Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
Collapse
Just Flight Community Forum
  1. Home
  2. Just Flight
  3. MSFS Products
  4. PA-28R Arrow III
  5. JF PA-28 Arrow CPU Heavy?

JF PA-28 Arrow CPU Heavy?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved PA-28R Arrow III
11 Posts 8 Posters 1.6k Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • Leonard McCoyL Offline
    Leonard McCoyL Offline
    Leonard McCoy
    wrote on last edited by Leonard McCoy
    #2

    The aircraft is approaching study level so a lot more systems are being simulated at a higher computational expensive as a result.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • S Offline
      S Offline
      sluflyer06
      wrote on last edited by
      #3

      Honestly I"d sort of expect this for any of the higher fidelity aircraft. I dont notice any issues but I do have a 5900x on open loop cooling and ultrafast ram.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • O Offline
        O Offline
        Ohmsquare
        wrote on last edited by
        #4

        Unfortunately, on my system the performance issues are noticable. I understand that my CPU and RAM (16@3200) are only (below) average, but even the Working Title CJ4 mod has a better performance (I've just tried).

        But yeah, I have actually no idea about the systems modeled and how demanding they are. I only know that the flight model is pretty good.

        Yet it would be nice if JF tried to optimize the CPU performance in future updates. Maybe it will become possible when Asobo improves their SDK.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • CraigC Offline
          CraigC Offline
          Craig
          wrote on last edited by
          #5

          Unfortunately, Third Party aircraft cannot be compared in anywhere to basic aircraft in MSFS, Third part aircraft will contain a lot more custom code and generally more realistic than anything from the base sim, meaning that it will use more resources than anything from the base sim.

          Technical Support

          1 Reply Last reply
          -1
          • O Offline
            O Offline
            Ohmsquare
            wrote on last edited by
            #6

            I have found the solution. It’s right in the manual.

            I suspected the EFB and all the GPS modules running in the background (at the same time) could affect the CPU. But turning off the EFB using the I/Com switch did not help, because it does not actually turn it off, it only makes it invisible. However, the EFB can be switched off by using the physical ‘Home’ button, located on its right bezel (as correctly described in the manual):

            Home Button (2).png

            FPS CPU TEST (w/ lowest graphics settings):
            EFB On:
            33d849c6-6dc7-4fb0-8b95-3a31f95ef57f-image.png
            EFB Off:
            66a6b5f4-a662-4947-a028-998ee7428e6b-image.png
            5b8343a7-aad6-4919-ac79-dbd165fb08cf-image.png

            L 1 Reply Last reply
            5
            • Z Offline
              Z Offline
              ZenIT_SWE
              wrote on last edited by
              #7

              I have noticed this as well. In fact, I have to stay away from high density areas and airports in order to keep my frame rate at a flyable level.

              Obviously some impact on the performance is expected with this addon compared to the default equivalents, but I get worse fps with this addon than I get with the FBW A32NX and the WT CJ4. Those aircraft are way more complex than the Pa-28 which brings me to believe there's something else going on here.

              My theory is that they accidentally released a debug build. They are compiled with debug flags and no optimization flags which would explain the performance issue.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • O Ohmsquare

                I have found the solution. It’s right in the manual.

                I suspected the EFB and all the GPS modules running in the background (at the same time) could affect the CPU. But turning off the EFB using the I/Com switch did not help, because it does not actually turn it off, it only makes it invisible. However, the EFB can be switched off by using the physical ‘Home’ button, located on its right bezel (as correctly described in the manual):

                Home Button (2).png

                FPS CPU TEST (w/ lowest graphics settings):
                EFB On:
                33d849c6-6dc7-4fb0-8b95-3a31f95ef57f-image.png
                EFB Off:
                66a6b5f4-a662-4947-a028-998ee7428e6b-image.png
                5b8343a7-aad6-4919-ac79-dbd165fb08cf-image.png

                L Offline
                L Offline
                lancealotg
                wrote on last edited by
                #8

                @Ohmsquare

                Fantastic find, thank you!!!

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • S Offline
                  S Offline
                  sluflyer06
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #9

                  I only see a 1 FPS increase turning the EFB off.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • S Offline
                    S Offline
                    Sender46
                    wrote on last edited by Sender46
                    #10

                    It makes no difference for me. I'm guessing that's because I have a 5900X so plenty of spare CPU capacity while the GTX980 is maxed out.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • C Offline
                      C Offline
                      copper
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #11

                      Yep, the FPS increase will only be visible if you're CPU bound since it basically only affects the CPU load.

                      @Craig said in JF PA-28 Arrow CPU Heavy?:

                      Unfortunately, Third Party aircraft cannot be compared in anywhere to basic aircraft in MSFS, Third part aircraft will contain a lot more custom code and generally more realistic than anything from the base sim, meaning that it will use more resources than anything from the base sim.

                      Well this is a bold statement if even a complex airliner which definitely has more lines of code and logic and screens has less FPS impact.

                      The EFB with it's static display eating so much CPU power is simply unoptimized and should be fixed. There is no reason that the EFB alone (the rest of the logic is still working fine while the EFB is off!) costs so much performance.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      1
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Don't have an account? Register

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • Users