Hi, been applying some of your tweaks with great success. And seeing there

And seeing there

thanks ;) but I'm just trying to make our hobby more enjoyable... specially now we don't have a new FS version. I'm also working on some new fixes/improvements. On monday, I'll release a fully Shader model 3.0 compliant mod for FSX (the one I use) i'm just busy with other stuff (like trying to fix autogen alpha fade)

That sounds very interesting!

I'm also working on some new fixes/improvements. On monday, I'll release a fully Shader model 3.0 compliant mod for FSX (the one I use) i'm just busy with other stuff (like trying to fix autogen alpha fade)

Speechless :(

Exactly! however, remember that the fibers that run on CORE0 don't take much CPU anyway, BUT if UT2 maxes CORE0 then you could have some stutters/lagging, so better to go the sure route and have them run on CORE1

Thanks, prior to asking I assigned FSInn, UT2, TrackIR, FPS limiter and Prio(priorty saver app) to CORE1, and FSX is set to HIGH priority and CORE2/3 using the AffinityMask=12 tweak.

bojote I have some question. your answer lead me to imagin that in few year , if 8 or 10 cores are available it can not raise Framerate . So we must wait for new flightsim . That 's correct ?and in this day I7 raise framerate because high overclocking ability but not more core, That 's right ??32nm cpu architecture may higher OC , may we have more FSX performance .Maybe I confuse. :(

No prob.And, the affinity mask will NOT make the CPU graphs go away ;) it justs instructs the application 'which' cores it is allowed to use. 12 tells FSX to use the last TWO cores, but a 'piece' of FSX remains in CORE0 regardless of the affinity mask you set, thats why it is recommended on QUAD CORE machines to use either 12 or 14 so you leave CORE0 free for the fiber system (terrain)You will also notice that either AffinityMask (12 or 14) will give your the exact same performance. Not even a single frame difference. Try running FSX with 8 cores and see what happens ;) it gets all choppy because there are too many threads working togheter, and they interact with fibers, which need to co-operatively multitask so the more COREs the more complexity and possiblity or 'stutters' or problems.

Hi *******,By the way, the Fermi is everything we had hoped it would be. With bufferpools=0 the 470 GTX is flawless. With knowledgeable fine tuning, machine has finally tamed FTX! Thanks for your help friend.Stephen

Hi *******,By the way, the Fermi is everything we had hoped it would be. With bufferpools=0 the 470 GTX is flawless. With knowledgeable fine tuning, machine has finally tamed FTX! Thanks for your help friend.Stephen

Yep... I agree :) thats why I posted my little 'review' and was so enthusiastic about it.

Hi *******,Just a little thankyou note here... I've got a new i7 930 o/c at 4ghz, with 6g of ram and a gtx 280.I've been running PNW "ok" but a spot disappointed. I had to use the external FPS limiter (or the internal one) at 25/30 fps, or had stutter-city.I tried the BP=0 tweak, and things were not great. More fluidity, but flashing textures every 4/5 seconds - not a good trade-off.So tonight I just swapped out your .cfg file for mine. Only changes were: a) pasted my "trusted" stuff in, so I didn't need to click all again; :( reset my screen res and c) upped airline traffic to 11%, and road traffic to 4%. I've also uninstalled Nhancer.Result: near perfect, except in cities e.g. Vancouver. In the bush - but also in the lighter urban areas - I am getting smooth flights with no texture corruption. And I no longer need to run the external frame limiter - I just leave FPS at unlimited (I may try the external FPS limiter, to see what it does - but currently I have no stutters).The biggest change? - I'm running now at Scenery=XD, AG = VD. And water high 2x. That compares to my previous settings of Scenery = VD, AG = D/N, water = low. It has only just occurred to me how much scope I've got to reduce these settings, in Vancouver, to see how things improve.Amazing difference. I was going to compare old and new, but I've decided not to look a gift horse in the mouth. I'm just flying, instead. Love it. I've backed up your .cfg file!For those still tweaking, I'd say that your .cfg did two principal things: a) slightly enhanced fps whilst not adding to blur and :( completely removed stutters, even with Fps = unlimited.Great stuff. If I'm imagining it, then I don't mind :)Thanks.Edit: smiley faces should be a "b" and a bracket!Edit2: I can also now use the ENB bloom mod with impunity - previously I switched it off in PNW for the extra 3/4 fpsEdit3: just did Vancouver -> Squamish; once out of the urban area, it was the most amazing flight I ever did - no texture issues, no blurries, no stutters, practically photoreal. Wow. I Will Stop Editing Now.Edit4: I lied: blurry textures here and there are the problem - but not a big problem; autogen diguises most of 'em... and a short pause here and there allows a "catch up". Still happy. But qualifications are good.

*******, I still get texture flashes when using your cfg file. But I have nhancer set to anti aliasing and everything following Nicks guide for that. Are you saying to remove nhancer and just use the in-game aa? Doesn't that give less aliasing? 2x? when I set 8x in nhancer

*******, I still get texture flashes when using your cfg file. But I have nhancer set to anti aliasing and everything following Nicks guide for that. Are you saying to remove nhancer and just use the in-game aa? Doesn't that give less aliasing? 2x? when I set 8x in nhancer

As I mentioned, I've got rid of Nhancer - and my understanding of J's posts is that he says it's "old" news. Get rid of it, and just try J's .cfg, is my advice. Good luck.

but fsx only does 2x anti aliasing, 8x ss aliasing is much nicer looking

ok things are MUCH smoother, I need to use the external fps limiter. No more flashing textures

Runs decent, but with the huge LOD I had to kick that back to get decent Frames with higher traffic levels. I like to see my airports swimming with traffic! Also kicked back cloud draw distance and saw that helped around major ports.However, I had no problem with settings at Max in areas lesser flown. Asia, africa, etc.

Hi Noel, well, yes there is a difference. the 'AffinityMask' setting in FSX is 'INTERNAL' to FSX. so, FSX 'knows' there are 4 CORES but you are instructing it to use 2 or 3. Ed Wilks app or anyother app will set the mask at runtime, meaning FSX will NOT be aware of how many cores you have, so this might be tricky.

Thank you for your reply & recommendation *******, which seems like an educated guess, versus something tested and proven? I like to try to separate friendly educated guesses from proven fact, if at all possible.What does FSX "think" when the AffinityMask setting is left out? When I use the applet I notice FSX is running nearly 100% on the 3 cores assigned, as if FSX was able to utilize the 3 assigned cores just fine, and quite heavily might reemphasize. Do you have any additional insight that sheds more light on the practical effects of this distinction? Noel