Compared with XP11 fully loaded and running beautifully with lots of 3rd party cloud, ortho, traffic, and other addons; stock XP12 with no addons runs about 30% slower for me. Weirdly, in XP11 I can run with max 2d trees with virtually no fps hit but any trees in XP12 (even 2d) is an fps killer. Just one example of the lack of optimization. Aliasing is just plain broken on XP12 compared to XP11 for me on my 2080 super. To me, jaggies are a no-go. I've actually gone back to XP11 and have never enjoyed/appreciated it more...really. LR will get it figured out eventually so I'll keep checking back every few months or so.
@@Sim737Pilot and @flightgamer7849 - do you guys still prefer XP11 or is XP12 better now? I have just 1060 3GB, and plane to be streaming the gameplay on Twitch and TH-cam, so naturally worried about the performance and which one to choose 🙂
I started with XP12. Was not happy with the frame rate. I then bought XP11. Yes, I bought an older version as crazy as that sounds, and the frame rate is doubled. Not happy that I had to pay to downgrade to get a decent frame rate, but had no choice. Intel i7, AMD 6600XT GPU.
Spent so much time on Xplane 10 and 11 years ago. I also spent a lot of money on XP11 with third party aircraft's. When XP12 came out and there was no support to convert XP11 aircraft over to XP12 (Carenado), I made a difficult decision to leave XP. I was extremely frustrated. I eventually built a monster PC and moved onto MSFS 2020 and I am extremely happy. My curiosity was bugging me so I tried XP12 with the default C172 and had a horrible experience. Not sure why. Maybe I had lost my XP feeling. To be honest, XP12 looks much better then previous XP versions including the flight model but the lack of developer support, especially when you spend thousands on third party aircraft is a shame. I've promised myself, until this developer scenario changes for XP, I will never go back and invest in XP again.
Michael, thanks for confirming what I see on my computer. I use VR for all flights and get 30 to 40 fps on Xplane 11. I have been trying for two weeks to make Xplane 12 work but it is just not useable in VR. Guess I'll just use 11 until there is some noticeable improvement on 12
*UPDATE- 8/8/23*- With XP12.06b4, the clouds have got significantly better and are no longer an "immersion" killer as they had been in the past. However, the AA still needs work as even with max settings, there are still issues.
I will write only a few words from myself, because literally a few days ago I switched from 1080Ti to 3080Ti - leaving the old i7 8700K processor for now. My observations concern VR (Rift S), which is a very demanding technology, because this is the only way I use the simulator Before changing the GPU (1080Ti): - XP11 - really good performance (locked 27 FPS for VR) - except London, Paris, NY etc - everywhere was fine even with demanding planes (e.g. Q4XP) - XP12 (I only have a bare Demo version) - it wasn't even suitable for test flights (unless the settings sliders were completely to left) After changing the GPU (3080Ti): - XP11 - it's better, but no WOW effect ;-) (of course it's better/smoother etc, but it's similar - London, Paris etc still not for me) - XP12 - complete game changer. I'm still using the bare Demo version, but the simulator performed wonderfully. Most settings sliders to the right. Sim is seamless with clouds, rain, any time of the day. There was a real WOW effect here ;-) The conclusion, although known to many people: XP11 - needs a powerful processor, and XP12 - needs a good GPU. I won't mention the second simulator, because there the optimization is a few steps ahead and the effect of switching from 1080Ti to 3080Ti was a great WOW ;-) (but I can't like that game). Sorry for the long post...
I have no experience with XPlane 11, but I do run XPlane 12. With three monitors, and flying in the NE corner of FL, I've seen 55-60 FPS with three monitors running at 1920x1080. I have a pretty beefy system though; I9-1200K, 32G DDR5 and an RTX 4080 GPU. Very happy with the performance.
4080 is a very 4k capable card, so im guessing that has a lot to do woth it. 3060ti is more 1080p->1440p territory, so 3x1080p is 1440p->4k territory and a bit much for the gpu to keep up with all those pixels
I get about 22 fps with i9-12900k and 6900XT. Kinda disappointing. Getting 26 FPS and on MSFS, but much better graphics and visuals. Edit: I guess it’s worth noting it’s on a 2560*1440 Monitor @ 144hz
I get at least 30+fps in XP12 with lesser specs i7 10700k RX6800 non xt version. 3440x1440 on settings High and Ultra. MSFS does run and look better but I prefer the physics in XP12.
Increased performance in VR is the one "feature" I want the most right now. Everything else is a distant second. I get 40 fps in XP11 VR and 20 fps in XP12 VR. As I've said before, I really hope the Laminar Research developers seriously explore strategic application of parallelization to speed up the pipeline. Under Linux, I'm currently seeing one core maxed out and only half my GPU used for both versions of XP, which is similar to what you've seen in your testing under Windows.
Yes, about 30-40% loss of fps is exactly what I see in my PC with XP 12.03r1 5800x3D - 2080ti However, the frame times, with any kind of weather/clouds are about 0.150{CPU) 0.210-0.230 (GPU), which gives am around 40-45fps in general. As a conclusion a better GPU reduces the frame times on its side and should increase the overall fps. Well, I personally wait for further updates, as you said Michael, because there will be performance update and 40 fps is not a lack of FPS (1080p and more or less max so settings). Hope that the optimizations will lead to more balanced frame times.
I concur Michael, just trying the X-Plane 12 demo, I saw a FPS decrease of not quite 50%. I'm running an XForcePC built machine with an i7 8086K overclocked to 4.8 ghz with 16GB ram and an NVIDIA 1060 with 6GB of vram. I'm using a single 27 inch 1080P monitor. When flying over sparsely populated scenery, I often get over 100 FPS.
@@tomik_brumik1328 Most of the settings are medium except for Texture Quality which is max and rendering resolution which is full. Rendering distance is high, World objects and Vegetation density are max and draw parked aircraft and enable 3D vegetation are checked.
Hello Michael, have you noticed that "text", not texture, on XP12 is blurry on the cockpits? On XP11 "text" is fine. Got a 5600X with 3080 rtx 32gb ram, and no matter what I tweek, XP12 cockpit is only readable with a lot of zoom.
@@xforcepc Thank you very much for the reply Michael, Im not using super sampling. I tried it though, gets a lot worse when enabed. Give it a try, read the defaut 737 cockpit on XP11 and XP12 and see that you need to zoom on XP12 for the text to be defined, you'll see that reading the cockpit on XP11 is better than on XP12, same for c172... etc
Could you please make a video on how best to set up an ultra wide display (49 inches) in terms of resolution settings? What are your thoughts on using a larger OLED TV instead of a monitor. What are the caveats for using a TV monitor. I am generally happy with my Samsung 49 inch display, but would much rather have more screen estate, in order to see the instruments close up as on the 49 inch display, while also seeing more of the outside world, without having to shift the view up and down continuously during a VFR approach. Can it be said that larger screens will require stronger GPU or does this only matter for the resolution (granularity, i.e. 2K vs 4 K vs 8K). Track IR is not for me due to a health condition that does not let me move my head around and VR-Glasses are not available for macOS yet. BTW thanks for all your content. I really appreciate your to the point explanations. As to the frame rate drops, I think the 50 percent figure is about right, even though I seem to have recognised some improvement between XP-12 07 Beta and 08 Beta. Hopefully Laminar can find more ways to improve performance in forthcoming versions of XP-12. I have a M1 Macbook pro, but feel X-Plane is not taking full advantage of the power of the many cores these machines offer.
Michael, ok so I watched a vid. you did some 7years ago I have air manager 4 xxx and the knobster I have a M1 iPad Pro and a 2nd iPad question is how do I get the AM panel to show up in the iPad using WiFi thanks for the help
Pity you never had more GPU's to test, like RTX 3090'S or RTX 4090's...to see how they compare in 4k..No idea why people still use 1080p these days!...I seem to be getting more of a 50% decrease in FPS when using XP12 using similar settings....This is very disappointing tbh, as i don't see this improving much, with no obvious miracle cure around the corner. By the time i decrease the sliders in XP12 to run as smooth as V 11 does,...it looks no better than V 11!..so i cant see any real upgrade apart from 3d clouds which shimmer like crazy, rain effects, and 3d trees which whilst they do look good, i just cant see any real must have reasons to upgrade to 12...YET. Great video as always thank you..
Michael, thanks for the faithful help and support videos over the years. We appreciate it.
It was worse when going from XP10 to XP11
Looks like I'll stay with X-plane 11. Thanks for the video.
x plane 11 is still good and I still use it, i have not upgraded to x plane 12 because x plane 12 is poorly optimized.
Compared with XP11 fully loaded and running beautifully with lots of 3rd party cloud, ortho, traffic, and other addons; stock XP12 with no addons runs about 30% slower for me.
Weirdly, in XP11 I can run with max 2d trees with virtually no fps hit but any trees in XP12 (even 2d) is an fps killer. Just one example of the lack of optimization.
Aliasing is just plain broken on XP12 compared to XP11 for me on my 2080 super. To me, jaggies are a no-go.
I've actually gone back to XP11 and have never enjoyed/appreciated it more...really.
LR will get it figured out eventually so I'll keep checking back every few months or so.
Im in the same boat, or plane should I say;-) That and the nuclear cloud formations in XP12.
@@Sim737Pilot and @flightgamer7849 - do you guys still prefer XP11 or is XP12 better now? I have just 1060 3GB, and plane to be streaming the gameplay on Twitch and TH-cam, so naturally worried about the performance and which one to choose 🙂
I started with XP12. Was not happy with the frame rate. I then bought XP11. Yes, I bought an older version as crazy as that sounds, and the frame rate is doubled. Not happy that I had to pay to downgrade to get a decent frame rate, but had no choice. Intel i7, AMD 6600XT GPU.
same here xp11 doubles fps than xp12
damn, that’s a nice video card too
I'll give it 1 year before I fully migrate then.
As a VR user I’ll be staying with 11 for a long time to come. 12 is a big step backwards
i5 6600k OC'd at 4.5ghz // GTX 1060 6GB // 16GB 2133ghz ram // 1TB WD M.2 // 1080p 60hz display
ICAO: KPDX (Default demo flight location) // Weather Clear // Time: 12pm
XP11: 60 fps (vsync) // XP12 (Demo): 35fps (vsync)
Confirmed: +-40% FPS difference. Still sticking to XP11 for the time being.
Thank you Michael.
Spent so much time on Xplane 10 and 11 years ago. I also spent a lot of money on XP11 with third party aircraft's. When XP12 came out and there was no support to convert XP11 aircraft over to XP12 (Carenado), I made a difficult decision to leave XP. I was extremely frustrated. I eventually built a monster PC and moved onto MSFS 2020 and I am extremely happy. My curiosity was bugging me so I tried XP12 with the default C172 and had a horrible experience. Not sure why. Maybe I had lost my XP feeling. To be honest, XP12 looks much better then previous XP versions including the flight model but the lack of developer support, especially when you spend thousands on third party aircraft is a shame. I've promised myself, until this developer scenario changes for XP, I will never go back and invest in XP again.
I like the transparency, here. Microsoft would NOT give you this level of honesty with MSFS affiliates. :o
Michael, thanks for confirming what I see on my computer. I use VR for all flights and get 30 to 40 fps on Xplane 11. I have been trying for two weeks to make Xplane 12 work but it is just not useable in VR. Guess I'll just use 11 until there is some noticeable improvement on 12
*UPDATE- 8/8/23*- With XP12.06b4, the clouds have got significantly better and are no longer an "immersion" killer as they had been in the past. However, the AA still needs work as even with max settings, there are still issues.
I will write only a few words from myself, because literally a few days ago I switched from 1080Ti to 3080Ti - leaving the old i7 8700K processor for now. My observations concern VR (Rift S), which is a very demanding technology, because this is the only way I use the simulator
Before changing the GPU (1080Ti):
- XP11 - really good performance (locked 27 FPS for VR) - except London, Paris, NY etc - everywhere was fine even with demanding planes (e.g. Q4XP)
- XP12 (I only have a bare Demo version) - it wasn't even suitable for test flights (unless the settings sliders were completely to left)
After changing the GPU (3080Ti):
- XP11 - it's better, but no WOW effect ;-) (of course it's better/smoother etc, but it's similar - London, Paris etc still not for me)
- XP12 - complete game changer. I'm still using the bare Demo version, but the simulator performed wonderfully. Most settings sliders to the right. Sim is seamless with clouds, rain, any time of the day. There was a real WOW effect here ;-)
The conclusion, although known to many people: XP11 - needs a powerful processor, and XP12 - needs a good GPU.
I won't mention the second simulator, because there the optimization is a few steps ahead and the effect of switching from 1080Ti to 3080Ti was a great WOW ;-) (but I can't like that game).
Sorry for the long post...
I am running 3x1080p 4080, i7 10700 and get 25fps at best...
I have no experience with XPlane 11, but I do run XPlane 12. With three monitors, and flying in the NE corner of FL, I've seen 55-60 FPS with three monitors running at 1920x1080. I have a pretty beefy system though; I9-1200K, 32G DDR5 and an RTX 4080 GPU. Very happy with the performance.
4080 is a very 4k capable card, so im guessing that has a lot to do woth it. 3060ti is more 1080p->1440p territory, so 3x1080p is 1440p->4k territory and a bit much for the gpu to keep up with all those pixels
I get about 22 fps with i9-12900k and 6900XT. Kinda disappointing. Getting 26 FPS and on MSFS, but much better graphics and visuals.
Edit: I guess it’s worth noting it’s on a 2560*1440 Monitor @ 144hz
Downgrade to 22.5 drivers
Hshah time to get a new gpu.
@@richardcook1987 I don’t think it’s my specs. I’ve seen people with 1080s getting 20 fps.
I get at least 30+fps in XP12 with lesser specs i7 10700k RX6800 non xt version. 3440x1440 on settings High and Ultra. MSFS does run and look better but I prefer the physics in XP12.
Increased performance in VR is the one "feature" I want the most right now. Everything else is a distant second. I get 40 fps in XP11 VR and 20 fps in XP12 VR. As I've said before, I really hope the Laminar Research developers seriously explore strategic application of parallelization to speed up the pipeline. Under Linux, I'm currently seeing one core maxed out and only half my GPU used for both versions of XP, which is similar to what you've seen in your testing under Windows.
Thanks for that statement, and that's exactly what is the biggest problem with x plane 12
Yes, about 30-40% loss of fps is exactly what I see in my PC with XP 12.03r1
5800x3D - 2080ti
However, the frame times, with any kind of weather/clouds are about
0.150{CPU) 0.210-0.230 (GPU), which gives am around 40-45fps in general.
As a conclusion a better GPU reduces the frame times on its side and should increase the overall fps. Well, I personally wait for further updates, as you said Michael, because there will be performance update and 40 fps is not a lack of FPS (1080p and more or less max so settings). Hope that the optimizations will lead to more balanced frame times.
Ugh...just not good enough for me with the 3 screens in my Home cockpit.....
Thanks for the video.
Looks like I will need to do that 1k€ PC upgrade befour I get XP12. Thanks for the video
I concur Michael, just trying the X-Plane 12 demo, I saw a FPS decrease of not quite 50%. I'm running an XForcePC built machine with an i7 8086K overclocked to 4.8 ghz with 16GB ram and an NVIDIA 1060 with 6GB of vram. I'm using a single 27 inch 1080P monitor. When flying over sparsely populated scenery, I often get over 100 FPS.
can you show yours graphics settings? i have very simillar specs
@@tomik_brumik1328
Most of the settings are medium except for Texture Quality which is max and rendering resolution which is full. Rendering distance is high, World objects and Vegetation density are max and draw parked aircraft and enable 3D vegetation are checked.
@@sturisa okay, thank you so much
@@tomik_brumik1328 Sure, hope it helps!
is the performance of xp12 still being worked on (future updates) or is that already over with 12.03?
Definitely still being worked on.
All of them.
Hello Michael, have you noticed that "text", not texture, on XP12 is blurry on the cockpits? On XP11 "text" is fine. Got a 5600X with 3080 rtx 32gb ram, and no matter what I tweek, XP12 cockpit is only readable with a lot of zoom.
Check your supersampling slider. It is the second one down on the left, I believe. Move it all of the way to the right. You may need to also restart.
@@xforcepc Thank you very much for the reply Michael, Im not using super sampling. I tried it though, gets a lot worse when enabed. Give it a try, read the defaut 737 cockpit on XP11 and XP12 and see that you need to zoom on XP12 for the text to be defined, you'll see that reading the cockpit on XP11 is better than on XP12, same for c172... etc
@@hugoweber5317 Then, I think this may be a bug that will be fixed. I have seen other people complain about things being blurry.
Xp12 definetely more blurry than 11 for me as well.
Could you please make a video on how best to set up an ultra wide display (49 inches) in terms of resolution settings? What are your thoughts on using a larger OLED TV instead of a monitor. What are the caveats for using a TV monitor. I am generally happy with my Samsung 49 inch display, but would much rather have more screen estate, in order to see the instruments close up as on the 49 inch display, while also seeing more of the outside world, without having to shift the view up and down continuously during a VFR approach. Can it be said that larger screens will require stronger GPU or does this only matter for the resolution (granularity, i.e. 2K vs 4 K vs 8K). Track IR is not for me due to a health condition that does not let me move my head around and VR-Glasses are not available for macOS yet. BTW thanks for all your content. I really appreciate your to the point explanations.
As to the frame rate drops, I think the 50 percent figure is about right, even though I seem to have recognised some improvement between XP-12 07 Beta and 08 Beta. Hopefully Laminar can find more ways to improve performance in forthcoming versions of XP-12. I have a M1 Macbook pro, but feel X-Plane is not taking full advantage of the power of the many cores these machines offer.
thank you so much
Did you check cpu time and gpu time on both versions. Are proportion the same? is bottleneck changing to need more cpu or gpu.
Weird enough, XPlane 12 is a lot smoother than XP11 on my pc. Even the shadows and the lighting doesn't effect my fps but in XP11, my fps drops 10
Mine has been much better on XP12. I9, 64 GB RAM and RTX 3090. It flies so smoothly. Not sure if that is the flight model but it's great
Flying XAviation's Cornell PT19 at my 33EFTS build I have actually gained FPS. XP11 runs around 30ish, 12 runs at 60.
No idea why.
Michael, would show Xplane 12 running in a HDR screen vs in a non HDR screen?
From 100fps to 60fps is still very nice to play, if i had 80fps on x11 now i have 40fps (or should have) and thats already very low
Michael, ok so I watched a vid. you did some 7years ago I have air manager 4 xxx and the knobster I have a M1 iPad Pro and a 2nd iPad question is how do I get the AM panel to show up in the iPad using WiFi thanks for the help
Who else running the original Xplane 10 from Mike!
Are you using default scenery?
I get random stutters which didn't happen with 11. Running i9 and a RTX 3080. I have had to turn down the settings for certain airports eg egll.
That's one of the worst airports to run and even worse if you use third party airliners there as they tend to be harder to run than default aircraft.
@@flightsimdeskuk yes I have noticed that.
Any performance boost on xp12 atm?
I'm over 140FPS with a 3070 and i7 12700. 60 FPS with Q400 on XP11 with tons of scenery addons.
Awful performance on my RX6800/5800X3D, I get random drops just by looking at different parts of the scenery (it can even get under 30FPS).
RX6800 i7 10700k runs ok on my end. Not all settings are maxed. Find a balance and take it from there.
Pity you never had more GPU's to test, like RTX 3090'S or RTX 4090's...to see how they compare in 4k..No idea why people still use 1080p these days!...I seem to be getting more of a 50% decrease in FPS when using XP12 using similar settings....This is very disappointing tbh, as i don't see this improving much, with no obvious miracle cure around the corner.
By the time i decrease the sliders in XP12 to run as smooth as V 11 does,...it looks no better than V 11!..so i cant see any real upgrade apart from 3d clouds which shimmer like crazy, rain effects, and 3d trees which whilst they do look good, i just cant see any real must have reasons to upgrade to 12...YET. Great video as always thank you..
Why xp12 is so bad optimized. It looks so bad in default even with max settings. The devs need to catch up with the market standard