Hi Ulf,thanks for your tests! Yes, i guess it's our different HW (i listed my specs in my profile).I made the tests because of the sound issues i had and the BP value has a big influence on that (on my machine).If i decrease the BP value, i see more flashing, so i guess that's why you want to use higher values, which is of course no problem for those who don't get the red spikes (and thus the sound issues).

About that latency checker: should you make sure everything is as low and green as possible...? And then you'd have the best running setup...? How do you 'read' the results...?

About that latency checker: should you make sure everything is as low and green as possible...? And then you'd have the best running setup...? How do you 'read' the results...?

I asked the same question in Post #252. I'v never used DPC latency checker before, but got curious when Nils posted his findings. Hopefully some of the hardware experts might chime in and spread some light on this utilty and if it's any use when examining the behaviour of FSX and a system.

Nils and J Van E,Found this brief explanation on how to use the DPC latency checker to check if you have device driver problems: http://www.vista4beginners.com/DPC-Latency-Checker

Hi,I can't use PoolSize=0 without problems, but I can use a low value, like 5000... I tested in complex scenery like Manhattan XAlso, what helped me more than Bufferpool is the Fiber setting, I'm using 0.02 and my FPS increased about 10, and the simulator is more stable, more fluid. My FPS is locked at 60, in Manhattan X I get about 30-40.I have an i5 @3.6, 4gb GtX 275 896ram.Ulisses

Also, what helped me more than Bufferpool is the Fiber setting, I'm using 0.02

0.02...?!? This almost disables the loading of textures...! Don't you get extreme blurries then...???

Nils and J Van E,Found this brief explanation on how to use the DPC latency checker to check if you have device driver problems: http://www.vista4beginners.com/DPC-Latency-Checker

Thanks, I'll give it a try.

Thanks Ulf but i think i did use the tool correctly...My drivers are up to date and i don't see any problems with any other programs/games i use, so i guess i would be able get rid of the problem by buying new HW.. unfortunately i had the "pleasure" to see FSX on an i7 system and now i'm not really motivated to upgrade from my system.. i'm happy with the frames i now get and i'm not convinced that i would see an improvement, which would justify the costs..Lower BP values seems to solve my problem and i guess i have to live with the flashing if i want to continue to use my HW with Win7.

Despite the criticism of my previous post above, too many of you are STILL missing the point.BUFFERPOOLS is a VIDEO MEMORY tweak. FSX is primarily a CPU DEPENDANT application. Always has been...always will be. So it is rediculous to try "tweaking" anything relating to your video memory UNTIL you get FSX using ALL AVAILABLE CPU resources it can use. By setting the fsx.exe file in Task Manager to run at "High Priority", many of you would not even NEED the Bufferpools, nor the Affinity Mask tweak on an i7. And you could quit chasing your tails and trading benchmarks about DPC Latency Checker also.Nick's setup guide says the Bufferpools "tweak" should be used as a "last resort", and only AFTER everything else is configured correctly on your computer for FSX. He also "implies" the same thing about the Affinity Mask "tweak". Read between the lines, and understand WHY he is saying those things. Nick is not a stupid man. If the rest of your computer, PARTICULARLY the CPU side, is NOT already being utilized correctly and in the best manner for FSX, you should NOT be trying to "fix" FSX using any OTHER CPU "tweak" (Affinity Mask), nor a GPU MEMORY "tweak" (Bufferpools) to try and solve your "problems". Both of those "tweaks" are really unneccesary in an FSX.CFG file on a PROPERLY setup i7 with a good GPU.Guys, I've done IT for over 35 years. Been flight simming since the Commodore 64 came out. I've run FSX on three different computers since FSX came out (a Dual Core, a Quad Core, and now an i7) with three different OS's (XP, Vista, and now Win7), and I have NEVER had to use Bufferpools or Affinity Mask as entries in the fsx.cfg file. NEVER. No stutters, good frame rates, no blurries, tons of addons ranging from simple to very complex. My current i7 with Win7 and FSX (over-clocked to 4GHz) gives me 30 - 35 FPS in the most demanding scenery areas at Very Dense to Extremely Dense autogen settings, with addon weather generators running some really cruddy weather scenarios, with the most demanding addon aircraft. Across three TH2G monitors...with a 27" HDMI connected to the second port on the GPU to show charts, moving maps, etc.Flame me if you want. But if you insist on "tweaking" the GPU MEMORY side of your computer BEFORE you get the CPU side of your computer using everything it can for FSX, you are pissing in the wind. And once you DO get the CPU side running FSX the way it should, you probably won't NEED to use the Bufferpools or Affinity Mask "tweaks" with an i7.Run FSX.EXE in "High" Priority using Task Manager. Many of you WILL discover you can completely eliminate any need at all for a Bufferpools or Affinity Mask setting in the FSX.CFG file after that. Respectfully submitted,FalconAF

Run FSX.EXE in "High" Priority using Task Manager. Many of you WILL discover you can completely eliminate any need at all for a Bufferpools or Affinity Mask setting in the FSX.CFG file after that. Respectfully submitted,FalconAF

About your high priority suggestion, you have to set it everytime you start FSX ?Ulisses

Thanks Ulf but i think i did use the tool correctly...My drivers are up to date and i don't see any problems with any other programs/games i use, so i guess i would be able get rid of the problem by buying new HW.. unfortunately i had the "pleasure" to see FSX on an i7 system and now i'm not really motivated to upgrade from my system.. i'm happy with the frames i now get and i'm not convinced that i would see an improvement, which would justify the costs..Lower BP values seems to solve my problem and i guess i have to live with the flashing if i want to continue to use my HW with Win7.

Nils,Your red figures might indicate that you might have a driver issue or maybe a conflict between your graphics card and some other device? Do you use a sound card or on board sound? Have you checked if your graphic card share IRQ with any other device, which might cause latency problems?

By setting the fsx.exe file in Task Manager to run at "High Priority", many of you would not even NEED the Bufferpools, nor the Affinity Mask tweak on an i7. And you could quit chasing your tails and trading benchmarks about DPC Latency Checker also.

Agreed. But 'many of you' doesn't mean 'all of you' :( and I for instance need the BP tweak... I used the Latency program and everything's cool on my system. I also don't use the affinity mask tweak because all it does is make FSX perform worse (if there is any difference at all). Using high priority also doesn't seem to make much difference btw... (when I use the highest option, real time, I get sound errors). Seems my system is setup pretty nice all in all, but I still need the BP tweak. I have it at 500.000 btw, because zero gives artifacts. My i7 920 is only running at 3.3 (yours is at 4), so that also makes a difference of course. If I could get my CPU at 4 I alsi might not need that BP anymore.

BP at 0 works for me. I changed my driver from 185.50 to 195.62 and BF to 0 and made FSX backwards compatible to Windows Vista sp2. Even though my previous performance was good, now it shines that much brighter. There is a brightness and sharpness that was not there before with a noticable increase in framerates.I get the (very) occassionsal flashing texture that seems to jump out of nowhere, but it is at a subdued and tolerable level. I tried dialing my card back down to near default levels but it did not make a difference except for slower frames, so I cranked it back up. These are excellent tweaks and one I expect to keep, at least for now. :( Thank you.Stephen

FalconAF,First of all this not a flame just a difference of opinion. I too have been flight simming or a long time . I have also ran FSX on multiple computers since it came out (Athlon X2, E6850, QX9650, i7 950). Given the infinite amount of hardware configurations available and the fact you are an IT professional I find it hard to comprehend that you use the word "ridiculous". We have learned over the years is that what works for one does not necessarily work for all regarding FSX. We have also been led to believe for years that if bufferpools was set to zero that FSX would revert to the default poolsize of 1MB through SP1 and 4MB for SP2/Acceleration. We now know that is just not the case. Do I know exactly how FSX is utilizing the video memory with this setting? Nope not in the least. What I do know is this, if I run FSX in high priority with no bufferpool entry I experience stutters/microstutters in a given situation. If I run FSX in high priority with the bufferpool entry and have a poolsize set other than zero, I experience stutters/microstutters in the same given situation. If I run FSX in normal prority or high priority with the bufferpool entry and the pool size is set to zero in the same situation I experience NO stutters/microstutters. At this point in time I have logged near 40 hours of flight time in FSX testing the BP=0 setting or lack there of and rebooting between each run and testing across multiple scenarios with flight times lasting from 15 minutes to over 5 hours.Who knows why this works on my system or someone elses system. To say that one is missing the point and that they do not know how to configure a system is a bit misleading as well. I am lucky in the fact that I can afford to have a dedicated computer for FSX, as such the computer, and its OS are optimized per Nicks guide and I have no other software installed on it. I will however agree with you that there are those out there that will not take the time to properly configure their system and FSX and then tune it. Those are the ones that continually chase their tails. Can I still make FSX stutter/microstutter using BP=0? Of course I can if I try to push it too hard.Respectfully in disagreement,BobFor any interested, in my testing I used MTX, REX, UTX, UTX Alaska, Tongass Fjords, GEX, FSgenesis Mesh, FTX and the ENB Mod. The weather used when testing was quite harsh (extremely cloudy with rain or snow). I tested in a variety of locations from heavily urban to heavily forrested as well as large to small airports.Framerate Lock = 30FPSLevel of Detail Radius = LargeMesh Complexity = 100%Mesh Resolution =10MTexture Resolution = 7cmWater Resolution = 2.X LowScenrey Complexity = Extremely DenseAutogen Density = Dense to Extremely (Dependent on the Scenery and/or Aircraft used)Special Effects = HighCloud Draw Distance = 90miCloud Coverage Density = MAXAirline Density = 50%GA Density = 20% to 40% (Dependent on the Scenery and/or Aircraft used)Airport Vehicle Density = MediumRoad Vehicles = 0%Ships Ferries = 25%Leisure Boats = 25%In the fsx.cfg I have BP=0, TBM=70 and AffinityMask=12 I tested the BP=0 setting with various aircraft from stock to complex (stock FSX, Acceleration, PMDG, Captain Sim, LVL-D, Flight 1 and Carenado to name a few). I have to say it is pretty damn impressive to take off from KSEA in an F-18, in adverse weather with autogen set to extremely dense and pull a low level knife edge turn over the airport at 300 knts and FSX remain smooth as silk (this was only attainable with BP=0 any other BP setting or lack there of resulted in some form of stutter) However, as this thread clearly demonstrates YMMV.

About your high priority suggestion, you have to set it everytime you start FSX ?Ulisses

If you use the default Task Manager...yes. If you download a very small utility program for Task Manager...No. The link below explains the process and contains the download link for the utility.http://www.askvg.com/how-to-permanently-se...s-task-manager/J van E: I know it may not work for "everybody". I'm not stupid. However, my post was designed to get "everybody" to TRY it and see if it solves their problem. That is no different than what this whole darn THREAD...now over 7 pages long...is doing by getting "everybody" to try the Bufferpools and Affinity Mask "tweaks". If "my" solution...which is a lot simpler than "tweaking" those two settings for hours on end...solves the problem, then there is no need to "tweak" anything. THAT is the point of my post...and why I spend MY time making these kind of posts.It's no different than what Nick says in his Setup Guide..."YMMV".Rick

J van E: I know it may not work for "everybody". I'm not stupid.

I know, of course you aren't stupid! :( I didn't say what I said to attack your post, but I just wanted to say I agree with you but needed the tweak anyway. :(