Hi Bert, would you be so kind to post you fsx.notsogreat.cfg file so I can take a look at it? I want to see how the settings on that file relate to you hardware specs:[email protected] 9600GT 4GB WinXP32 External Fps Limiter at 24 fpsThanks,

Well said. I too have come to the conclusion that FSX with correctly tuned hardware will yield good results and save a ton of time. The AffinityMask=14 also works very well on my system although I'm not sure exactly why.

come to the conclusion that FSX with correctly tuned hardware will yield good results

Thats my point. (and guilty as charged for not making that absolutely clear) but... 'tweaks' can be either heavenly cures, OR hellish nightmares :) depending on the conditions you apply them, the point with tweaks is not to increase your raw FPS, but to 'balance' the engine to get the most out of your hardware. Meaning.. EVERY HARDWARE will react differently to this tweaks, I want to understand (in the OP poster particular case) what caused the problems he experienced, so we can adapt or change recomendations based on hardware characteristics, guess it will help others understand what tweaks WORK or which hurt performance based on a particular setup.

Hi Bert, would you be so kind to post you fsx.notsogreat.cfg file so I can take a look at it? I want to see how the settings on that file relate to you hardware specs:[email protected] 9600GT 4GB WinXP32 External Fps Limiter at 24 fpsThanks,

Sure,[JOBSCHEDULER]AffinityMask=14[bufferPools]UsePools=0 // Use 0 or 1 if you experience crashes (if ENABLED PoolSize defaults to 4000000 bytes, 4 MB)PoolSize=500000[Display]BLOOM_EFFECTS=0SKINNED_ANIMATIONS=1TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=40TextureMaxLoad=9 // new variable, default 3 or 6? UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT=0WideViewAspect=TrueRUNWAY_LIGHTS_SURFACE_SCALAR=0.7 //scales edge,center,end,touchdown,runwaysRUNWAY_LIGHTS_VASI_SCALAR=0.6 //scales VASI lights)RUNWAY_LIGHTS_APPROACH_SCALAR=0.5 //scales approach light barsRUNWAY_LIGHTS_STROBE_SCALAR=0.5 //scales RAILs and ODALs)[Main]ProcSpeed=6765PerfBucket=6//MIN_FIBER_TIME_SEC=0.020 //MAX_FIBER_TIME_SEC=0.040 FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=.99 // 0.33 default or 0.0 [DISPLAY.Device.NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GT.0]Mode=1680x1050x32TriLinear=1AntiAlias=1[GRAPHICS]SHADER_CACHE_PRIMED=1693500672TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=1024NUM_LIGHTS=8AIRCRAFT_SHADOWS=0AIRCRAFT_REFLECTIONS=1COCKPIT_HIGH_LOD=1LANDING_LIGHTS=1AC_SELF_SHADOW=0EFFECTS_QUALITY=1GROUND_SHADOWS=0TEXTURE_QUALITY=3IMAGE_QUALITY=0See_Self=1Text_Scroll=1D3D10=0[sCENERY]LENSFLARE=0DAWN_DUSK_SMOOTHING=1IMAGE_COMPLEXITY=5SmallPartRejectRadius=4[TrafficManager]AirlineDensity=14GADensity=12FreewayDensity=0ShipsAndFerriesDensity=20LeisureBoatsDensity=12IFROnly=0AIRPORT_SCENERY_DENSITY=0[TERRAIN]LOD_RADIUS=4.500000MESH_COMPLEXITY=80MESH_RESOLUTION=22TEXTURE_RESOLUTION=25AUTOGEN_DENSITY=1DETAIL_TEXTURE=1WATER_EFFECTS=3Nhancer used to set AA to 8XS and AF to 16XFpslimiter to 24, and/or internal limiter set to 24.Affinity Mask was definitely better at loading textures at 14 than at 15.

Thats my point. (and guilty as charged for not making that absolutely clear) but... 'tweaks' can be either heavenly cures, OR hellish nightmares :) depending on the conditions you apply them, the point with tweaks is not to increase your raw FPS, but to 'balance' the engine to get the most out of your hardware. Meaning.. EVERY HARDWARE will react differently to this tweaks, I want to understand (in the OP poster particular case) what caused the problems he experienced, so we can adapt or change recomendations based on hardware characteristics, guess it will help others understand what tweaks WORK or which hurt performance based on a particular setup.

IMHO, you're putting the cart before the horse. Your approach of tweaking the engine on vastly different hardware is like using a shotgun - you hit some of the time but miss most. I'm amazed that a coder of your experience would apparently abandon a more structured approach.I suggest helping folks get their HARDWARE in balance so you have a relatively stable platform and THEN tweaking the engine within the "balanced" framework.To do otherwise might be more exciting but will result in more and more people having results that are next to useless because they don't have a balanced base to compare to.However, you have got people talking and thinking.....Just MHO

Sure,[JOBSCHEDULER]AffinityMask=14[bufferPools]UsePools=0 // Use 0 or 1 if you experience crashes (if ENABLED PoolSize defaults to 4000000 bytes, 4 MB)PoolSize=500000[Display]BLOOM_EFFECTS=0SKINNED_ANIMATIONS=1TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=40TextureMaxLoad=9 // new variable, default 3 or 6? UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT=0WideViewAspect=TrueRUNWAY_LIGHTS_SURFACE_SCALAR=0.7 //scales edge,center,end,touchdown,runwaysRUNWAY_LIGHTS_VASI_SCALAR=0.6 //scales VASI lights)RUNWAY_LIGHTS_APPROACH_SCALAR=0.5 //scales approach light barsRUNWAY_LIGHTS_STROBE_SCALAR=0.5 //scales RAILs and ODALs)[Main]ProcSpeed=6765PerfBucket=6//MIN_FIBER_TIME_SEC=0.020 //MAX_FIBER_TIME_SEC=0.040 FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=.99 // 0.33 default or 0.0 [DISPLAY.Device.NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GT.0]Mode=1680x1050x32TriLinear=1AntiAlias=1[GRAPHICS]SHADER_CACHE_PRIMED=1693500672TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=1024NUM_LIGHTS=8AIRCRAFT_SHADOWS=0AIRCRAFT_REFLECTIONS=1COCKPIT_HIGH_LOD=1LANDING_LIGHTS=1AC_SELF_SHADOW=0EFFECTS_QUALITY=1GROUND_SHADOWS=0TEXTURE_QUALITY=3IMAGE_QUALITY=0See_Self=1Text_Scroll=1D3D10=0[sCENERY]LENSFLARE=0DAWN_DUSK_SMOOTHING=1IMAGE_COMPLEXITY=5SmallPartRejectRadius=4[TrafficManager]AirlineDensity=14GADensity=12FreewayDensity=0ShipsAndFerriesDensity=20LeisureBoatsDensity=12IFROnly=0AIRPORT_SCENERY_DENSITY=0[TERRAIN]LOD_RADIUS=4.500000MESH_COMPLEXITY=80MESH_RESOLUTION=22TEXTURE_RESOLUTION=25AUTOGEN_DENSITY=1DETAIL_TEXTURE=1WATER_EFFECTS=3Nhancer used to set AA to 8XS and AF to 16XFpslimiter to 24, and/or internal limiter set to 24.Affinity Mask was definitely better at loading textures at 14 than at 15.

Bert,With that 9600 it is probably not the best to try to get 8xsAA out of that card, even at that low screen resoltuion.That card doesn't really have the guts to do that much AA very well, it might do half that or less. Would be a more reasonable expectation for that hardware. Also I dont understand the FFF of .99 (?), stock .33 at 24 FPS I would think should have been more suited for your hardware, so I am suprized that you got blurries (probably the combo of BP=0 and 8xs). If you want to run 8xs you should at least pick up a 9800+ or 260 IMHO.

TextureMaxLoad=9 // new variable, default 3 or 6? FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=.99 // 0.33 default or 0.0 IMAGE_COMPLEXITY=5

Hi Bert, I noticed your IMAGE_COMPLEXITY set at 5.. am I correct assuming you did INCREASE this value after you noticed an increase in performance when using BP=0? or you have always used IMAGE_COMPLEXITY=5? this is a CPU killer, and this prevents textures to load quick enough, so this can definitely induce blurries. My recomendation is that you use a value of 3 here.TextureMaxLoad GREAT to make texture loading quicker, it transfers more data per frame, but even with my GTX 480 I have seen STUTTERS when going over 18!! you have a much older card, so, may I suggest lowering that to its default? (which is 3)FIBER_FRAME_FRACTION=.99 this is a % value of time allocation for the fibers to interact with the main processing thread. this value means that 99% of the time it takes to render EACH frame, will be used by the fibers to process terrain loading. This fibers DO run in CORE0 (if you use Affinitymask 14) however, since they cooperatively multitask with the main scheduler it IS possible, that by setting a 'high value' here, you can get the terrain scheduling out of sync and create some problems if the fiber 'locks' the thread for too long. so, if you are running UNLIMITED, I suggest you use EXACTLY a value of 0.25 here.Blurries are simply the inability to 'keep up' with terrain loading inside the FSX engine, there is no SINGLE setting that causes it, but a combination of them.. no need to go back to your old fsx config if the new one is working for you, I just wanted to understand 'what' caused the 'blurries' you reported and I think that the combination of the above values definitely played a major role.Thanks Bert!

I suggest helping folks get their HARDWARE in balance so you have a relatively stable platform and THEN tweaking the engine within the "balanced" framework.

Your observation its a very valid one, but.. I 'think' (I could be wrong) that *most* of the people trying the tweaks DO have their hardware in balance... theres a bit of common sense here too. You don't use full sliders or 32x AA with old hardware, you need to 'know' your limits, otherwise tweaking is NOT for you. I also think the 'hardware aspect' is covered in the guides published by NickN, and I *assume* people DO READ those guides, otherwise, you are asking for trouble! If you see the BP=0 topic pinned in the forums, you'll notice it starts with a text that says:What you are about to read CAN PRODUCE UNFAVORABLE RESULTS depending on your particular setup and slider settings....Again, I think I made it really clear that applying the tweaks is not a 'good for all' approach, like all tweaks YMMV, specially, taking the above statement into consideration.

Hi Bert, I noticed your IMAGE_COMPLEXITY set at 5.. am I correct assuming you did INCREASE this value after you noticed an increase in performance when using BP=0? or you have always used IMAGE_COMPLEXITY=5? this is a CPU killer, and this prevents textures to load quick enough, so this can definitely induce blurries. My recomendation is that you use a value of 3 here.TextureMaxLoad GREAT to make texture loading quicker, it transfers more data per frame, but even with my GTX 480 I have seen STUTTERS when going over 18!! you have a much older card, so, may I suggest lowering that to its default? (which is 3)FIBER_FRAME_FRACTION=.99 this is a % value of time allocation for the fibers to interact with the main processing thread. this value means that 99% of the time it takes to render EACH frame, will be used by the fibers to process terrain loading. This fibers DO run in CORE0 (if you use Affinitymask 14) however, since they cooperatively multitask with the main scheduler it IS possible, that by setting a 'high value' here, you can get the terrain scheduling out of sync and create some problems if the fiber 'locks' the thread for too long. so, if you are running UNLIMITED, I suggest you use EXACTLY a value of 0.25 here.Blurries are simply the inability to 'keep up' with terrain loading inside the FSX engine, there is no SINGLE setting that causes it, but a combination of them.. no need to go back to your old fsx config if the new one is working for you, I just wanted to understand 'what' caused the 'blurries' you reported.Thanks Bert!

Since I thought: "Since FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION only affects scheduling of jobs on the primary thread, it will have less of an impact on the performance of Flight Sim on multi-core machines. In fact, we moved so many jobs off of the primary thread that there probably isn't enough fiber work left to soak up the full time allowed by the default value of 0.33." I dont know why we keep seeing the suggestion to keep messing with this on multi-cores, is there a new development or something? I mean this seems like such a dead horse, with all the hours of testing on FScom, Simforums and here on Avsim. Is all that old data wrong, I dont even put it in the cfg anymore as I have never seen a difference at all going back 3-4 multi-core machines ago. ???

Since I thought: "Since FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION only affects scheduling of jobs on the primary thread, it will have less of an impact on the performance of Flight Sim on multi-core machines. In fact, we moved so many jobs off of the primary thread that there probably isn

(as I'm sure you probably know) FSX consists of several threads that work between them to make things load in FSX. this 'threads' or processes are responsible for terrain loading, AG batching, simconnect, mesh etc etc.When FSX was initially released, it only worked on a SINGLE core, so ALL PROCESSES ran on the same core. When SP1 came along, the FSX team 'split' the work so FSX would make 'use' of multicore machines.FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION affects the time allocation of the fibers, if you run a SINGLE core, reducing this value has a DRAMATIC performance impact because it AFFECTS all the other running threads, it changes time allocation and resource usage considerably, however AFTER SP1 most of the 'terrain' loading was 'moved' off the primary thread to the texture managers, meaning that 'reducing' this value on a MULTICORE computer did NOT have the same impact it had before, in fact, fibers running in CORE0 do use VERY LITTLE cpu, but 'sometimes' this fibers (when flying under rought terrain) spike the CPU to about 20/30% usage. if you let them run ALONE in CORE0 and the main scheduler is running in CORE1, this 'spikes' will not affect you, because they are 'isolated' from the main scheduler, so EVERTHING in the above 'statament' is 100% true and in fact, if you read my 'recomendation' to Bert, I said he should use FFTF of '25' (not 33) because 25 is MORE THAN ENOUGH for the fibers to do the work they need to do, under 'normal' flying conditions.Running AF=14 is NOT a Performance boost tweak (because the gains are marginal) it simply ensures a more 'stable' linear CPU utilization trend which is NOT influenced by another 'process' sharing resources.Is it now more clear? or I got you all confused?

I guess my point was that tweak clearly isn't very relevant anymore like so many others, esp if you do the important OS/system tweaks first. ;)Confused? Not at all, the less convoluted the cfg the better is working here.Cheers!

I guess my point was that tweak clearly isn't very relevant anymore, esp if you do the important OS/system tweaks first. ;)Confused? Not at all, the less convoluted the cfg the better is working here.Cheers!

And while all of you guys spend your time tweaking, I'm flyiiiiiing!And while all of you guys spend your nights twisting your configs, tweaking your video cards.... I am sleeeeeepin' !!!!! :( Jean-Jacques

Guys,******* never claimed to deliver the Holy Truth.He is a talented guy that offered his finds to the community with a bunch of cautious warnings and also a lot of modesty.Tweaking is (for most of us) part of the fun, you are free to try or not, that's your choice.Saying such things as "NickN, you always was right!" is IMO not very fair nor usefull.Neither Nick nor ******* have found or will find the so called "holy grail" beacuse the ONLY way to get a 100% smooth and performant simulator is to rewrite the whole FSX coding.They both give tracks to explore that might help - or not.Now Nick's approach is IMO rigid and rather authoritative: "do this, do that, don't change a word of what I say". Some like or need that, some don't, it's a matter of personnality.I, for one never apply all his recommandations to the letter. Neither do I with Bojote tweaks. The only thing that bothers me with Nick is that he doesn't really allow contradictions and above all he does not really explain things. Most of what Nick wrote in his guides is true and highly interesting but there is also lot of irrelevant or useless information. Again, he is not a guru and doesn't deliver the one and only truth. He is a person with very good knowledge and skills but he can be wrong too.******* approach is radically different, he tries different things, some are pure genious, other are pure crap and when he is wrong he recognizes it with humour. He wants people to apply his finds only if they understand what they are doing. He involves the guys in his finds. He takes the time to educate others. He is also a talented person with worthy skills but he is not either a guru.I received lot of PMs asking why did I pinned his "guide" and not Nick's one.The resaon is very, very simple and has nothing to do with "who is right and who is wrong". In fact, both guides are very complementary and helpful to the community.Nick's guide is not a sticky because he was not published in our forums but in Simforums and we do respect intellectual property. One can find thousands of links to Nick's work here though.So take what is good for you here and there, try, make your own judgement and above all make backups!! But please, don't open a war between ******* and Nick.There are engouh other forums for that (...) and here, it won't be tolerated.Thanks!

Hi Bert, I noticed your IMAGE_COMPLEXITY set at 5.. am I correct assuming you did INCREASE this value after you noticed an increase in performance when using BP=0? or you have always used IMAGE_COMPLEXITY=5? this is a CPU killer, and this prevents textures to load quick enough, so this can definitely induce blurries. My recomendation is that you use a value of 3 here.TextureMaxLoad GREAT to make texture loading quicker, it transfers more data per frame, but even with my GTX 480 I have seen STUTTERS when going over 18!! you have a much older card, so, may I suggest lowering that to its default? (which is 3)FIBER_FRAME_FRACTION=.99 this is a % value of time allocation for the fibers to interact with the main processing thread. this value means that 99% of the time it takes to render EACH frame, will be used by the fibers to process terrain loading. This fibers DO run in CORE0 (if you use Affinitymask 14) however, since they cooperatively multitask with the main scheduler it IS possible, that by setting a 'high value' here, you can get the terrain scheduling out of sync and create some problems if the fiber 'locks' the thread for too long. so, if you are running UNLIMITED, I suggest you use EXACTLY a value of 0.25 here.Blurries are simply the inability to 'keep up' with terrain loading inside the FSX engine, there is no SINGLE setting that causes it, but a combination of them.. no need to go back to your old fsx config if the new one is working for you, I just wanted to understand 'what' caused the 'blurries' you reported and I think that the combination of the above values definitely played a major role.Thanks Bert!

Hello ******* , Sorry I am a little bit confused,here(http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=283061&st=0) I see you recommended TextureMaxLoad=30 and now below 18? So which one is better? I am on Corei7 @3.6Ghz 285GTX.ThanksBob

Hi David,I hope it was not my post (which by the way was intended to be humorous and not critisizing at all) that triggered your remark (as it came just after my post I was afraid it might have been the case) .I did not intend to hurt anybody, and if I did I am very sorry.Jean-Jacques

Guys,******* never claimed to deliver the Holy Truth.He is a talented guy that offered his finds to the community with a bunch of cautious warnings and also a lot of modesty.Tweaking is (for most of us) part of the fun, you are free to try or not, that's your choice.Saying such things as "NickN, you always was right!" is IMO not very fair nor usefull.Neither Nick nor ******* have found or will find the so called "holy grail" beacuse the ONLY way to get a 100% smooth and performant simulator is to rewrite the whole FSX coding.They both give tracks to explore that might help - or not.Now Nick's approach is IMO rigid and rather authoritative: "do this, do that, don't change a word of what I say". Some like or need that, some don't, it's a matter of personnality.I, for one never apply all his recommandations to the letter. Neither do I with Bojote tweaks. The only thing that bothers me with Nick is that he doesn't really allow contradictions and above all he does not really explain things. Most of what Nick wrote in his guides is true and highly interesting but there is also lot of irrelevant or useless information. Again, he is not a guru and doesn't deliver the one and only truth. He is a person with very good knowledge and skills but he can be wrong too.******* approach is radically different, he tries different things, some are pure genious, other are pure crap and when he is wrong he recognizes it with humour. He wants people to apply his finds only if they understand what they are doing. He involves the guys in his finds. He takes the time to educate others. He is also a talented person with worthy skills but he is not either a guru.I received lot of PMs asking why did I pinned his "guide" and not Nick's one.The resaon is very, very simple and has nothing to do with "who is right and who is wrong". In fact, both guides are very complementary and helpful to the community.Nick's guide is not a sticky because he was not published in our forums but in Simforums and we do respect intellectual property. One can find thousands of links to Nick's work here though.So take what is good for you here and there, try, make your own judgement and above all make backups!! But please, don't open a war between ******* and Nick.There are engouh other forums for that (...) and here, it won't be tolerated.Thanks!