Let me begin with saying this is not another miracle-tip topic. I just want to share something and maybe it may help someone. But most of all I am posting this because I am curious what's happening.On my Vista-system I always used a Bufferpools setting of 490000000 for my GTX285, running with DX9. Anything lower and I would get stutters. After not playing FSX for a few months, I installed FSX on my system that had Windows 7 on it by that time. I tried to use the same tweaks (just bufferpools, really) but it was horrible. So I gave DX10 a try and it's was great: very smooth and all. Of course there were some disadvantages (no vsync, ingame FSAA, no ENB bloom, no progressive taxi, shimmering textures) but FSX ran so much better that I took all that for granted. I even posted a topic on this forum that I completely converted to DX10!Last week I had to give DX9 a try because of a plane that wouldn't work will with DX10 and also because I lost vsync, which had been working with DX10 for some time. DX9 was horrible, as expected. Very low fps and not smooth at all. But then I remembered a topic on this forum where someone suggested to use a much lower bufferpool setting: 500000. I did try that with DX10 at the time but it wasn't any good: stutters all over the place. But while giving DX9 a try, I remembered that tip and tried it... hardly any stutters! So... I tweaked and tweaked some more (amongst others with the limiter addon and affinity mask) and at this moment I've got FSX running in DX9 almost as good as in DX10...! Yes, fps is a LOT lower, but that's totally not important: it's all about smoothness. I also installed the ENB bloom (which I thought I could live without, as I posted here some time ago) and BOY... things are looking great! Again, DX10 IS smoother, but performance, with the same ingame settings, is good enough for me and I also got vsync, great FSAA (nHancer's combined 8xS), progressive taxi and, more important than I expected, the ENB bloom!!!Anyway, something in Windows 7 made the bufferpool setting behave quite differently. I mean, 490000000 or 500000: that's quite a difference! Wonder what is causing this... Well, if you got a GTX285 (or something similar) and DX9 isn't running as good as it did on Vista (or XP) you might want to give this lower bufferpool setting a try. And if someone could explain what's causing this: feel free to do so! This also shows that tweaks apparently (can) behave different on different OS's: something to keep in mind when you switch to another OS.

Let me begin with saying this is not another miracle-tip topic. I just want to share something and maybe it may help someone. But most of all I am posting this because I am curious what's happening.On my Vista-system I always used a Bufferpools setting of 490000000 for my GTX285, running with DX9. Anything lower and I would get stutters. After not playing FSX for a few months, I installed FSX on my system that had Windows 7 on it by that time. I tried to use the same tweaks (just bufferpools, really) but it was horrible. So I gave DX10 a try and it's was great: very smooth and all. Of course there were some disadvantages (no vsync, ingame FSAA, no ENB bloom, no progressive taxi, shimmering textures) but FSX ran so much better that I took all that for granted. I even posted a topic on this forum that I completely converted to DX10!Last week I had to give DX9 a try because of a plane that wouldn't work will with DX10 and also because I lost vsync, which had been working with DX10 for some time. DX9 was horrible, as expected. Very low fps and not smooth at all. But then I remembered a topic on this forum where someone suggested to use a much lower bufferpool setting: 500000. I did try that with DX10 at the time but it wasn't any good: stutters all over the place. But while giving DX9 a try, I remembered that tip and tried it... hardly any stutters! So... I tweaked and tweaked some more (amongst others with the limiter addon and affinity mask) and at this moment I've got FSX running in DX9 almost as good as in DX10...! Yes, fps is a LOT lower, but that's totally not important: it's all about smoothness. I also installed the ENB bloom (which I thought I could live without, as I posted here some time ago) and BOY... things are looking great! Again, DX10 IS smoother, but performance, with the same ingame settings, is good enough for me and I also got vsync, great FSAA (nHancer's combined 8xS), progressive taxi and, more important than I expected, the ENB bloom!!!Anyway, something in Windows 7 made the bufferpool setting behave quite differently. I mean, 490000000 or 500000: that's quite a difference! Wonder what is causing this... Well, if you got a GTX285 (or something similar) and DX9 isn't running as good as it did on Vista (or XP) you might want to give this lower bufferpool setting a try. And if someone could explain what's causing this: feel free to do so! This also shows that tweaks apparently (can) behave different on different OS's: something to keep in mind when you switch to another OS.

I came from Vista 64 to Win7 64 via the 'in situ' upgrade route. FSX performance was about the same for each OS although I think that Win7 is slightly smoother. However, every now and again the graphics (with GTX285) would collapse at the end of a flight (usually when switching from full screen to windowed mode). My notes indicate that the BP figure, in my FSX.cfg, of 490000000 was used to get over sound issues with an earlier set of Nvidia drivers (#185+ from memory). As this sound issue is no longer apparant in the newest set of Nvidia drivers I reset my BP setting to 200000000. Since doing this I have had no end game graphic crashes so I assume that the new BP setting fixed the problem. Performance and smoothness remain the same. I think that we must learn to adapt our tuning as software and hardware changes occur to our system. There is clearly no magic bullet or one size fits all recipe for success.

Let me begin with saying this is not another miracle-tip topic. I just want to share something and maybe it may help someone. But most of all I am posting this because I am curious what's happening.On my Vista-system I always used a Bufferpools setting of 490000000 for my GTX285, running with DX9. Anything lower and I would get stutters. After not playing FSX for a few months, I installed FSX on my system that had Windows 7 on it by that time. I tried to use the same tweaks (just bufferpools, really) but it was horrible. So I gave DX10 a try and it's was great: very smooth and all. Of course there were some disadvantages (no vsync, ingame FSAA, no ENB bloom, no progressive taxi, shimmering textures) but FSX ran so much better that I took all that for granted. I even posted a topic on this forum that I completely converted to DX10!Last week I had to give DX9 a try because of a plane that wouldn't work will with DX10 and also because I lost vsync, which had been working with DX10 for some time. DX9 was horrible, as expected. Very low fps and not smooth at all. But then I remembered a topic on this forum where someone suggested to use a much lower bufferpool setting: 500000. I did try that with DX10 at the time but it wasn't any good: stutters all over the place. But while giving DX9 a try, I remembered that tip and tried it... hardly any stutters! So... I tweaked and tweaked some more (amongst others with the limiter addon and affinity mask) and at this moment I've got FSX running in DX9 almost as good as in DX10...! Yes, fps is a LOT lower, but that's totally not important: it's all about smoothness. I also installed the ENB bloom (which I thought I could live without, as I posted here some time ago) and BOY... things are looking great! Again, DX10 IS smoother, but performance, with the same ingame settings, is good enough for me and I also got vsync, great FSAA (nHancer's combined 8xS), progressive taxi and, more important than I expected, the ENB bloom!!!Anyway, something in Windows 7 made the bufferpool setting behave quite differently. I mean, 490000000 or 500000: that's quite a difference! Wonder what is causing this... Well, if you got a GTX285 (or something similar) and DX9 isn't running as good as it did on Vista (or XP) you might want to give this lower bufferpool setting a try. And if someone could explain what's causing this: feel free to do so! This also shows that tweaks apparently (can) behave different on different OS's: something to keep in mind when you switch to another OS.

-------------------------------------------------------I think that what has changed, is that you have discovered what a lot of us had without even having to change ANYTHING in their config...that for whatever reason, Windows 7 64 bit kicks major butt! After having installed (not a clean install, but an upgrade install) W7 it was very noticeable a performance increase...so much so, that I could throttle back my i7-975 from an OC of 4.1 GHz to how the system came to me via Dell, set at 3.61 GHz with no performance (base performance set as a 4.1 GHz over clock) loss at all. No tweaks, NOTHING but the W7 64 Ultimate install. Others have posted that there is no gain of performance with going from Vista to W7 64 bit (I have left out XP 64 bit, as I have never had that O.S. to compare), and I have to hotly disagree. You are seeing what I and others have reported.... actual system-wide performance gain. I will never go, nor need to go back to Vista, XP, etc. W7 runs everything I had before my install and since without any driver issue, etc. It is simply stellar!

I had a major improvement from a driver update (could've happened with windows 7) and INCREASING my AA to 8xS. Try fooling with the 8xS and see what happens.

These two smoothed out any remaining stutters, poolsize making the most difference. Done using the C2D proc, and before the i7.TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=40poolsize=800000 // Fantastic difference!!

I'd just like to say that this thread cured me of not being able to fly in FSX ever since building this rig back in November. THANKYOU Paul J and J van E

These two smoothed out any remaining stutters, poolsize making the most difference. Done using the C2D proc, and before the i7.TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=40poolsize=800000 // Fantastic difference!!

800000 ??? Do you mean 8000000 as in 8 million?

800000 ??? Do you mean 8000000 as in 8 million?

I think he indeed means 800000... This is what this topic is all about: on some systems a LOW bufferpools does the trick. I also used a million figure on Vista (on the same computer with the GTX285) but in Windows 7 500000 is the sweet spot for me: no bufferpools makes FSX totally unplayable but my old 490000000 setting does so too...!

I'd just like to say that this thread cured me of not being able to fly in FSX ever since building this rig back in November. THANKYOU Paul J and J van E

Great news! (Again, this is no magic trick that works for everyone, but it clearly helps some! :( )

So, those of you who HAD the sound crackle problem with the GTX 285 and now DO NOT have it anymore:1) Which driver are you running?2) What's your poolsize setting?I have tried some drivers about 182.50 but they all gave me the clackles.

800000 ??? Do you mean 8000000 as in 8 million?

Nope; eight-hundred thousand, 800,000, and it went very suddenly and noticeable smooth after making this change.I always test with a reboot first, and then a C 'n' D start and take-off from Renton, fair weather, in a climbing turn to port heading toward KSEA, with Boeing Field and the downtown Seattle off the stbd wing, using the A2A Spit - generally with a cct and landing to close it. I saw the 800k mentioned a couple of months ago in one of the posts here, tried it, and found it worked. I'll see if I can dig it out, as there may be more info.Ok - it's dug out: all credit goes to gman!-http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtop...;hl=bufferpools

Interesting about the buffer pools.So would we say that DX9 or DX10 is generally better on W7 64 bit for curing stutters?

Interesting about the buffer pools.So would we say that DX9 or DX10 is generally better on W7 64 bit for curing stutters?

DX10 (for me) causes the taxypath flashing problem across the runways, plus no anti-aliasing, so I run using DX9. I'm using Win7-32-bit Pro version.

Well AFAIK the nHancer can force the AA even in DX10.

Well AFAIK the nHancer can force the AA even in DX10.

No, it can't. However, on Windows 7 with the 195.62 driver, vsync seems to work.But er... does anyone have any clue why such a low bufferpool can make such a huge difference...?

So, those of you who HAD the sound crackle problem with the GTX 285 and now DO NOT have it anymore:1) Which driver are you running?2) What's your poolsize setting?I have tried some drivers about 182.50 but they all gave me the clackles.

I'm running 195.62 Nvidia drivers (also Nhancer) sound on Creative X-Fi good. From memory it came good after 192 series was introduced. Poolsize as per my previous post.