What Settings Should I Use To Help Reduce OOM

[kerouner 0]

Hello All!I fly the PMDG 747 a lot or should I say I atempt to. I receive on almost every flight the OOM. Can anyone suggest what my settings should be for my computer, video card, and FSX? I do have the OOM occasionally with other planes. This is very frustrating and never experienced on FS9. I thought when I bought this power machine my problems would end.My system is as follows;XPS 720 DellIntel Core 2 Extreme CPU Q6850@3.04GB Memory144 GB storage & 500 GB StorageCreative X-Fi AudioNvidia GeForce 8800 GTXI have all the recent updates that I can find. Any help would be greatly appreciated!GRouner

[GHarrall 494]

If you are on a 32bit operating system you need to add the 3GB switch to the OS boot preferences page.Do a search for 3GB switch.

[kerouner 0]

I am on a 32bit system but you are writing to a novice. Sorry, but where do you want me to search for the 3GB switch, my system, the internet, this forum?

[jdk2 1]

Here you go: http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...d=438071&page=8Regards,Jim Karn

[kerouner 0]

Thanks! I will give her a whirl.

[Guest D17S]

Operating systems keep "tally sheet" that forecasts projected memory usage by individual programs. It's called lots of things, including (inaccurately) Virtual Memory. It has nothing to do with AnY hardware function. It's Entirely occurs within the operating system. 32bit operating systems are preset to have a limit of 2Gbs, per process (program). When the "tally sheet" hits this number for any program, the program shuts down with that (poorly worded) OOM message. The 3G switch moves this limit to 3Gs. Using a 64Bit operating system will move this limit to 4Gs. Finally, when we start using 64bit programs, the limit will be moved to 8 terabits. That ought to do it, but that solution is not available yet. Try the 3G switch. If you still get the OOMs, consider switching to Vista 64. It was nothing any normal simmer would encounter, but I was able to take out even the 4G limit (in Vista 64) with the 744X and FSX. 64bit programs Must start happening soon. We are seeing the early warning signs now with these OOMs. Moving that limit up to 8T can't happen a moment too soon.

[kerouner 0]

Sam, I did what was suggested and I just flew a complete route from LAX to LAS without any OOM popping up! Incredible difference. I can't thank all of you enough!Gene

[Guest jahman]

>Using a 64Bit operating system will move this limit to 4Gs.Indeed, but wouldn't a portion of the OS and video RAM need to be mapped into the app's 32-bit space, thus reducing available address space below 4 GBy?For example, suppose I run FSX, a 32-bit app, under Vista 64 with a 1 GBy Video card: Wouldn't FSX then be limited to "seeing" only 4 GBy - 1 GBy Video = 3 GBy, especially under DX9?Or would Vista 64 with DX10 (Read: Virtualized Video RAM) allow FSX to use the full 4 GBy + 1 GBy Video RAM = 5 GBy?Would love to know the answer!Cheers,- jahman.

[Guest D17S]

The Vcard memory does contribute to the Virtual Address Space usage, but how much is not clear (at least to me). I understand that - at least - the amount of Vram the program is using (or projects it will be using) is included in VS. However I don't know if the entire Vcard's memory is included, regardless of usage. It was interesting to observe that VS ran between .5G and 1G Above my physical ram load at all times. My 512M 8800GT, therefore could Not have been responsible for the entire difference between VS and physical allocations, at least at all times. However your question does highlight another interesting observation I made. I saw VS just trip over 4Gs before it OOM'd. This was right on schedule for a 32bit program running in a 64 bit environment. This clearly indicates that the op system was NoT running anywhere in this 1st 4Gs of VS. FSX had it all. The 64bit op system was running in VS Above that 4G program allocation.You say something fancy happens with DX10? Don't know about that at all. I have a GTX260, but just took it out. There was no improvement in FSX and the fan was running like a B-29 on takeoff roll. Idle temp was 80+. 3Dmark Vantage ran it to 110C and crashed the system in 10 seconds. However FSX is such a light Vload, the card cruzed along at a tolerable 85C. Ran fine, just didn't make $500 (or 5 cents) of difference. Got an email into BFG. This can't be right. I still want to see how VS handles a 900MB card. This is really the point of your question . . . and mine too. We'll see, but I bet we're right on the edge of (even) the 3G VS barrier.

[Guest jahman]

>I saw VS just trip over 4Gs before it OOM'd. This was right on>schedule for a 32bit program running>in a 64 bit environment. This clearly indicates that the op>system was NoT running anywhere in this 1st 4Gs of VS. FSX had>it all. The 64bit op system was running in VS Above that 4G>program allocation.You mean the OS had allocated the full 4 GBy to FSX? Interesting!>You say something fancy happens with DX10? Don't know about>that at all. Indeed the big difference in DX9 and DX10 under Vista vs. Win XP is that with Vista the WDDM - Windows Display Driver Model virtualizes the VRAM, i.e. each app thinks it "owns" 100% of the VRAM similar to how the OS virtualizes regular RAM. (Previously I had thought only DX10 was affected).So there seems to be an advantage in Vista regarding OOM, especially if you have a lot of VRAM.WDDM: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Display_Driver_ModelBut the article is moot about whether virtualized VRAM is available on both Vista 32 and 64 or ony on Vista 32...Anybody know the answer to this?Cheers,- Jahman.

[Guest D17S]

Sometimes I think there's only a committee somewhere that fully understands this stuff. 'All-of-it' is simply beyond any one (deity or otherwise).