Please try X-Plane 10.41 release candidate two by running our installer, updating, and checking “get betas”. More notes here.  Release candidate two gets in the datarefs that I (stupidly) forgot in RC1.

This build should go final this week!

About Ben Supnik

Ben is a software engineer who works on X-Plane; he spends most of his days drinking coffee and swearing at the computer -- sometimes at the same time.

26 comments on “Please Try X-Plane 10.41 Release Candidate 2”

  1. Cor X-Plane 10.42 released all ready………………..(or so says the 10.41rc2 Splash screen). ;-D

  2. Hi Ben

    I am just going to put it out there, its not bug or perticular related to this topic so excuse my boldness. But please note somewhere on your desk, that it would be awesome to have an option to select gates and runways on the Quick Select Startup Screen. As of now there isnt any option to do so other than the indicated airport, aircraft and time/weather etc. I now extra features would mean extra cost, but the benifit of having this is in my mind great so hope you manage down the line.

    Keep up the excellent work as always to you and the team.

  3. I have extensively used the new extended DSF feature, together with the HD mesh v3 and UHD mesh v1 Alps by Alpilotx. While the VAS allocation was quite lower than expected (it never went above 10 GB, while I purchased 32 GB of RAM following the recommendations by alpilotx), I was quite surprised to notice an aggressive usage of the VRAM. Monitoring my video card (an almost obsolete Radeon HD 7870 with 2 GB of VRAM) with GPU-z, I noticed peaks of 3,8 GB of VRAM allocated! Of course, since they are much more than the VRAM physically installed in the video card, the others were dynamically allocated in the system RAM.
    I suppose this is by design, so in case you plan to use extended DSF *and* use custom meshes for your scenery, beware of the VRAM required. I finally decided to definitely replace the good old Radeon with a brand new GeForce GTX 980 Ti with 6 GB of VRAM… let’s see what improvement I will get…

      1. Hi Ben, I don’t know in detail how the video driver uses the VRAM, but it looks strange to me that the driver deliberately decides to allocate up to twice the available VRAM. And in any case through empirical tries I saw that the extended DSF has a high influence on the VRAM usage (up to 3.8 GB with the extended DSF on, up to 1.5 GB with extended DSF off).
        From your reply I understand that the decision to allocate more or less VRAM is up to the video driver and not to X-Plane; I’ll try again with extended DSF as soon as I have the new video card available.

        1. Dear Filippo,
          I have the same graphics card (AMD 7870) and also thought about buying a GTX 980TI. It would be great to hear how your fps benefits from this upgrade.

          regards,

          Carsten

          1. Made the same upgrade myself, expensive but did make a huge improvement especially to cloud rendering performance (without Skymaxx). I think the overclocked Core i5 is now the bottleneck on my system, maybe along with the RAM.

    2. I’m having the same VRAM issues with 4GB on a GTX 970 card. Download GPU-Z if you haven’t…when I monitor it, I see substantial traffic, “bus interface load”, where it will go to 30-40% which I think is thrashing data between VRAM and system RAM. When this happens FPS is horrible…anywhere from 5 to 20. I’d be interested to hear how 6 GB works for you. For me, I have to close all other programs including chrome in order to free up enough to make it workable. I’m on driver 355.80. Let us know how that new card is! 🙂

      In my case the card is definitely trying to use it. The odd thing is I can close the sim and restart it and then it’s usually fine. Maybe memory is being allocated by something and then not released. I can only guess and I’m sure not correctly.

      1. FYI, GTX 970’s do NOT have 4GB of VRAM (despite what the box says). They max out of 3.5 GB. More than that and you’re hosing your GPU.

      2. Hi GBP
        My computer runs smoth al 30 frames in any condition with an
        4Gb 970 Strix.
        Try changing Treading to off at nvidia control panel.

        1. Mine does too if I choose an airport in a less dense area than LAX. I also have extended dsf on and skymaxx pro. I think it’s just a combination of all of this where I’ve exceeded the available memory. I have multi thread optimization off. Thanks.

  4. random question would you consider adding SMAA to x-plane at some point? its even open source

    but about the same performance hit as FXAA and looks much much nicer

    1. It’s a possibility. If you have a link to an already-ported GLSL 1.2 version, please send it to me – I saw a few HLSL->GLSL porting efforts on GITHub

  5. Hi Ben,

    it’s an off topic question but there isn’t any discussion going on here so ..:-)

    Why things that you can change and improve with data ref editor (or write a lua script for example to make those changes perament) , i.e those amazing scattering effects that one can achieve.
    Things like making clouds look more impressive with data refs.

    and a thing like that :http://www.avsim.com/topic/476160-much-improved-fog-easily-attainable-but/

    I mean , is there any reason why so much stuff can be easily improved, but they aren’t there out-of-the-box?

    So why those awesome things are hidden from the “regular” user 🙂 ?

    1. If you read the fog thread, the answer is sort of in there – setting the near fog ratio higher makes hard-ball IFR days look better, but it also screws up clean days. Similarly, a lot of the scattering tricks make scattering look better in some views, but just turns things “pure blue” in others. Some of these tricks are matters of aesthetic taste (e.g. “hey let’s make the light billboards HUGE – ooh, pretty!”). Some of them only work in some views.

      So my view is that if a modification isn’t:
      – Applicable to all aspects of the flight (or has fine print and cases where it makes things worse) or
      – Changes the aesthetics of the sim in a way some users like but is not what we intended

      then a third party add-on is the right place for the modification.

  6. Are those datarefs deprecated ? (they are no more in the datarefs.txt).

    sim/operation/failures/rel_bad_cht
    sim/operation/failures/rel_bad_egt
    sim/operation/failures/rel_bad_ff
    sim/operation/failures/rel_bad_itt
    sim/operation/failures/rel_bad_mpr
    sim/operation/failures/rel_bad_oilp
    sim/operation/failures/rel_bad_oilt
    sim/operation/failures/rel_bad_rpm

    1. Yes. Those failures were being used _only_ in conjunction with a physical real G1000 attached to X-plane via ethernet for high-end pro training purposes.

      If you were using them in an add-on and your add-on is broken, please file a bug immediately.

  7. Thank you.

    I use smartcopilot, and write smartcopilot.cfg files. (http://xsmart-plane.com/smartcopilot/)

    Stock failures can be transmited between the two planes thru the plugin.

    The log.txt of smartcopilot tell me that it can’t found those datarefs. Now i understand why

    Will delete them of my smartcopilot.cfg files.

    1. Right – if you’re not using a physical G1000 there’s no need to sync the datarefs.
      In the past we have simply “slaved” the failures to the present UI, but recently we’ve been trying to stabilize them since third party add-ons have started to depend on them.

      In general, a third party add-on that does -generic- data IO (e.g. shovel this dataref from a config file over there) should not hard fail if a dataref is missing – it sounds like smart copilot is just issuing a warning, which is fine.

  8. Hy
    If you remember I write that in 2 system pc and mac I have low fps. I reinstall from 0 xplane in pc and mac, make update to ultime release candidate, and now I have 55 fps were I haved 12 fps.
    Cancel just preferences was not fine. Reinstall all ittems from 0, yes.
    Thanks for you job, Ludovic

  9. Hi Ben,

    Not sure if its a bug or ‘feature’, but whenever I use the Random weather generator,
    the visibility is always unlimited regardless of the mix of clouds/layers.
    If I then try to reduce the visibility in the main WX page, all the nice weather is lost.
    ( I know you hate adding more buttons, but maybe a visibility button on that page would be perfect)

    Thanks,

    Nat

Comments are closed.