Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest FlyingBits

PT- "The fiber system that has been a part of FSX since the RTM version still runs on core-0" and other Gems

Recommended Posts

Thought that one would grab some attention....There are some real gems of info from just a few post from some time ago (bottom of post) that I thought would be relevant to share for the Gurus and the wanna, can I be a Gurus that will find it interesting as you do your math.I think as you read some of the quotes the thought about Bandwidth and Latency speak directly concerning these recent tweaks as well as reminding about the need for balance.Anyway, With all the dust being stirred up again I thought I would gather and centralize some long lost info here in this post that seems to be missing or needed for the recent discussions of "fixing FSX" instead of having it buried in the mess of threads and post about the "fixes" etc., that way this can become the new mess of threads and post....Ha,Basically besides things that get broken by various new drivers, OS changes, there is still the same old problem that seems to remain; We keep adding more and more complex add-ons, jump from textures that are 1024x1024 to those that are 16 times larger at 4096x4096, now start pushing the flight model details and everyone trying to run Traffic add-ons with all sliders progressively to the right and well we are still stuck with:Performance + Smooth flight vs. Visual Detail = CPU+Memory+GPU vs. Bandwidth and latency - Something like that, shift the balance anywhere you want in these maxed scenarios, what are you willing to trade off? Balance.If you want to skip past my rant below, just go down the page to where you start to see the quotes. Rant:Hey maybe some of these tweaks will establish themselves as legit in certain circumstances.But One comment I have to make is that there is such a rush to "test" (cough) these "tweaks" it is hard for anyone to take the "results" seriously.Anyone can troll the forums were various developers or techs are trying to test out various settings as a means to deal a problem, to take that and to start shouting it from the roof tops before it thoroughly tested in a controlled way that gathers apples to apples information IMOP is not doing the community any favors. That is why It has been strongly suggested that more thorough testing be done. And not just for the sake of testing for results but to save a lot of pain in the days ahead for those who will try to figure out "hey whets wrong with my FSX now when I do this/that etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

There are some real gems of info from just a few post from some time ago (bottom of post) that I thought would be relevant to share for the Gurus and the wanna, can I be a Gurus that will find it interesting as you do your math.I think as you read some of the quotes the thought about Bandwidth and Latency speak directly concerning these recent tweaks as well as reminding about the need for balance.
I certainly buy into the need for balance... but interestingly, IMHO, on the AffinityMask issue, Mr. Taylor is just plain wrong, as can be seenby watching the Performance tab in the Task Manager.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I certainly buy into the need for balance... but interestingly, IMHO, on the AffinityMask issue, Mr. Taylor is just plain wrong, as can be seenby watching the Performance tab in the Task Manager.
Hi Bert,I really cant comment on the AM issue as I have seen it go back and forth on the forums. In setting up the OS to run very lean, I have no use for it and have removed it, but I know others here do use it.You sound pretty confident so your comment is apreciated. Just curious, care to describe under what conditions, hardware you tested this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Bert,I really cant comment on the AM issue as I have seen it go back and forth on the forums. In setting up the OS to run very lean, I have no use for it and have removed it, but I know others here do use it.You sound pretty confident so your comment is apreciated. Just curious, care to describe under what conditions, hardware you tested this?
Sorry, if I came on a bit strong.. but Phil and I had this discussion back when.. :( On a quad core, if you choose affinity mask = 14, you can see in the task manager that theload from Core0 moves to Core1. Technically, Phil may be correct in that a very small partof the FSX load may remain on Core0; but practically, the heavy load moves off Core0,giving it room to do other stuff.I personally do not use the tweak, but some people seem to like it and I certainly do notbelieve it has no value.Q6600@3.2 - Win XP Pro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, if I came on a bit strong.. but Phil and I had this discussion back when.. :( On a quad core, if you choose affinity mask = 14, you can see in the task manager that theload from Core0 moves to Core1. Technically, Phil may be correct in that a very small partof the FSX thread may remain on Core0; but practically, the heavy load moves off Core0,giving it room to do other stuff.I personally do not use the tweak, but seem people seem to like it and I certainly do notbelieve it has no value.
I did not want to get into a debate, but I concur with your findings, most of it is moved over, but not all.I have always understood it to mean just that and mainly it was Adam who had shed light on the subject, Phil was just passing it on, so I am surprised he debated it with you.Dont worry about coming on too strong,, feeling pationate about all things FSX is also part of my sickness and pain as well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing I have to point out is that balance is not always the answer. I suffer from texture corruption. Let me give you a in-sim example where it occurred.Take off from EGLL to VRMM in am with ASA weather, Simwings scenery and 100% AI. Of course, fps are low in these circumstances but still in the low-mid teens - doable for departure IMHO. I'm flying the CLS747.As I move further from the airport, FPS increases as expected. Nice smooth flight with GEX - FPS locked at 30.As I begin to land, I loose all vc textures. When I switch exterior, ac is invisible. Go to desktop and go back in to sim. Now the ac is back.Upon landing I notice that the runway and scenery are gone.This can not be a balance issue. Sure, I had Aerosoft scenery at VRMM but I only had 5 ai aircraft on the ground and no autogen for miles.Was I taxing my system at EGLL? Yes and it performed as good as I could expect. Was I taxing it at VRMM, absolutely not.It seems like nothing is ever getting dumped from memory - Like EGLL and all of those ai were still in memory all the way to VRMM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, if I came on a bit strong.. but Phil and I had this discussion back when.. :(
I have since added PTs reply to you in my post above from that old thread and I think he was in agreement with you:"Phil Taylor - 12-27-07 http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=64781 - post #19"The fiber system is significantly off-loaded since SP1 but does still perform work."Image5.jpgFull size:http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/sN_9v...feat=directlink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The only thing I have to point out is that balance is not always the answer. I suffer from texture corruption. Let me give you a in-sim example where it occurred.Take off from EGLL to VRMM in am with ASA weather, Simwings scenery and 100% AI. Of course, fps are low in these circumstances but still in the low-mid teens - doable for departure IMHO. I'm flying the CLS747.As I move further from the airport, FPS increases as expected. Nice smooth flight with GEX - FPS locked at 30.As I begin to land, I loose all vc textures. When I switch exterior, ac is invisible. Go to desktop and go back in to sim. Now the ac is back.Upon landing I notice that the runway and scenery are gone.This can not be a balance issue. Sure, I had Aerosoft scenery at VRMM but I only had 5 ai aircraft on the ground and no autogen for miles.Was I taxing my system at EGLL? Yes and it performed as good as I could expect. Was I taxing it at VRMM, absolutely not.It seems like nothing is ever getting dumped from memory - Like EGLL and all of those ai were still in memory all the way to VRMM.
I used to have the same problem with the pmdg md11 and I had active sky. I know that pmdg knew Of a conflict between the two and this caused problems and so I put it down to that. I don't have active sky on my pc anymore and now I don't have the problemSo it might be worth trying a flight without ASA loaded incase cls have the same issue.Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thought that one would grab some attention....
Phil works now at Intel, in MS he was a PM, most of the information given by Phil came from either Adam or Rafael as he was not a lead developer. There is ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong with Phil giving advice, he was passing it along as best as he could, I don't see whats wrong in passing information not 100% accurate.Problem is taking advise from a source and NEVER challege the theory behind those claims. I can't imagine being told the earth was flat and not having the need to prove it right or wrong!! it's my nature. One guy said FSX should be called 'Flight Tweak Mulation' and not flight Simulation.. I agree!! whats wrong in proving your own theories if you have the means, tools and background to do it? Humanity will be doomed, and NO advancements of any kind be made if everyone accepted established knowledge... there is absolutely nothing wrong in doing that because its human nature.FSX is a little ecosystem, our own 'world' where 'experts and novices alike' claim things such as that PerfBuckets o ProcSpeed make a difference to them... now, WHO am I to prove them wrong??? they are simply contributing!!! its up to ME, to determine if it works or not, don't you agree with this? please, join me in thanking EVERY SINGLE person that in past 5 years has suggested something that in some way has improved your Flight Simulation experience. nuff said.Hope you don't take this the wrong way...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phil works now at Intel, in MS he was a PM, most of the information given by Phil came from either Adam or Rafael as he was not a lead developer. There is ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong with Phil giving advice, he was passing it along as best as he could, I don't see whats wrong in passing information not 100% accurate.Problem is taking advise from a source and NEVER challege the theory behind those claims. I can't imagine being told the earth was flat and not having the need to prove it right or wrong!! it's my nature. One guy said FSX should be called 'Flight Tweak Mulation' and not flight Simulation.. I agree!! whats wrong in proving your own theories if you have the means, tools and background to do it? Humanity will be doomed, and NO advancements of any kind be made if everyone accepted established knowledge... there is absolutely nothing wrong in doing that because its human nature.FSX is a little ecosystem, our own 'world' where 'experts and novices alike' claim things such as that PerfBuckets o ProcSpeed make a difference to them... now, WHO am I to prove them wrong??? they are simply contributing!!! its up to ME, to determine if it works or not, don't you agree with this? please, join me in thanking EVERY SINGLE person that in past 5 years has suggested something that in some way has improved your Flight Simulation experience. nuff said.Hope you don't take this the wrong way...
No need to try to put words in my mouth, I never said anything about not chalenging anything. Further I have already stated above that Phil was just passing it on from Adam.It seems that you dont understand the point of this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder about the validation of "task manager"? I'm not sure how useful it is as a test tool.scott s..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wonder about the validation of "task manager"? I'm not sure how useful it is as a test tool.scott s..
Hey Paul, Phenomenal shot...Where are you flying in that screenie? Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul, have you been drinking again? No, just kidding, good to see you once again contributing thoughtful comments, we missed the voice of sanity in this forum (did I just write that about you? I must be drunk!)There are so many problems with all the unsubstantiated claims, and unsurprisingly this is nothing new. I still have, tucked away in the archives, discussions carried out by you, Elrond, Chris Wright, and others from... wait for it.... 8 years ago! So, nothing changes.The comments here have always been plagued by a complete lack of rigor in analysis and testing: - definition of problem: as far as I know, only the developers know the concepts and code used in the game, and they told nobody, for obvious contractual reasons. So, how do self-proclaimed experts know the cause of display problems? - measurement: people talk about bus latency, frame buffer fill rates, etc., but who is actually providing precise measurements of these values? Nobody. And if so, how do they know that they are the source of the problems? And some vague vid memory values or approximate core usage data in the Windows Task Manager is not enough. - testing: nobody seems to empty cache, isolate display settings, or seek to stress the system to determine the true value of suggested remedies. It is all just flying around, looking at frame rate counter and giving a general impression of how much better it all seems. But, again, nobody thinks to measure buffer fill rates or latency after applying their "tweaks" to see if they made any difference at all.Oh well, it is just a computer game, and it does not really matter if the claims are unsubstantiated, or even unsubstantiable. As long as people are happy believing that they have made their flights more enjoyable and better looking, then that is all that counts.By the way, would you either stop showing those pictures of Buffalo, or show a lot more? You have been working on that project for too long and there must be a lot more and we want to see it.Best regards.Luis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites