Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest dakrisht

Autogen Tweak

Recommended Posts

"If I have autogen at minimum, I don't see any buildings in Los Angeles (including downtown or the stadiums) "I didn't read the op's post closely enough-but in answer to this question-is this not the "scenery complexity" slider? Set that to the right and see if your downtown buildings show up.I run the sim with buildings turned off and trees maximized, and the scenery complexity slider to the right.For me -this gives more realism (the high res textures show thru that are normally covered by autogen)-there are trees that gives the 3d perspective, and all airport buildings-city buildings, custom structures, and obstacles appear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How do you accomplish this, Geofa?
Open your fsx.cfg- Under the Terrain heading:TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_TREES_PER_CELL=4000TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_BUILDINGS_PER_CELL=0Then, turn your scenery complexity slider all the way to the right.Note-some have said setting the buildings to 0 can cause crashes-I have had none-but you may want to try a small number first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Open your fsx.cfg- Under the Terrain heading:TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_TREES_PER_CELL=4000TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_BUILDINGS_PER_CELL=0Then, turn your scenery complexity slider all the way to the right.Note-some have said setting the buildings to 0 can cause crashes-I have had none-but you may want to try a small number first.
Thanks Geofa... I will give it a shot...

Regards,

Efrain Ruiz
LiveDISPATCH @ http://www.livedispatch.org (CLOSED) ☹️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you have a 1GB 285 or 280 card the solution for the sound static/cracke issue in relation to autogen level IS to raise bufferpools to between 450-490It can and has been repeated/confirmed as a fix for that exact issue but it does require a >450MB bufferpool setting to work in which only 1GB Nvidia cards (single core) will worknow that is also specific to the chipset and the drivers being used as well.
I still get static even after setting bufferpool to 490000000 and using that FPS locker set to 36 fps. Albeit not as much, it is still too much to fly with. Should I try a higher bufferpool yet?I'm on the rampage formula X48 board with a Q9550 at 3.4 GHz, a GTX280 stock speed, and 8 GB DDR2 set to 1066. Vista Ultimate 64 if that matters. 182.08 drivers too.

13900K | MSI RTX 4090 | 64 GB 3600 MHz | 4x SSD + 1x HDD | ASUS 42" 3840x2160 120Hz OLED
VirtualFly TQ6+ | Virpil WarBRD + Constellation Alpha | MFG Crosswind V2 | RealSimGear GNS530/430

spacer.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Nick_N
I still get static even after setting bufferpool to 490000000 and using that FPS locker set to 36 fps. Albeit not as much, it is still too much to fly with. Should I try a higher bufferpool yet?I'm on the rampage formula X48 board with a Q9550 at 3.4 GHz, a GTX280 stock speed, and 8 GB DDR2 set to 1066. Vista Ultimate 64 if that matters. 182.08 drivers too.
Lets not confuse a 'static' type noise when switching from interior to exterior views on certain aircraft which can be recovered by tapping the "Q" (sound on/off) button twice with constant garbled audio and higher autogen levels. The first issue I mentioned is not the same... however if this is something you can relate to autogen level and BP does make some change then it is the issue at hand.I can tell you that the problem can change with video drivers versions although there is no 'magic' version that works for everyone, and there have even been a few I have seen report that setting PCIE SPREAD SPECTRUM in the BIOS to DISABLED (which everyone should anyway) can have an positive effect on the issue. Past that most of the posts I have seen around raising bufferpools on the 2x series Nvidia cards to beteen 450 and 490 does the trickFor a test you could try 512000000 (512MB) however that may cause autogen graphic spikes at the same time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Raising it to 512 didn't improve it any. Setting the autogen slider to dense does make the static go completely away. Even at very dense I can hear the static and see its effects on my FPS.


13900K | MSI RTX 4090 | 64 GB 3600 MHz | 4x SSD + 1x HDD | ASUS 42" 3840x2160 120Hz OLED
VirtualFly TQ6+ | Virpil WarBRD + Constellation Alpha | MFG Crosswind V2 | RealSimGear GNS530/430

spacer.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Nick_N
Raising it to 512 didn't improve it any. Setting the autogen slider to dense does make the static go completely away. Even at very dense I can hear the static and see its effects on my FPS.
The issue is specific to the motherboard/drivers and not so much FSX. It has been around for about 2 years and effects P35, x38, x48 and their variant chipsets. There have been some who have simply RMA'd their board for the issue and new product solved the problem. Vgbaron resolved this sound issue that way. You may fall unfortunately into that category. I do know that Noel could not use any driver higher than 169.21 without the problem appearing until the bufferpool tweak came alongI would say based on the autogen slider only needing to hit 'very dense' and not 100% you do have a bit of a problem with that boardI have never had a system display the issue so I have not had any way to run a local diagnostic to see if it could be pinpointed to the exact cause however I do suspect it is chipset support component or circuit design related and because the problem appears on more than one manufacture of motherboard I also suspect it has something to do with a Intel standard circuit design for their chipset products all the motherboard manufactures use to design their boards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's pretty discouraging to think it might be a problem with my board. That thing cost me nearly 300 dollars. I already had to RMA the first one I got. I'm past the RMA period on this one anyways.I think this is where I blame FSX instead because all my other games work perfectly... :)I'm entirely happy with "dense" settings anyways. I just thought I would try to get it to work with max sliders because it looks pretty neat. I think I'll see what I can kick the buildings up to and set trees to something low like 500 or 1000 and see if that makes static. I like seeing lots of buildings... trees and other vegetation not so much.


13900K | MSI RTX 4090 | 64 GB 3600 MHz | 4x SSD + 1x HDD | ASUS 42" 3840x2160 120Hz OLED
VirtualFly TQ6+ | Virpil WarBRD + Constellation Alpha | MFG Crosswind V2 | RealSimGear GNS530/430

spacer.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Nick_N
I think this is where I blame FSX instead because all my other games work perfectly... :)
Although how FSX slams the PCIe system with AG calls is what brings it to the surface.. sadly its not FSX causing the problem or everyone would see the same issue. Gigabyte who thus far is the only MB company I am aware who has acknowledged the issue,.. fixed the problem with a BIOS update and a later design change on their P35 design.http://forums.hexus.net/1398162-post14.htmlBut.. if it makes you feel better, yes.. FSX design is what is forcing it to the surface on your board

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so what do I do to get ASUS to fix it? Phone my congressman? Protest in the streets?Doesn't sound like any other companies will fix it.


13900K | MSI RTX 4090 | 64 GB 3600 MHz | 4x SSD + 1x HDD | ASUS 42" 3840x2160 120Hz OLED
VirtualFly TQ6+ | Virpil WarBRD + Constellation Alpha | MFG Crosswind V2 | RealSimGear GNS530/430

spacer.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest dakrisht

Since I started this chaos :( I want to share some results regarding the FSX.cfg AUTOGEN tweaks and Nick's nHancer settings:I couldn't really notice a difference when using the: 2400/1600 AUTOGEN values. Both my sliders were set to Very Dense - my FPS around LAX was anywhere from 24-34 fps (when using fps limiter capped @ 30) Without it, I saw anywhere from 34-46 fps.Also using nHancer with Nick's settings... I tried using AA both within FSX and just with the nHancer settings. No difference.I tried adding BP's from 40MB - 100MB, the latter numbers crashed my card but that's b/c I'm on a 512MB GeForce 9800 GTX.I'm also using UTX USA if that matters and running in 1920x1080.SO MANY options, but what will run FSX on my system the best. Obviously, I'm going to keep trying and optimizing. At one point, I lost my oceans! so I had to remove and re-install UTX.Should I just stick to nHancer and fps limiter? set sliders to very dense, and fly?My system: Phenom II X4 940 OC'd @ 3.7Ghz (beats Core i7 920 stock hands down in 90% of benchmarks I've been running with my colleague for two weeks). So I know the chip is solid. EVGA 9800 GTX+, standard clock, although I can OC as well using EVGA Precision (is that necessary, will it do anything).I just want to fly already, enough with all these tweaks!!! :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Nick_N
Since I started this chaos :( I want to share some results regarding the FSX.cfg AUTOGEN tweaks and Nick's nHancer settings:I couldn't really notice a difference when using the: 2400/1600 AUTOGEN values. Both my sliders were set to Very Dense - my FPS around LAX was anywhere from 24-34 fps (when using fps limiter capped @ 30) Without it, I saw anywhere from 34-46 fps.Also using nHancer with Nick's settings... I tried using AA both within FSX and just with the nHancer settings. No difference.I tried adding BP's from 40MB - 100MB, the latter numbers crashed my card but that's b/c I'm on a 512MB GeForce 9800 GTX.I'm also using UTX USA if that matters and running in 1920x1080.SO MANY options, but what will run FSX on my system the best. Obviously, I'm going to keep trying and optimizing. At one point, I lost my oceans! so I had to remove and re-install UTX.Should I just stick to nHancer and fps limiter? set sliders to very dense, and fly?My system: Phenom II X4 940 OC'd @ 3.7Ghz (beats Core i7 920 stock hands down in 90% of benchmarks I've been running with my colleague for two weeks). So I know the chip is solid. EVGA 9800 GTX+, standard clock, although I can OC as well using EVGA Precision (is that necessary, will it do anything).I just want to fly already, enough with all these tweaks!!! :(
Read my tweak thread http://www.simforums.com/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=29041you can not and probably will not be able to use bufferpools with a 512 cardand I dont care what you see.. that 920 clocked wipes that AMD 940 into the drink for where it counts and benchmarks mean nothing... AMD memory benchmarks for memory latency up until i7 were astounding against Intel, even C2/Q... and were also a FARCE for real perf due to the northbridge design. Those memory benchmarks made people think things that were absolutely not true about real world results as the northbridge was NEVER allowing that benchmark perf to be used by the processor in real world application... its not the CPU speed, its the internal design

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest dakrisht
Read my tweak thread http://www.simforums.com/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=29041you can not and probably will not be able to use bufferpools with a 512 cardand I dont care what you see.. that 920 clocked wipes that AMD 940 into the drink for where it counts and benchmarks mean nothing... AMD memory benchmarks for memory latency up until i7 were astounding against Intel, even C2/Q... and were also a FARCE for real perf due to the northbridge design. Those memory benchmarks made people think things that were absolutely not true about real world results as the northbridge was NEVER allowing that benchmark perf to be used by the processor in real world application... its not the CPU speed, its the internal design
Yeah, I agree that a clocked i7 will be faster than a clocked 940, but a clocked 940 takes down a standard entry i7 920. They're both very close - IMO. My colleague hasn't been able to beat my cpu in any pcmark or 3dmark and only comes close in synthetics.The Core has more bandwidth and the architecture is newer, but the 940 is no joke as much as you might not like AMD :(. I personally have always been an Intel guy and have a bunch of Sun servers running Xeon chips, they're great CPU's. I decided to go with the 940 because I read a lot about it, it's got great OC potential and it's just a great chip. The 940 easily destroys the Kentfields and price is a major + for that chip. A lot of people don't want to buy a whole new setup to run i7, which is NOT that much better than the top C2Q.I'll read your tweak thread, need to start flying soon and stop tweaking...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...