 version is you can do custom tanks with custom insignia and stuff, but it literally is the same model in SF2.

 

 

I'd love to use the Blk II model but on the the flight deck and on approach the thing runs like a dog on my system.  

 

So I need to look at the format of the SF2 tanks that came with the Blk II model, name it differently, then edit the WoX data.ini files to point to the newly named file/folder?

[Dillon 2]

 

I might understand you wrong, but....

The SF2 SH model has its built in fuel tanks into the AC's lod file. If you try to use the SF1 lod in place of the SF2 one in your SF2 games the tanks would never show up as those are not part of the SF1 AC lod.

In order to load the SF1 lod in your SF2 game you will have to create your respective tank folder entries in your SF2:NA "weapons" folder. After that you will have to block out the "FuelTankNodeName=" entries on the relevant pylons in the Ac's_data.ini

 

 

If the performance issue is your biggest concern, then I advise you to use this setting in your FA-18E.ini:

 

//[LOD001]

//Filename=FA18Ed.lod

//Distance=100

 

[LOD001]

Filename=FA18Edr1.lod

Distance=500

 

[LOD002]

Filename=FA18Er2.lod

Distance=1000

 

[LOD003]

Filename=FA18Er3.lod

Distance=2000

 

[LOD004]

Filename=FA18Er4.lod

Distance=12000

 

This makes your highest lod a bit lesser system intensive one '....dr1.lod" and you can still enjoy all the features the Ac has, not mentioning the skipping of all other file/folder creation-editing dance you would have to do with the SF1 lod to get it work properly.

 

 

 

This actually worked.  I didn't comment out any settings I just changed the top two highest settings which was '4000' and '8000'.  I dropped them down to '400' and the other '500'.  Still testing.

[+russouk2004 6,958]

Not out yet but my SU-16 is not for you then...  will try to get the early low poly one done too..

Num Nodes: 270
Total:    (105395 polys, 316185 verts)
Mesh Max: (5010 polys, 15030 verts)

and thats with no skin yet

I tend to model as best detail as poss,with as few polys as possible...sometimes tho high poly counts cant be helped  mind you my system can handle it ,and I tend to model what I want foremost and for you guys here too...

Edited January 5, 2015 by russouk2004

[+Dave 2,322]

Well I was thinking maybe the Iceland terrain might of been messing with it. So I took the following screen shots;

 

Default Iceland Terrain

 

Iceland Full Size Terrain

 

Desert Terrain

 

So as you can see the FPS is still kind of low. My specs as follows:

 

Digital Storm Vanquish II Level 4
3.2GHz Intel Core i5-4570 (4 cores, 6MB cache, w/3.6GHz with Turbo Boost)
120GB Samsung 840 EVO SSD
1TB Seagate HDD (7,200 rpm, 64MB cache)
1TB Western Digital Black HDD (7,200 rpm, 64MB cache)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 7700 2048MB
16 GB 1600MHZ DDR3 RAM

 

So my specs are no slouch, so it leaves me with the conclusion is that this plane's high poly count is giving the performance issues.