Like others, I stayed with V4. I may have upgraded to V5 if they had offered an upgrade path (discount) to those with V4 already. I ain't spending another dime on P3D when FS2020 was around the corner.
As an P3dv5 owner and FS2020 alpha tester, I recommend you don't compare apples with pineapples as we say in germany. FS2020 is going to be great, but it will never and has never intended to replace P3D. It will take some time until Addons will be on the market for fs2020 just like they take time for p3dv5 to release. I have no problems running almost all my addons in v5 and its running extremely smooth compared to p3dv4
@@xXshinichiconanXx3 I agree. It will be very interesting to see what the MSFS release will look like. Also as an alpha tester and what I have seen so far the MSFS are not ready for release. But, we will see, this will be very interesting.
FS 2020 its a different league and i will jump on it the moment is released , ita a shame that lockheed martin keeps going around the bush with a 14 year old code... I will still keep p3d v4 cuz i spend in addons and aircrafts
@@kreshnik1710 I agree and I keep P3D for the same reason. That's just a typical example of one company playing monopoly. Because Lockheed Martin has a monopol, when it comes to software that runs on actual level D flight simulators in real live. They're like: Well screw you hobby flight simmers, our software is not intended for entertainment, why should we optimize the code and not instead use it and make small changes only... But I've actually heard rumors of airlines asking for a MSFS2020 Version for their flight sims. So it is going to be a very exciting time ahead
@@xXshinichiconanXx3 This is such a true statement! Well said! P3DV5 is where it is at now and the next few years is my guess. I enjoyed my time in MS2020 and will buy it next month but I know we are years away from it being fully supported with our favorite add-ons.
@@dominiktuchowicz7680 Well I stayed with P3D and got V5. I worked out much money I needed to upgrade everything to MSFS. Not going to fork it out, simply too much!!! Stay safe!
I'm very surprised about your conclusion that v4 and v5 performs about the same : this is not at all what I'm experiencing on my config, v5 has much better performances, despite some stutters ( wich also happens in v4 ), it's a lot smoother than v4 and has much stable fps, I could increase pretty much all the graphic option in v5 compare to the v4.5 and I get better performances. I think this is kind of a biased conclusion because your config is very high range, so it might have not that much difference because you almost cannot get a better build to run these sim and it will run v4 and v5 very well anyway, but for me, with a middle range PC ( ryzen 5 1600x, full SSD, 48 GO ram and a 1070 TI ) I can tell that the v5 is bringing a significant performance improvment compare to the v4!
Thanks for the video. I bought v5 shortly after release and what impressed me the most was the lighting something you also mentioned. When flying single props performance was very good however when flying the PMDG747 it started OK but had different CTDs that also affected most usersand had nothing to do with PMDG. Even after the hotfix still believe the sim needs a lot of work and disappointed with the default scenery landclass which alledgedly was better than v4, except for the fact that had a huge number of incorrect details like lakes and rivers didn't exist in real life and some that did weren't there at all. Then you have the issue with VRAM which is of concern and that will stop many users from fully utilising the sim unless their systems can handle an 8Gb to 11Gb+ graphics card. I was expecting this version to incorporate better technology with a more realistic terrain and landclass. Bit of a disaster really considering Lockheed Martin is one of the leading companies in the aviation field. Currently still using v4.5+HF3 with full sliders to the rioght where suitable using many commercial addons, PMDG, etc. Will wait to see if they eventually release something worth using. Intel Core i9-9900K at 5Ghz, Corsair Hydro H100i RGB PLATINUM CPU cooler, Asus ROG STRIX Z390-E,Motherboard, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super 8GB GDDR6, G.Skill Trident Z RGB 32GB DDR4 3200MHz Memory, 500GB Samsung 970 EVO PLUS M.2 PCIe,2TB Samsung 860 QVO Solid State Drive, 2TB, 2 x Samsung 860 Evo 2TB, 1 x 1TB Samsung 860 Evo, Corsair RM650x 80 PLUS Gold 650W PSU.
@2:57 Hasn't this been a long-existing legacy thing going back to FSX days; More cores is great, you can do more and stay smooth, but raw speed in terms of calculating & rendering your flight progression has always been capped or bottle-necked at the point of maxed out single-core performance 2:57 _(I think. It's been a long time since I last ducked my head into flight sims. But having one core 100% and only one core at 100% most of the time I believe has been a staple of the industry, FSX, P3D or XP-11)_
Yep, that’s how I understand it: single-core clock speed is king on the CPU side. For me, P3Dv4 pretty much firewalls one i5 core; a second core sees intermittent, usually brief, loads, and my theory (from limited observation) is the activity comes from Active Sky. The other cores are mostly idle. My guess is the P3Dv4 vs. P3Dv5 performance gap (or lack thereof) comes down to the hardware bottlenecks. The idea, as I’ve heard it, is that P3Dv5’s use of DirectX 12 means it can offload more work to the GPU. So, users that are CPU-bound with GPU headroom to spare ought to see better performance with that version, whereas users that are already GPU-bound probably won’t notice much improvement.
@4:14 -- How did you get grass in v.4 but not in v.5?? @4:14 Earlier in the video, neither had grass at airports _(and it looked atrocious)_ I think it's clear that more texture or PBR went into the aircraft skin/rivets & runway in 5, so I don't think there is any miss-label here.... anyways just a thought: With your build, YOU DESERVE GRASS :)
@@DeathDonky yes because 1440p res is more to GPU bound which means it utilizes more gpu. Whereas 1080p leaves the CPU working really hard. Prepar3d v5 utilizes a lot of gpu power unlike FSX that utilizes single core cpu power.
Dear Sir - thank you for your video. May I ask you one question.........? My PC was high-end 4 years ago, used exclusively for simulation P3D and PMDG 737NG. After a few months of perfect functioning, FR dropped to 1.5, one point five!, with any internal aircraft and B737 as well......after approximately 20 seconds of flight. Additional SW: AS and Navigraph. Nothing else. No hotline is able to help. Both, P3D and PMDG have been uninstalled and reinstalled. The FR-drop persisted. Thank you for your advice W. M. Bretscher
If anything, I think you may have proven that your system is well balanced for P3D loads, with good utilization of both CPU (100% on the P3D thread) and GPU (~70-80%). Looks like you got a GPU utilization bump in P3Dv5, albeit not a huge one. For the heavily CPU-bound systems, I would think P3Dv5’s ability to offload more work to the GPU would boost effective performance. For those without significant GPU headroom, though, I’d imagine the gains are minimal at best. And that’s assuming the bottleneck isn’t elsewhere - say, thermal/power throttling or disk access times (e.g. traditional HDDs).
Dude what do you have on your computer that costs $5.000.00? I have my rig made specifically for FS2020 by Jetline systems and the only thing I didn't get was the TI version of the RTX2080 but rather the super, and even like that I paid US$4.000.00.
Really wanted to see what the conclusion was as I’ve held off going to 5. But very disappointed in your test...find it hard to believe your $5,000 machine is anywhere near relevant to my $2,200 machine. So, to me the test was irrelevant.
lol. This is the problem, to talk to ppl with a brain level like yours..... Maybe the fanboys you mention (who already have the sim....) dont make up that choice based on a video but their own sim? How about that. Lol, i cant even laugh anymore about comments like this, its just sad.... Besides that, i have 0 idea how this can be the result of that test. Many other ppl already have made these comparisons and every single one of them had major performance increase in v5, also compared with the same settings. So, why not make it like this: 1. set everything to max, same here 2. go to Gaya LOWW, FT KLAS, KSFO to a gate, same time, same weather, same settings. 3. make a pic from the fps of both sims. Or even better: 1. install True Earth NorCal in both sims and KSFO 2. same settings, time, gate and again compare both. Or the best at the end, i wanna see this one: 1. install FSLabs 2. install TrueEarth NorCal 3. install KSFO (flightbeam) 4. go to same gate, same time and compare fps. I want to see that in a honest video. I somehow cannot believe all said here, something smells fishy. No idea why one could fake this but i simply dont see how that can be possible if the difference for me and basically everyone else with a different setup is over 100% in mentoned cases. Of course not all systems are the same but it just doesnt make sense. Weve tested on 7700k with RTX 2080, 16 GB, weve tested on 9900K with RTX 2080TI, 32 GB, weve tested with 7700k and RTX 2070 and weve tested with other systems around this range, EVERY one of those ppl have all drastic improved fps. It ranges from +20% to +120% in some cases, like mentioned above.
P3D has released a new iteration almost every 2 years like clockwork. If anything, v5 was released six months behind-the-curve, which for profit-seeking purposes is a terrible idea since that puts it right up in direct competition with Microsoft's grand re-entry into the market, and if your goal is to cash-grab then releasing your revision six months later than normal and putting it in direct competition with Microsoft _(and MSFT's $1.55 Trillion Market Valuation)_ is the ABSOLUTE WORST STRATEGY YOU COULD POSSIBLY DO
How expected it was. Imagine the rage of all those guys having paid hundred dollars for the new update to play beta testers and then finally realised there is no performance increase.
Why would anyone have paid hundreds of dollars - the update was $60 (less than it costs to fill the average car with petrol) and most of the updates to v5 are free as far as I can see? Hardly breaking the bank for your average simmer considering the addons are 100$ plus. Maybe the rage is for the kiddies who can't afford a 60$ upgrade cost
ahahah getting mad? Typical kid reaction "blabla you dont have money". Truth hurts i see. Oh, and dont forget to read the EULA concerning academic licence.
I'm going to laugh when MS decides to change over to a subscription service next year after they get everyone hooked. I trust MS about as far as I can throw their HQ building. BTW, I have switched over to V5 and it performs and looks far better than v4.5. with ORBX loaded to the gills in both, I no longer get the pauses and studdering I got in v4.
This is called MARKETING (something you probably never heard before). If i wanna sell addons i better have to say that performance are better on the new P3D version... and users that have paid $200 wont say its run less good than v4. Not even talking about idiots comparing v5 vanilla VS v4 heavy modded... And what about all the bugs, (vram) CTDs and others cool things introduced in v5.
@@theamazingdude9795 No that's called lying for no good reason... Users will find out= backfire=trust lost.... I've installed V5 and will soon try it out myself
I don't have a $5000 computer but I find the FSLabs in v5 has 20% - 50% better frame rates - can't speak for any other aircraft as I haven't tried others yet.
P3Dv5 is a joke, since i purchased it i can't finished a single fly because the game suddenly take me to the desktop, in others words this game crashes all the time because insufficient vRAM i have to mention that i have an GTX 1060 6GB which works perfectly with Xplane 11, MSFS2020, P3Dv4. This new version of Preppard doesn't get along with GTX video cards series Lockheed Martin has a lot to improve, i have been in fly simming since 2006 and this is my worst experience so far
Like others, I stayed with V4. I may have upgraded to V5 if they had offered an upgrade path (discount) to those with V4 already. I ain't spending another dime on P3D when FS2020 was around the corner.
As an P3dv5 owner and FS2020 alpha tester, I recommend you don't compare apples with pineapples as we say in germany. FS2020 is going to be great, but it will never and has never intended to replace P3D. It will take some time until Addons will be on the market for fs2020 just like they take time for p3dv5 to release. I have no problems running almost all my addons in v5 and its running extremely smooth compared to p3dv4
@@xXshinichiconanXx3 I agree. It will be very interesting to see what the MSFS release will look like. Also as an alpha tester and what I have seen so far the MSFS are not ready for release. But, we will see, this will be very interesting.
FS 2020 its a different league and i will jump on it the moment is released , ita a shame that lockheed martin keeps going around the bush with a 14 year old code...
I will still keep p3d v4 cuz i spend in addons and aircrafts
@@kreshnik1710 I agree and I keep P3D for the same reason. That's just a typical example of one company playing monopoly. Because Lockheed Martin has a monopol, when it comes to software that runs on actual level D flight simulators in real live. They're like: Well screw you hobby flight simmers, our software is not intended for entertainment, why should we optimize the code and not instead use it and make small changes only... But I've actually heard rumors of airlines asking for a MSFS2020 Version for their flight sims. So it is going to be a very exciting time ahead
@@xXshinichiconanXx3 This is such a true statement! Well said! P3DV5 is where it is at now and the next few years is my guess. I enjoyed my time in MS2020 and will buy it next month but I know we are years away from it being fully supported with our favorite add-ons.
Very helpful. I’ve deliberately held off V5 to date and glad I did. I like others will see what MS FS2020 offers.
LOL. Another poor hyped guy. So ... You stayed with P3D or fly new crap?
@@dominiktuchowicz7680 Well I stayed with P3D and got V5. I worked out much money I needed to upgrade everything to MSFS. Not going to fork it out, simply too much!!! Stay safe!
I'm very surprised about your conclusion that v4 and v5 performs about the same : this is not at all what I'm experiencing on my config, v5 has much better performances, despite some stutters ( wich also happens in v4 ), it's a lot smoother than v4 and has much stable fps, I could increase pretty much all the graphic option in v5 compare to the v4.5 and I get better performances. I think this is kind of a biased conclusion because your config is very high range, so it might have not that much difference because you almost cannot get a better build to run these sim and it will run v4 and v5 very well anyway, but for me, with a middle range PC ( ryzen 5 1600x, full SSD, 48 GO ram and a 1070 TI ) I can tell that the v5 is bringing a significant performance improvment compare to the v4!
Thank you for the testing, this video was helpful.
Thanks for the video. I bought v5 shortly after release and what impressed me the most was the lighting something you also mentioned. When flying single props performance was very good however when flying the PMDG747 it started OK but had different CTDs that also affected most usersand had nothing to do with PMDG. Even after the hotfix still believe the sim needs a lot of work and disappointed with the default scenery landclass which alledgedly was better than v4, except for the fact that had a huge number of incorrect details like lakes and rivers didn't exist in real life and some that did weren't there at all. Then you have the issue with VRAM which is of concern and that will stop many users from fully utilising the sim unless their systems can handle an 8Gb to 11Gb+ graphics card. I was expecting this version to incorporate better technology with a more realistic terrain and landclass. Bit of a disaster really considering Lockheed Martin is one of the leading companies in the aviation field. Currently still using v4.5+HF3 with full sliders to the rioght where suitable using many commercial addons, PMDG, etc. Will wait to see if they eventually release something worth using. Intel Core i9-9900K at 5Ghz, Corsair Hydro H100i RGB PLATINUM CPU cooler, Asus ROG STRIX Z390-E,Motherboard, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super 8GB GDDR6, G.Skill Trident Z RGB 32GB DDR4 3200MHz Memory, 500GB Samsung 970 EVO PLUS M.2 PCIe,2TB Samsung 860 QVO Solid State Drive, 2TB, 2 x Samsung 860 Evo 2TB, 1 x 1TB Samsung 860 Evo, Corsair RM650x 80 PLUS Gold 650W PSU.
So happy to not go with v5. I'm a happy v.4 simmer till fs2020 arrives. Ordered the boxed version yesterday.
me too
So P3Dv4.5 with Orbx is pretty much the same as P3Dv5 scenery-wise?
Sticking with v4.5. Not touching that new Microsoft garbage either.
P3Dv4 is perfectly adequate.
@2:57 Hasn't this been a long-existing legacy thing going back to FSX days; More cores is great, you can do more and stay smooth, but raw speed in terms of calculating & rendering your flight progression has always been capped or bottle-necked at the point of maxed out single-core performance 2:57
_(I think. It's been a long time since I last ducked my head into flight sims. But having one core 100% and only one core at 100% most of the time I believe has been a staple of the industry, FSX, P3D or XP-11)_
Yep, that’s how I understand it: single-core clock speed is king on the CPU side. For me, P3Dv4 pretty much firewalls one i5 core; a second core sees intermittent, usually brief, loads, and my theory (from limited observation) is the activity comes from Active Sky. The other cores are mostly idle.
My guess is the P3Dv4 vs. P3Dv5 performance gap (or lack thereof) comes down to the hardware bottlenecks. The idea, as I’ve heard it, is that P3Dv5’s use of DirectX 12 means it can offload more work to the GPU. So, users that are CPU-bound with GPU headroom to spare ought to see better performance with that version, whereas users that are already GPU-bound probably won’t notice much improvement.
@4:14 -- How did you get grass in v.4 but not in v.5?? @4:14
Earlier in the video, neither had grass at airports _(and it looked atrocious)_
I think it's clear that more texture or PBR went into the aircraft skin/rivets & runway in 5, so I don't think there is any miss-label here....
anyways just a thought: With your build, YOU DESERVE GRASS :)
I get a noticable fps increase in V5, plus the variable refresh rate on my g sync monitor is a huge plus.
@@DeathDonky yes because 1440p res is more to GPU bound which means it utilizes more gpu. Whereas 1080p leaves the CPU working really hard. Prepar3d v5 utilizes a lot of gpu power unlike FSX that utilizes single core cpu power.
1080p is good for RTX 2070/2060 below. While 2080/3060 above should use 1440p and 3080 above should use 4K/2160p
Dear Sir - thank you for your video. May I ask you one question.........? My PC was high-end 4 years ago, used exclusively for simulation P3D and PMDG 737NG. After a few months of perfect functioning, FR dropped to 1.5, one point five!, with any internal aircraft and B737 as well......after approximately 20 seconds of flight.
Additional SW: AS and Navigraph. Nothing else.
No hotline is able to help. Both, P3D and PMDG have been uninstalled and reinstalled. The FR-drop persisted.
Thank you for your advice
W. M. Bretscher
So glad i didn't get suckered into buying V5. I can't wait until Aug 18.
is it so hard to put FPS counter while you were seperating the screens. OMG
If anything, I think you may have proven that your system is well balanced for P3D loads, with good utilization of both CPU (100% on the P3D thread) and GPU (~70-80%). Looks like you got a GPU utilization bump in P3Dv5, albeit not a huge one.
For the heavily CPU-bound systems, I would think P3Dv5’s ability to offload more work to the GPU would boost effective performance. For those without significant GPU headroom, though, I’d imagine the gains are minimal at best. And that’s assuming the bottleneck isn’t elsewhere - say, thermal/power throttling or disk access times (e.g. traditional HDDs).
Dude what do you have on your computer that costs $5.000.00? I have my rig made specifically for FS2020 by Jetline systems and the only thing I didn't get was the TI version of the RTX2080 but rather the super, and even like that I paid US$4.000.00.
You just convinced me to not upgrade it. Thanks.
Idk I’m new to prepard so I only got to use v5 and I made some config edits and it’s runny really smooth :)
Love to hear that...Did you go with an 8-Core, 10-Core, 12-Core or 16-Core? _(Round about way of asking did you go AMD or Intel)_
Really wanted to see what the conclusion was as I’ve held off going to 5. But very disappointed in your test...find it hard to believe your $5,000 machine is anywhere near relevant to my $2,200 machine. So, to me the test was irrelevant.
I Think you should of compared both Sims with the same weather stuff like rex
You just made the Prepar3D v5 fanboys cry and begging for a refund LOL
lol. This is the problem, to talk to ppl with a brain level like yours..... Maybe the fanboys you mention (who already have the sim....) dont make up that choice based on a video but their own sim? How about that.
Lol, i cant even laugh anymore about comments like this, its just sad....
Besides that, i have 0 idea how this can be the result of that test. Many other ppl already have made these comparisons and every single one of them had major performance increase in v5, also compared with the same settings.
So, why not make it like this:
1. set everything to max, same here
2. go to Gaya LOWW, FT KLAS, KSFO to a gate, same time, same weather, same settings.
3. make a pic from the fps of both sims.
Or even better:
1. install True Earth NorCal in both sims and KSFO
2. same settings, time, gate and again compare both.
Or the best at the end, i wanna see this one:
1. install FSLabs
2. install TrueEarth NorCal
3. install KSFO (flightbeam)
4. go to same gate, same time and compare fps.
I want to see that in a honest video. I somehow cannot believe all said here, something smells fishy.
No idea why one could fake this but i simply dont see how that can be possible if the difference for me and basically everyone else with a different setup is over 100% in mentoned cases.
Of course not all systems are the same but it just doesnt make sense.
Weve tested on 7700k with RTX 2080, 16 GB, weve tested on 9900K with RTX 2080TI, 32 GB, weve tested with 7700k and RTX 2070 and weve tested with other systems around this range, EVERY one of those ppl have all drastic improved fps. It ranges from +20% to +120% in some cases, like mentioned above.
felt like V5 was a cash grab before the ship sinks.
P3D has released a new iteration almost every 2 years like clockwork. If anything, v5 was released six months behind-the-curve, which for profit-seeking purposes is a terrible idea since that puts it right up in direct competition with Microsoft's grand re-entry into the market, and if your goal is to cash-grab then releasing your revision six months later than normal and putting it in direct competition with Microsoft _(and MSFT's $1.55 Trillion Market Valuation)_ is the ABSOLUTE WORST STRATEGY YOU COULD POSSIBLY DO
@@czdaniel1 Agree I did say "felt like" Thanks for you input cheers
Right now I hardly touch FS2020. In my opinion it is still an incomplete beta
Thats cause you tested it on a monster machine xD Try a lower spec pc which would struggle with v4.5 and try it with v5
These will both die on August 18.
Tomasz Pasternak Total bollocks!
@@simonsmedley5434 Total truth.
Bullshit 😂
But enjoy this cartoon simulator without a single study-level aircraft
@Keith L The hype has got the best of them, it will soon all come crashing down...
Sad ending for p3d
Truth hurts
still one month more and many of those cheap gaming companies are going bunkrupts
How expected it was. Imagine the rage of all those guys having paid hundred dollars for the new update to play beta testers and then finally realised there is no performance increase.
Why would anyone have paid hundreds of dollars - the update was $60 (less than it costs to fill the average car with petrol) and most of the updates to v5 are free as far as I can see? Hardly breaking the bank for your average simmer considering the addons are 100$ plus. Maybe the rage is for the kiddies who can't afford a 60$ upgrade cost
ahahah getting mad? Typical kid reaction "blabla you dont have money". Truth hurts i see. Oh, and dont forget to read the EULA concerning academic licence.
Not impressed with V5 clouds. V4's look better even if they are not 3d.
I'm going to laugh when MS decides to change over to a subscription service next year after they get everyone hooked. I trust MS about as far as I can throw their HQ building. BTW, I have switched over to V5 and it performs and looks far better than v4.5. with ORBX loaded to the gills in both, I no longer get the pauses and studdering I got in v4.
Haha, David you wish ... you just mad cuz u got tricked into getting Prep3d v5. lol I bet you're invested in it up to your nose ahahah
Just exactly the opposite reported by developers and users... what a waste of space this is
This is called MARKETING (something you probably never heard before). If i wanna sell addons i better have to say that performance are better on the new P3D version... and users that have paid $200 wont say its run less good than v4. Not even talking about idiots comparing v5 vanilla VS v4 heavy modded...
And what about all the bugs, (vram) CTDs and others cool things introduced in v5.
@@theamazingdude9795 No that's called lying for no good reason... Users will find out= backfire=trust lost.... I've installed V5 and will soon try it out myself
@@DeathDonky Flytampa wrote extensively about the performance of Boston in V5 over V4... Go search their fora
I have better fps in v5 than in v4 my v5 runs like a dream.
I don't have a $5000 computer but I find the FSLabs in v5 has 20% - 50% better frame rates - can't speak for any other aircraft as I haven't tried others yet.
P3Dv5 is a joke, since i purchased it i can't finished a single fly because the game suddenly take me to the desktop, in others words this game crashes all the time because insufficient vRAM i have to mention that i have an GTX 1060 6GB which works perfectly with Xplane 11, MSFS2020, P3Dv4. This new version of Preppard doesn't get along with GTX video cards series Lockheed Martin has a lot to improve, i have been in fly simming since 2006 and this is my worst experience so far
It's maybe your nvidia driver dude
I uninstalled all of my flight simulators, they will all die on August 18 😎
Only when the high quality addons become available.
Fs2020 wins
test in computer 5000$ is inutil