9 minutes ago, Nedo68 said:

a nice christmas present 😁

Tech alpha 1 as my birthday present would be great, so MS you have 2 days to roll it out. 😂🙈

9 hours ago, ArchStanton said:

But the computers at that time couldn't do multithreading either.

Time to get Ryzen instead of Intel.

Im looking forward to see ZEN 3

14 minutes ago, topatov said:

Time to get Ryzen instead of Intel.

Im looking forward to see ZEN 3

Still DX11 which isn't able to do multithreaded, so, I don't think so. 

2 minutes ago, carsten12 said:

Still DX11 which isn't able to do multithreaded

Really? Didn't know that...

6 hours ago, LB777 said:

But I was told countless times that flight simulators were the absolute pinnacle of software and that in comparison video games were a trivial matter that required no processing power at all as they were just displaying the sky, some trees and a gun.

Or could it be that the people preaching this were completely clueless??

You can't compare shooters  and flight sims, the priorities for the 2 are vastly different.

for a shooter,  FPS and latency is the most important, if its not there it's game braking.

flight sims are simple  in term of the physics needed to make it accurate.

There is a reason why flight sims have been the first simulation games, compared to other vehicles a plane is pretty simple, you could model a decent approximation with only 4 parameters, lift, drag, weight and traction.  simulating a car is much, much more complex. Accurate racing sims are fairly recent. You have to take into account friction, weight, drag, power, for each wheel,  then you need to simulate the chassis, how it deforms under load,  then the suspension geometry, which affect the handling of the car depending on tthe type of suspension. then there is the tyre simulation, which is a whole other subject just on itself.

flight sims are the pinnacle in term or map size. A sim has to render an area far greater than any other genre. then you have the details. people want 4k textures and eye candy as far as the eye can see with a technology that was never meant to achieve that.

This costs a lot in term of computing power. but  none of this existed in 2006 when fsx came out. hardware was not only less powerful it was vastly in the way of handling complex tasks. FSX was made for a kind of hardware that doesn't exist anymore.

 

what i take from this interview is that  fs20 will be dependent  on the number of cores available. FSX and p3d were notoriously bad at multithreading. This was the single most important limiting factor in performance. It looks like we finally getting a sim able to take full advantage of modern hardware.

19 minutes ago, carsten12 said:

Still DX11 which isn't able to do multithreaded, so, I don't think so. 

The game logic load does not depend entirely on the 3D API, but DirectX 11 certainly utilises multithreading for its overhead. DirectX 12 is better at that though, and Microsoft Flight Simulator will be upgraded to it eventually.

3 hours ago, carsten12 said:

Still DX11 which isn't able to do multithreaded, so, I don't think so. 

That is so wrong on so many levels