OOM errors and CTD's

[geoffco 0]

Hi folks,I always thought this was only for those folk with more than 2GB of installed physical memory but having read this thread and others I decided to have a go...First off I set the /3GB switch and modified the fs9.cfg but upon testing, I found that I had real problems with texture loading. Initially it was ok, indeed better load times than normal but when moving around, the FPS gradually dropped to less than 5. This was "reset" by reloading scenery but still not useful.Adding the userva switch (so now I had /3GB /userva=2560) resolved this problem and now it looks like it's all working. Also appears to handle texture loading better than before but I'll save a full verdict until I've tried it for a while!Thanks everyone for the info in this thread :)Geoff

[altstiff 71]

This is similar to Stuart Bunches instructions above but a bit easier:I'll give MeatWaters instructions (translated from German), for the record, Meatwater has been tweaking the heck out of many games I have played for years now and is in my opinion a guru. So when I seen him praising this I knew I had to try it.From the German Forum, posted by MEATWATER and translated from German wit5h Google DISCLAIMER! TRY THIS AT YOUR OWN RISK!>>>>I am now very confident of a fix for the dreaded "out of memory" errors, as they interplay with the high detail settings, and add ons complex in recent times they have increasingly occur. I will not sell my idea, but I have a lot of tips and forums contributions ultimately the most out what finally works. The solution to the puzzle lies in the fact that neither the FS9.exe nor FSX.exe so programmed that it requests the virtual memory of Windows (XP and Vista) in a framework, as the operating system also can be processed. Since this limit within applications is missing, it gets Windows in panic and makes the OOM occur. More and more users are now on powerful hardware, such high settings possible or useful! Before got the operating system not in the situation in which we are now due to the sudden increase in requirements. These requirements are not only our users in the form of "all sliders to the right", but also add ons, which are given better hardware equipment becoming more and more trust, increased demands on resources. Now there are two tactics, the problem OOM-counter. 1) It ensures that it's not only too high to requests to the OS, 2) It continues operating and *. exe file to a table and shows both how they cope with the problem together. For option 1), to which it now countless tips and tricks for now, the problem is not really solved. It buys a stable FS with the waiving of high levels of detail, in extreme cases, even entire Add Ons (Super 80, Yak 40, Heathrow 2008). Option 2) is much more useful because it eliminates the difficulties of communication between the application and operating system, the OOM cause. Operation: Officially this Tweak works only with systems that have 2GB or more on board. But there is a lot of feedback that it is also less of RAM to work - you can safely try, more than a blue screen, it will not give, and the changes can be easily undone. Nevertheless, in all clarity: everyone tried it here at your own risk! The changeover takes place in two steps. Step one, Windows XP, more than 2GB of virtual memory available. Step two tells the individual applications, as they prefer to request more at the VM operating system can provide, without the panic that the bag close. The one or the other is already something about that, but I do not really come under the full instructions, and certainly not in English. Step 1: Download the program 4GB patchhttp://ntcore.com/4gb_patch.phpMake a backup copy of the file FS9.exe Then with the tool running locate the FS9.exe and patch it. The tool will adjust everything automatically.Flight Simulator now knows that it may ask for more virtual memory, and how it should be employed. Now Windows XP still be informed that such a request may come from programs and that it will not be frightened: Step 2: Windows XP: Click the start button then "Run" and type in sysdm.cpl and confirmed with OK. Then click on the Advanced tab, then under Startup and Recovery Settings. Then, at system startup, click Edit.There will be a text of this should be very similar here, perhaps it is also identical: [boot loader] Timeout = 30 Default = multi (0) disk (1) rdisk (0) partition (1) WINDOWS [Operating systems] Multi (0) disk (1) rdisk (0) partition (1) WINDOWS = "Windows XP Professional" / fastdetect So that Windows is no longer scared if a program asks for more virtual memory screams, add the line "3GB / userva = 2560" less the quotes so the boot loader section looks like it does below......[boot loader] Timeout = 30 Default = multi (0) disk (1) rdisk (0) partition (1) WINDOWS [Operating systems] Multi (0) disk (1) rdisk (0) partition (1) WINDOWS = "Windows XP Professional" / fastdetect / 3GB / userva = 2560 MAKE SURE TO TYPE IT IN CORRECTLY!Save the file, close all windows and starts the computer. Further benefits Some of the FS is not the only application to be affected by this Tweak benefits. Especially video editing programs, renderers, and audio converter software can also "gepimpt". Security copy remember her before the exe modified!

[psolk 3,040]

I actually just want to add that I was one of those that couldn't use the /3GB switch until the /userva=2560 setting. Prior to that there was not enough memory left for my 1.5 gigs of VRAM and my graphics AA/AF went to P**p. with the /userva I am testing now but all driver functions seem normal.Thanks for all the great information in this thread,-PaulPrimary RigLiquid CooledIntel C2D E6600 @3.2 gigsAsus P5N32SLI-Plus2 gigs Corsair XMS PC6400 4 4 4 12 @810Dual OC'd XFX 8800GTX @ 2 gigs24 inch Widescreen LCD 16XAA/16XAFDual 19 inch LCD'sRaid-0+1PCPower and Cooling 1k Quad SLIhttp://home.comcast.net/~psolk/3monitorsa.htmlBackup RigAMD 4000 San Diego @ 2.72 Gigs Kingston Corsair XMS CL2XFX 7900 GTX Raid-0

[richardlepage 0]

HiI applied the patch and adjusted the Userva in the boot ini and still had an out of memory after about 3 hours flying.I flew from Malaga to Birmingham and got an OOM abou 5 miles final from BHX.Page file usage had gradually increased from 985MB to About 1.45GB when the OOM occured which is far below the 3GB page file I have assigned with 2GB RAM.Seems that I have A memory leak somewhere.It seems that OOM messages occur anytime When the page file increases as I have got as high as 2GB before the message occured and as low as 1.2GB.I deleted the page file and let it reduild another incase the page file had become corrupted as instructed on the microsoft website and also deleted the fs9.cfg file and also let it rebuild another.I also am using Ultimate terrain Europe.I read on another forum to disable the enhanced industrial Landclass option as these can cause memory leaks.Will do some further testing . This is very frustrating as this has only happened recently on a regular basis although it did occasionally happen before.RegardsRichard

[richardlepage 0]

Just completed the same flight LEMG -EGBB which resulted in OOM error yesterday.Page file usage at the start was 875MB and at the end of the flight it had gone up to 1.35GB but no OOM this time, so theres definately a memory leak somewhere or is this normal?At the start of the flight it barely rose at all but as i got closer and over the UK the rise was quite rapid.I do have alot of addon airports for the UK almost all the major and regional airports so maybe it just needs more memory when flying here.As long as I dont keep getting these dteaded OOM messages I,ll be happy.Too early to know if ive elininated them yet. WIll keep testing.Regards

[dfish 1]

>Dave, did you apply the fix to both the FS9.exe and the>boot.ini? >>Also is it an OOM error CTD or just a plain CTD caused by a>dll for example? They are two different things, happening for>different reasons.>>This 2GB+ "hack" is a neat little fix to that nasty OOM error>problem many of us have. I just discovered it recently>myself.>>More details on the subject can be found here (look for>MeatWaters post's)>>>>>>http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=221.0>I don't get an OOM prompt, It will crash and I get the "FS has encountered a problem....." it will usually crash after a few minutes, usually when I switch views or pan around. Some times the CPU will just freeze up. I've just installed FSDream team's O'Hare and ran into the same problem. Can anyone tell me how too fix this? I've got tons of large PW. airports but I've never had a problem before.Edit: I've tried an experiment at ORD, I started with all my scenery sliders at Dense, traffic 50%. I slewed around for about 5 min. No CTD. Then I set all sliders to the right, still no problem. It wasn't until I raised traffic to 100% that my feeble little CPU crashed. It seems like I may have to reduce AI to be able to use that scenery. I'll try it at LAX.Dave FisherCYYZP4 Prescott 3.2e 478p 800mhz 1mg CPUP4P800SE Asus Motherboard2.5 gig PC3200 DDR RAM 400MHZGeForce 7600GT/512 OC'dMaxtor 80 Gig ATA 133 HD x2WDC WD800 80 Gig HDAntec 500watt true powerSharp 19 inch LCD MonitorSaitek AV8R-01 Joystickhttp://fs2crew.com/linepilot.jpg

[richardlepage 0]

If you get the FS has encountered a problem message that is not an OOM but a CTD.When you get an OOM you get a Loud BONG and a message with a red cross saying you have run out of memory.If youve just installed new scenery check that you dont have Duplicate Afcads for the same airport as I believe these can cause FS to crash. If its only crashing with 100% traffic could be just that your system cant handle it.Regards

[martinlest2 58]

I have tried the >2GB fix, patching the fs9.exe file and editing boot.iniI then flew again a flight I took earlier today, EGPK to EGSS in a PMDG 737-600, in which FS9 had an OoM error near to landing. My initial impressions were good, but soon after take-off I noticed problems - the a/c livery took much longer to load than before and the ground texture (UTEur), which has always been crystal sharp before, was very blurred and refused to come into focus.So I've gone back to the unpatched fs9.exe and usual boot.ini. Anyone else had unwanted side effects from this 'fix'?Martin

[ubersu 78]

None whatsoever - however, there can be some impact on video cards with large amounts of memory when the extra memory space is used to offload video to system ram. I have read that somewhat reducing the 'userva' parameter size can be helpful.There are lengthy discussions of the /3GB switch pluses and minuses on the board - do a search to find them.DJ

[martinlest2 58]

I have read some of these - but perhaps not enough as yet to be able to say conclusively that this fix won't ever work for me. I'll experiment and read up a bit more before I finally decide. First attempts were very disappointing however ..M.

[ubersu 78]

Looking at your system specs, I suspect that the dual video cards are eating your system memory up by caching to ram...DJ

[martinlest2 58]

I don't use them as SLI, as I have two monitors. Does that make a difference?M.

[ubersu 78]

I honestly don't know for sure, but suspect that it doesn't since they are mounted in the same machine, both will use whatever available system ram they can get for cache...DJ

[martinlest2 58]

Well, I'll experiment a bit more and continue to read what I can on these forums about the 3GB patch. Should I come to any novel conclusions, I'll post back of course!:-)

[martinlest2 58]

I flew the EGPF-EGSS route again just now in the PMDG 737. This time the a/c and ground textures loaded fine (vis. my earlier comments).But here I am at the gate at EGSS and no OoM error!! What's more, the machine I use for FS9 has a small LCD screen showing CPU and RAM usage: now I ALWAYS had OoM crashes when the RAM got to about 85/86%. This time, as I say, I've landed at Stansted and got to the ramp with no problems - OK, graphics a little jittery maybe, but nothing really to object to. And my little built-in RAM usage monitor is showing 98% at the moment as I sit at the stand. Yet all is wonderfully stable.One successful flight does not yet convince me that OoMs are a thing of the past, but if FS9 sits happily at 97% RAM in use, then the signs are good. Certainly for the moment I am really chuffed!!M. :-)