What I Changed to Get Better FPS

[gman! 1]

I was just looking at the hardware forum about graphics cards and found this link about fiber frame fraction (coincidence or what?) which may help explain what this line does. Note how it recommends a setting of 0.33 but also note how it was written in 2006. Quad core processors may have changed the playing field so to speak.[/url]http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555738I've just cut and pasted a section from the link above for those who don't want to click on the link:

This has been posted many times, and I have specifically explained why this line may be improtant due to the tweaks I have. Yes, I have a quad core, but I set the affinity to two cores, so FSX is not using all four. This may mean in some cases that FSX will need to donate more time to loading scenery tiles by changing the timing of fibers (which are like threads, but not the same) for FSX. Thanks for the information though everyone.

[JOBSCHEDULER]AffinityMask=12

In Hex (You can check in the Windows Calculator or Google) it is equal to 1100, and is read backwards by FSX because it is Hex. So the affinity is really 0011. This means Core 0 and Core 1 are unused while Core 2 and Core 3 can be accessed by FSX. Keep in mind this is only for quad core processors. I do not like to speculate, but I know the OS primary cores are Core 0 (1st Core) and also has some processes that use Core 1 (2nd Core), so this maybe why FSX runs so well on the last two cores. Also FSX was designed in the era of dual core processors (2005) so this may be why it utilizes two cores more efficiently than 1. The bad part about this tweak (*Affinity Mask) is that it may cause scenery to load slower on some computers but this can be overcome by using the Fiber Frame tweak and setting it to 0.66, which will keep fibers (which are like threads of a process) in line making FSX donate more time loading ground/scenery textures.The Fiber Frame line should be entered under the [MAIN] section in the FSX.CFG file, an should be entered like this

FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.66

You can also try setting it to 0.33 instead of deleting the line in the FSX.CFG because even though FSX default value is 0.33, the frame rate slider modifies the fiber allocations when it is not set in the CFG (PTaylor said this).

[bojote 20]

This has been posted many times, and I have specifically explained why this line may be improtant due to the tweaks I have. Yes, I have a quad core, but I set the affinity to two cores, so FSX is not using all four. This may mean in some cases that FSX will need to donate more time to loading scenery tiles by changing the timing of fibers (which are like threads, but not the same) for FSX. Thanks for the information though everyone.

I can offer you a comprehensive test methodology were you can SEE FOR YOURSELF that fiber frame fraction DOES have a considerable impact on performance on Multi-Core CPU setups. Are you willing to test?1) get yourself a copy of FPS Limiter2) Set FSX to Unlimited frames3) Configure FPS limiter to 20 frames only.4) Run FSX on window mode and open task manager5) Check CPU0 usage (or CPU2 if you have AffinityMask set to 12)repeat the above steps, using a fiber frame fraction of 0.25, then 0.10 and finally 0.01 after doing this, you will never ever believe what others tell you about this tweak :)Technical explanation:fiber frame fraction ONLY AFFECTS the first CPU. Since, this CPU is usually at 100% usage no one can tell if the tweak has any effect on performance. HOWEVER, when you limit your FPS with a program like FPS limiter, you are throttling the FIRST CPU usage, this allows you to see if there is any real impact to using the fiber frame fraction tweak.Now... when you finish doing this test you'll believe that the FPS limiter its a good idea. right? well.. NO, it is not, FPS limiter will twrow the FSX process scheduler OFF BALANCE and you'll experience stutters, so, best to limit FSX using the frame limiter it provides and ALLOW the CPU to crawl to 100%... because that aditional usage is meant to load scenery using 1/3 of CPU cycles. when you modify fiber frame fraction you are adjusting HOW MUCH FSX dedicates to this.. now, this is a FACT that you can check for yourself.

MipBias=6

True, MipBias gives you sharper textures and it also messes up water reflection (wet runways) at least on my Setup/drivers (nVidia 196.32)

[Guest anthony31fs]

Yes, I have a quad core, but I set the affinity to two cores, so FSX is not using all four.

Thanks for that Gman. I finally figured out what your tweak was all about. The deleting fsx.cfg threw me off the scent. If I understand correctly what you are saying is that running FSX on core 3 and 4 only provides better results?JohnCi posted a similar thread 13 months ago titled "AffinityMask Tweak" which people may find interesting when reading in conjuction with this thread (John mentions this in his post earlier in this thread).http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=241713Happy tinkering gentlemen!

[bojote 20]

JohnCi posted a similar thread 13 months ago titled "AffinityMask Tweak" which people may find interesting when reading in conjuction with this thread.

One of the best tweaks for FSX! (but few people pay attention to it) FSX performance DEGRADES with more than 4 cores. and it REALLY only needs two to work (Second one rarely goes to 100%) and if you use all 8 cores you experience thread collisions which will make you experience an incredible ammount of stutters. So yes, the advice to use the AffinityMask Tweak set to 12 is great! and gman, don't let others discourage you with their childish and/or sarcastic comments, I saw a previous post of yours were the sarcastic police jumped in making fun of you... I'm used to that!! :) remember, If you ain't Nick, No trick ;) (of course, I mean it in a good way) 95% of the tweaks I use are Nick's!! but others seem to easily discard comments and/or suggestions made from us mortals.

[gman! 1]

Thanks for the support guys, and I definitely agree with Bojote. Threads like these are often overlooked!

Thanks for that Gman. I finally figured out what your tweak was all about. The deleting fsx.cfg threw me off the scent. If I understand correctly what you are saying is that running FSX on core 3 and 4 only provides better results?JohnCi posted a similar thread 13 months ago titled "AffinityMask Tweak" which people may find interesting when reading in conjuction with this thread (John mentions this in his post earlier in this thread).http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=241713Happy tinkering gentlemen!

Exactly! FSX on any two cores will provide a smoother experience in many cases. The only thing is the Texture_Bandwidth_Mult must be set to a higher value than 40 sometimes to overcome the reduction in scenery loading time, but edit that and FSX will look great and run smooth in most cases! :(

[JOBSCHEDULER]AffinityMask=12

In Hex (You can check in the Windows Calculator or Google) it is equal to 1100, and is read backwards by FSX because it is Hex. So the affinity is really 0011. This means Core 0 and Core 1 are unused while Core 2 and Core 3 can be accessed by FSX. Keep in mind this is only for quad core processors. I do not like to speculate, but I know the OS primary cores are Core 0 (1st Core) and also has some processes that use Core 1 (2nd Core), so this maybe why FSX runs so well on the last two cores. Also FSX was designed in the era of dual core processors (2005) so this may be why it utilizes two cores more efficiently than four* (I said one in my first post, that was a typo.)

[Dirk98 354]

Gman, any suggestions for my system on E8600 (2 core CPU)?Meanwhile I'm trying the MipMaps.Thanks,Dirk.

[gman! 1]

There's not much to change in terms of affinity for a dual core, except for forcing FSX to use all two by using an an affinity of 3, but can you give me details on your problem? Slow scenery loading, low FPS?

[Dirk98 354]

There's not much to change in terms of affinity for a dual core, except for forcing FSX to use all two by using an an affinity of 3, but can you give me details on your problem? Slow scenery loading, low FPS?

Gman!, no problem, LOL. Seriously, I think I'm pretty close to the objective limits of my hardware. BUT thanks to this thread I've just discovered the MipMap=6 setting ( along with nHancer Negative LOD BIAS @Clamp, Adjust LOD BIAS @0.000[?], AA MS@4x, Enhance in-game AA+Gamma Correction; ingame res @1680x1050) decisively improves visual gfx of the ground that I see from above.Thanks, man, there's always something useful I pick up reading this forum, and I thought I had it all.Dirk.(E8600@4Ghz, 9800GTX+, 4Gb RAM)

[n4gix 4,947]

Yesterday I was flying in heavy areas and my FPS was not where I

[JOBSCHEDULER]AffinityMask=12

This means Core 0 and Core 1 are unused while Core 2 and Core 3 can be accessed by FSX.

I'm still having a problem reconciling what you've stated above with this statement by Phil Taylor:http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=64781 Post #11 on Dec 27 2007, 10:14 AM

This is a common misconception of the AffinityMask tweak, that it will completely lock FSX out of core-0. The AffinityMask tweak affects the extra threads used by SP1 and beyond. That is all that tweak affects. The fiber system that has been a part of FSX since the RTM version still runs on core-0.

I can't help but think that nothing Phil stated above has changed in the intervening few years... :(

[Guest FSXBuster]

I'm still having a problem reconciling what you've stated above with this statement by Phil Taylor:http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=64781 Post #11 on Dec 27 2007, 10:14 AM I can't help but think that nothing Phil stated above has changed in the intervening few years... :(

He-he!Can we please have more posters to cut through the vast amount of hot air and a complete waste of forum space, and particularly my time!I have serious trouble understanding any logical step by step move in the threads made by both gman and bojote...These two guys are shooting around like madmen, in their attempt at getting a few more frames, or is it fame they are looking for?!

[Alvega 2,124]

He-he!Can we please have more posters to cut through the vast amount of hot air and a complete waste of forum space, and particularly my time!I have serious trouble understanding any logical step by step move in the threads made by both gman and bojote...These two guys are shooting around like madmen, in their attempt at getting a few more frames, or is it fame they are looking for?!

I have some serious trouble understanding how a new member like you and a known troll is allowed to talk complete BS to well established members. :(

[Guest FSXBuster]

I have some serious trouble understanding how a new member like you and a known troll is allowed to talk complete BS to well established members. :(

Ouch!Why don't you just shut the ###### up you POS!!!!!!"A known troll!Get a life you idiot instead of sitting in front of a stupid lame flightsim all day!Hasta la vista morons!

[ryanbatc 12,837]

lack of sleep? lol?

[rightseater 0]

Ouch!Why don't you just shut the ###### up you POS!!!!!!"A known troll!Get a life you idiot instead of sitting in front of a stupid lame flightsim all day!Hasta la vista morons!

Goodbye!

[timers15 11]

I was following Phil's advice and just ignoring fiber_frame. Well. After all this discussion I tried messing with it.Good thing I read this thread! It appears to me fiber_frame is a trade off between using CPU for scenery or CPU for other tasks.First I set it to 0.01 with a saved fps test flight. Everything was much smoother, however all the textures got blurry. I hit pause and had to wait some time (minute?) before they sharpened.So I tried 0.10. That worked nicely. Now my autogen is set to dense, everything is smoother, and my fps is slightly higher (on a rough average, I went from 15 to 20).However, I can see the autogen working away in the distance. But that (to me) is worth the other improvements.So I'd say yeah, after this test there seems to be something to fiber_frame. I can easy repeat me results by using a saved flight and adjusting the value.Ohq9650 4 core 3.0Ghz 4 GB ram, 280 GTX 1 GBTim