FSX. The tweaking game gives some good moments.. At least here, it's more like "how to save my 35 US dollars investment". And i finally got the right tuning. This should be your article, your testimonies : how you tamed your... Vancouver.
Okay first, just a brief word on my initial configuration :
Processor I5 with clock of 3,4 Ghz, 6 MB RAM, ATI HD 6570
I have got 100 % of OOM (out of memory) symptoms from the moment i installed FSDT Vancouver. Then i decided to take a better look at my task manager (CTL + ALT + DEL).
What i found is that FSX started to generate OOM from 4,65 GB.
I flew several flight from Ketchikan, Bella Coola and San Fancisco, but each time, OOM occured in the last 10 nm to CYVR.
So i tried a few things. But i am not offering you a solution, just some tips that you might try to use. There are better experts than me in this area...
I flew several flight from Ketchikan, Bella Coola and San Fancisco, but each time, OOM occured in the last 10 nm to CYVR.
So i tried a few things. But i am not offering you a solution, just some tips that you might try to use. There are better experts than me in this area...
My solutions :
- In Addon Manager, i deactivated the "Force HD textures".
- I uninstalled Orbx freeware West Wind, since it's close to CYVR.
- Then, i uninstalled REX environment (version 2).
- I also applied the new Microsoft update. It's supposed to prevent OOM.
http://kostasfsworld.wordpress.com/2012/09/24/oom-out-of-memory-helperfix/
I could also make some tweaks in the FSX.CFG but everything was alright.
Lod was at 4,50000
And i did not want to change Texture-Max-Load = 4096.
I kept my PMDG NGX (not negotiable !)
And i tried with IVAO / IVAP interface.
Result ?
It worked. On my computer, once i was overtaking 4,70 GB (task manager), i started to get OOM.
With my new configuration, the task manager stayed around 4,25 - 4,40 GB.
I am not getting any OOM anymore. But, i am still surprised to see my FSX frozing for some mili-seconds before the final approach to Vancouver.
This is not acceptable. OOM can be explained by too many addons, not this frozing thing.
FSDreamteam has many good reasons to say that the PMDG NGX uses too much resources.
but Vancouver has also some weaknesses :
- The DST Dynamic shadow technology, although not directly involved in these OOM (until now), shows many textures flickering when the weather is changing. So this is not a full transparent process.
- Vancouver seems to use a lot of resources too : (800 MB of memory maybe ?).
These are my conclusions, from an average simmer. I am not an expert.
Help us, post your comments and testimonies !
Dom
13 comments:
So not worth doing any of this for just an airport. Glad I didn't purchase it.
Also had OOM with the MD11. Do we really need the inside of the buildings in three-dimensional or would a good texture also do the job?
I fly FSDT Vancouver with REX essential,FSAddon+ Vancouver,PMDG NGX and UT2 60% flow.Tweak with FSPS XTREME PC. FSX use 1.7GB memory when cruise and 2.6GB when approching CYVR. That's good.
Agreed - staying away from this one and sticking with ORBX PNW, PMDG 737 and other addons in the vancouver area that don't create so many problems when they are on at the same time.
To be honest, i can't find any sense on this topic.
As you are aware you aren't an expert, you should reflect what normally is used to happen in such situation.
Other non experts feel vindicated by your text and this really doesn't help the community in any way.
If someone has trouble facing this scenery he should consult the developer, thats why they offer real support, not assumptions.
Your CPU setup doesn't fit to your non negotiable NGX. Your GPU doesn't fit to a modern FSX setup.
FSX isn't interested in virtual cores. What you do is to stress the windows jobscheduler more than needed. Turn HT off set affinity mask to 14.
Windows taskmanager isn't helpful you should use processmanager
Beside of that a modern Nvidia GPU would be the better choice. Beside more setup ability via NI they give you more sensors to read out via GPU-Z.
There are 2 main tasks in FSX, keep your GPU memory below its physical memory and keep whole FSX stuff below 4GB VAS.
If you want to fly smooth with NGX you have to raise your CPU core.
And if you set your TML to 4096 before the upcoming FSDT update, CYVR HD textures checkbox will be filled again.;-)
Wow impressive, Tom. No Orbx ?
Dom
I understand your point of view. But we don"t pretend to be experts. We are are three simmers, with different levels of knowledge on various products.
I am just writting my experience, my tricks. If it helps 1 people, i am happy.
Dom
In this case ORBX surrounding takes around 200mb memory in RAM and VRAM.
Btw. you can reproduce this amount of usage easily with pure ORBX scenery design and without FSDT vodoo.
Just start in YSCB with an older PMDG airliner eg MD-11 or 744 surrounded by Australia X and set a high level of texture-filtering. Whether you get an OOM depends on details like weather, (HD clouds, traffic, LOD) At least you will have poor performance with GPU with VRAM < 1024mb.
Things have changed, since developers gave up supporting FS9. (PMDG, FSDT, ORBX,...)
Simmers have to accommodate to the new situation, if they don't wanna get disappointed.
If you really had understood that point, you would reflect that this can't be any help from a realistic point of view. As task-manager isn't your friend anyway. This is self-delusion or calculation.
It doesn't meet the minimal rules of journalism if one publishes stuff he can't barely handle.
If it's the goal to raise clicks by starting a conflict on assumption the audience will notice sooner or later.
But maybe someone buys the one people story, really touching. ;-)
Not everybody uses the NGX. I think the majority of the simmers are using "light" and freeware-aircraft as the Project Airbus for example. So for lots of people who enjoying beautiful sceneries more than f"flying" complex airliners like the NGX this topic surely might be usefull. So why not?
I hope you guys can get better computers in the future. D'andre too has a old steam powered heap.
Hardy har, har!! Very funny! I really want a new system but I am just too damn picky. I want FSX to run in the same manner as FS9 and spending any amount that won't accomplish that will just leave me disappointed. But I am currently examining hardware upgrade options.
Whilst the Complaints run rampant across many forums one thing remains clear...as put by Umberto " we have to start making some choices due to the limitations of FSX(the foundation/core).
Surely, we don't want the new / innovation to cease when developing addons for our beloved hobby. Its what has brought us much delight in flying equipment such as NGX and now the Airbus x. I can almost feel the fear now resonating with the other devs on their unreleased products as I read each post. I would even bet that they are second guessing themselves.
At these stages a lot must be resonating with all of us like "what will I need to live without in the virtual world when the Pmdg 777 arrives?"
By no means am I'm saying that our complaints are not valid, But what we need is to be as constructive as possible. In the end we all seek success, do we not?
In recent passing, I've had to fly to and From CYVR via default fields to achieve success. Shucks, has anyone tried to fly from NYC or Philly (addons) into EU or Europe (AS EHAM) with FSX advanced equipment such as CLS A330/ CS777 or the like without getting the Oom message?
Or has anyone completed multiple flights in one sitting using NGX 3hr legs and addon scenery such EGLL, EDDL, LGKO?
I can share that after every tweak, I can still only fly 2 legs of a combined time of 6hrs in the NGX before having to restart my Computer.
I can live with it...not at all happy with it, but I can live with it.
Ooms are almosts inevitable with Fsx as a preivous posting/blogger had shared. I initially thought that it was a bi-product of 3rd partyware thats exclusively designed for FSX only, but then getting consistent Ooms when flying into AeroSofts EDDL quickly nullified that thought...
Soo what is one to do?????
well let's not forget the there have been many successes. After all, we have some of the benefits in FS9 because of FSX as well and versa vice FSX because of the limits on FS9 to make FSX at all flyable.
So let's continue to keep it positive and hope someone comes across the antidote
Post a Comment
Comments are now deactivated. Please visit our new website: AirDailyX.net
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.