I get oom error if I try and load Orbx YMML with Orbx Blue scenery and PMDG 744. It loads 80 percent and then CTD. As you can see I have 2 GB RAM with XP. Would more RAM help me? I heard somewhere that XP only utilises 2 GB?

It could do but to be honest you need a 64bit OS to go along with it to get the best advantage. 4GB of RAM along with the 3GB switch on a 32bit OS can help in a lot of cases, but I know what a beast YMML is and you would probably need a 64bit OS so you can use the full 4GB RAM along with a GPU with a minimum of 700MB too. In a 32bit environment with 4GB installed the OS will only be able to use about 3.25GB when using a 512MB GPU. The more memory the GPU has, the less memory is left over for the OS to use because VRAM is shadowed (I think that is the correct term) in the main RAM. So if you had a 1GB GPU you would be left with about 2.75GB available for FSX and the OS and that is getting very marginal, especially if you want to have any external to FSX add-ons running too.In essence 64bit is the way to go and if you can wait then I'd wait for Windows 7 or whatever it is finally called when its released as this is far ahead of XP-64 and Vista 64 performance wise.

Reading through the thread, Melkor and Tabs have clearly looked at the link and take time to carefully argue their points. You, on the other hand, go immediately into rant-mode rather than respond to the points they raise. What's all that about? What's your aim?

If you want to try and get smart you could at least say my rant was in response to the points they have carefully raised? What's your technical input on this topic btw? What's my AIM? You already know that, you've just been "Reading through the thead".

Keiron, you got it basically wrong. The "negative" posts as you call them, are not there against you. They are FOR other users, to help them understand technically whats behind the scenes, at least I try to post in that manner - some might have an opinion its not working, some otherwise, but thats the nature of all forums, its an open place for people to discuss new things, and that is the ONLY way to come up with a better solution. Imagine noone said anything, and even everyone saying its working out - there would be no need for improvement.

Seriously what are you going on about? Do you have a problem with high memory usage whilst flightsimming? If so have you tried this program? What results did you get from it?Funny thing is, I read through this topic and the people that have actually read and got a clue how it works and tried it whilst simming have had positive results in lowering high memory load and high memory usage whilst flightsimming. Meanwhile the MR know it alls have done nothing apart from stating reasons why they think it wont work. Brilliant.Click as this pic is too large for forum table.Let me guess.."sorry to burst your bubble Keiron but these are clearly photo shopped" ..

Keiron, thanks, I have installed this utility. Can I confirm that after installation it runs by itself? Is any further intervention / setting up required?

What's your technical input on this topic btw? [...]Let me guess.."sorry to burst your bubble Keiron but these are clearly photo shopped" ..

No, it's "sorry to burst your bubble Keiron, but your use of that image as evidence just proves that you do not understand Windows memory management". There is no need for additional technical input on the topic - the relevant stuff has already been posted in this thread. But clearly that is of no interest to you.

I've never seen anything like that with the MD-11, saying that though I've never owned an Nvidia graphics card either. DX10 is fully backwards compatible with DX9 so it isn't anything to do with that. DX10 preview mode in FSX breaks many more things than just a few planes, it's called a preview for a reason. The very worst thing about DX10 preview mode though is that AA doesn't work at all in windowed mode. I fully expect my problems to go away when I upgrade to a card with 1 Gig of VRAM.

Andy, I want to verify you. Above MD-11X was a FSX DX9 sample . I flew 146 hours with FSX Preview DX:10 combine with AA checked and filtering Anisatropic selected. I never did not have any problem as I experienced in FSX DX:9 mode combine with Vista 64 and Nvidia GTX 280 ,Question is: Why MD-11X fly almost perfect in FSX Preview DX:10 with OS Vista64 DX;10 and Nvidia GTX280 DX:10 mode ? It is interesting to search the answer....... Sanal

I never did not have any problem as I experienced in FSX DX:9 mode combine with Vista 64 and Nvidia GTX 280 ,

You are going to have to write that sentence again because it can have 2 meanings the way it is written at the moment.I do not use DX10 mode ever in FSX because it is badly broken, you get flashing ground textures and runways at add-on airfields, lights not working the way they should or not at all, progressive taxi lines do not work at all, the list goes on an on. FSX SP2 has lots of bugs as it is without enabling even more of them in DX10 PREVIEW mode.I have never seen the MD-11 look like your screen shot in FSX DX9 mode in Vista 64 with an ATI graphics card.

You are going to have to write that sentence again because it can have 2 meanings the way it is written at the moment.I do not use DX10 mode ever in FSX because it is badly broken, you get flashing ground textures and runways at add-on airfields, lights not working the way they should or not at all, progressive taxi lines do not work at all, the list goes on an on. FSX SP2 has lots of bugs as it is without enabling even more of them in DX10 PREVIEW mode.I have never seen the MD-11 look like your screen shot in FSX DX9 mode in Vista 64 with an ATI graphics card.

Here is it: "The worst problems I have ever had are with FSX DX:9 mode with Vista 64 and Nvidia GTX 280 "Yes, there are some issues with FSX DX;10 as you described. Some of them can be eliminated to selecting AA settings and Anisatropic filter. At least you will not end up flying with half structural of aircraft missing.I never used ATI graphics card. Maybe Navdia GTX 280 is the problem. I will never know if I test ATI card. What model is your ATI graphic card?Sanal

Hi it's a HD4870 512MB DDR5 memory. I'll go one stage further and say I have never seen any plane in that blown up state on any ATI graphics card since FSX came out in 2006 and I've used a lot of different planes, OS's and computers, the only constant in all my setup's has been ATI graphics cards. Read in to that what you will.I cant use FSX in fullscreen mode as I need to get to other add-on programs too at the same time, which means I have to run FSX in windowed mode and with 2 monitors. DX10 preview mode in FSX does not allow any form of AA when in windowed mode and I refuse to use a simulator that looks jaggier than flight sim 95 did :(

Keiron, I initially didn't want to post any more in this thread, for the reason of simply wanting to stay out of this hilarious conversation. Not that it only isn't from interest to you to check the correct technical side of this tool, but it only interests you to push through that you are right - that this tool will make you rid of OOM, and you won't hear different opinions. As I said before, there might be users for which this tool might be useful, but I strongly advise to use it with caution.So whats my reason:First of all, you are using task manager. A tool not adequate enough for measuring OOM memory usage.For the real process size, you HAVE to measure so called virtual size.To my knowledge, only tool capable of that is Process Explorer from Sysinternals.Here are couple of shots for better understanding:What Task Manager calls "Mem Usage", is in fact called "Working Set", a real physical RAM + VM usage I believe.That memory usage is totally irrelevant for users that are suffering from OOM errors - more caused by the MD-11 since it uses more memory than other addons.So, as it has been discussed on various other threads, Virtual Size is the total size of the application, which, IF it goes over 2000MB, will OOM the FS9 or FSX in the 32bit environment.What happens if we apply the CleanMem?Here we can observe that Working Set has changed to 140MB - which is basically what the application did - it freed up a physical RAM. Not at all relevant...Note that Virtual Size didn't change.And the highlight of the whole thing - it cleans up the RAM so that FS9 can start loading again everything?This is what happens after a minute:FS9 has recalled 120MB of what we just "deleted", loading means stuttering - and there you have it. What happens in half an hour? Reloads all 800MB, and then the application cleans it again so it can reload again...?? Vicious circle which will only bring your FS to possible stuttering, but will surely cause disk access - and for what?My honest opinion? For people that don't have enough RAM (1GB or less), possibly a temporarly solution, because its going to give you more physical RAM, as all other RAM cleaners do. But it WILL NOT get rid you of OOM errors.

Seriously what are you going on about? Do you have a problem with high memory usage whilst flightsimming? If so have you tried this program? What results did you get from it?

I have the problem, yes. My FS9 tends to go as high as 2800mb memory usage, and there are two ways to solve it:1) Have less addons2) Use 64bit system with fs9.exe that can use it (large address aware)I chose Nr.2I tried the program, see previous post - incl. the explanation.

Hi Keiron... thanks for the sharing...I've tried this tool last night. I flew long haul WIII-OEJN.After landing and park, I check Task Manager for FS9.EXE... It reads only 300-400MB. Usually it was above 1GB.Performance wise, I haven't felt any slight impacts... because the tool only runs every 30 minutes...The tool itself is not a resident program. It is put in Windows Task Scheduler and runs less than 1 second.PS. I use FS9 and XP-Pro without 3GB switch...Using this tool, all I can say is: Good by 3GB Switch!!! [lol] :DWasono

Hi Keiron,thanks for your advice.My system: Vista 32 and 3Gb of RAM.Yesterday I flew the 747-400 (PMDG) for my VA, including: AS6, RC4, FSflightkeeper all for FS9.Furthermore: An accounting program and IE plus Email. All in all the flight took 10 hours (OMDB - ZSPD).I have never before been able to do this. I also found that screenswitching, panel switching etc is a lot faster.So, at least for me it is an improvement.Thanks,Wijnand (EHBK)

No, it's "sorry to burst your bubble Keiron, but your use of that image as evidence just proves that you do not understand Windows memory management". There is no need for additional technical input on the topic - the relevant stuff has already been posted in this thread. But clearly that is of no interest to you.

....yeah..

I have the problem, yes. My FS9 tends to go as high as 2800mb memory usage, and there are two ways to solve it:1) Have less addons2) Use 64bit system with fs9.exe that can use it (large address aware)I chose Nr.2I tried the program, see previous post - incl. the explanation.

Yeah great write up Word Not Allowed, I like the screenshots! Too bad I didnt title the topic as "Solution for OOM errors" though. Would of contrasted quite well I think.. Well sor far anyway, you've proved that my original point/aim of the topic was right. Now all you need to go and do for me is go and complete a whole flight from start to finish then you wont have to guess what happens after half an hour. Then come back with your results of what kind of memory usage, memory load and stutters (if you get em) you are seeing during parts of the flight.

Hi Keiron... thanks for the sharing...I've tried this tool last night. I flew long haul WIII-OEJN.After landing and park, I check Task Manager for FS9.EXE... It reads only 300-400MB. Usually it was above 1GB.Performance wise, I haven't felt any slight impacts... because the tool only runs every 30 minutes...The tool itself is not a resident program. It is put in Windows Task Scheduler and runs less than 1 second.PS. I use FS9 and XP-Pro without 3GB switch...Using this tool, all I can say is: Good by 3GB Switch!!! [lol] :DWasono

Cool stuff, I'm not using the 3Gb switch in Xp32bit either. I dont think i'll ever need to now :(

Keiron, thanks, I have installed this utility. Can I confirm that after installation it runs by itself? Is any further intervention / setting up required?

Not unless you want to apply it to a chosen exe in which case you can set up by using the apply only lists. I just installed it and left it to do it's job. It's not a resident program and it only runs about 1 second or so every 30minutes as Wasono also pointed out. Let us know what kind of results you're getting if you have spare time.

Well, I can only say that when opening the task administrator (ctrl+alt+del), the memory usage of FS9.exe has dropped from more than 200.000 Kb to 30.000 Kb after installing and using this tool.I am not a computer expert, but that seems to be a good thing.