Poor performance of FS9, a plea for help.

[i16t24 0]

I've been working at getting FS9 to run smoothly for ages now and given my current hardware, I do not understand why I can still only manage to pull ~19 FPS on the ground at a somewhat busy KLGA and ~30 FPS in clear skies. Granted I do have plenty of addons and enhancements but it still seems too low.My current setup is as follows:Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bitAsus P5Q MoBo750W PSUC2Quad Q6700 @ 3.33ghz4GB PC6400 DDR2 RAMEVGA GTX 285 1GBHD #1 Seagate Barracuda 250GB (OS and OS oriented programs)HD #2 WD Caviar Black 640GB (games only incl. FS9)Addons for FS9 include plenty of scenery, UTUSA, GE2006, ASE, Radar Contact 4, and plenty of complex 3rd party aircraft.While I don't think the above setup is anything spectacular, I do feel it should be able to run FS9 at at least 30 FPS in all situations. I have shut down all unecessary applications and services, made sure all temperatures are always within normal tolerances, and keep the drives defragged. I do use nHancer to give FS9 some antialiasing but keep that very low at 4x MSAA as anything above costs me more FPS which is odd considering my graphics card. I do have nearly all the sliders in the sim full right and run at 1280x1024 so as to not stretch the 2D panels. I'm trying to put forth as many details as I can in case they matter so if I forget anything please let me know.Is the performance I am getting to be expected given my hardware, the sim and its programming, and/or all the additions made to the original sim (addons, nHancer enhancements, etc.)? Thank you in advance and I greatly appreciate any input anyone can offer.

[All 0]

Hi, It definitely seems you should be getting higher FPS. I think the biggest two questions are 1) is this a fresh install of Windows and FS? and 2) what addon planes are you talking about? Also make sure you don't have the frame rate limiter set at 30. I get about 60 fps (locked at 60) most of the time with my pc (i7 860 2.8ghz, 4gb ddr3 ram, gtx 260) using UT CAN/US, GE2006, AS6.5, Rc4, Ultimate Traffic etc but I only have some general aviation add on aircraft at the moment. I haven't tested with any PMDG, Level-D etc stuff yet. I have everything maxed and using 1600x1200. Two other things that may affect your FPS are your traffic settings and the cloud resolutions you are using. Al

[Guest simmer9304]

Your issue seems somewhat odd considering I run FS9 at 35fps at KLGA full traffic, medium clouds, all other sliders to the right and 1600x900 and my system is much weaker than yours.Are you running FS9 in XP SP3 compatibility mode?Are you running it windowed or full screen? Some people have issues with Win 7 x64 where if you're running FS9 windowed and the bottom of the game window touches the task bar it will kill FPS, also if you're running two monitors and the image from one is even one pixel onto the edge of the other it's an instant loss.

[Silverbird 115]

Your issue seems somewhat odd considering I run FS9 at 35fps at KLGA full traffic, medium clouds, all other sliders to the right and 1600x900 and my system is much weaker than yours.Are you running FS9 in XP SP3 compatibility mode?Are you running it windowed or full screen? Some people have issues with Win 7 x64 where if you're running FS9 windowed and the bottom of the game window touches the task bar it will kill FPS, also if you're running two monitors and the image from one is even one pixel onto the edge of the other it's an instant loss.

I feel your pain its sometimes as simple as going back to older drivers bad part is that if you do find a good driver for fs9 you might lose some frames are optimization's on newer games. believe me I had this problem myself no mater what driver I installed most of them gave me horrible frame rates around 9 10. there was only one driver that worked and gave me a big boost to around 20 25 even 30 some times. I would highly advise to test out alot of drivers and write down the fps you get and the drivers number, on a list. on a saved flight say at klga or something heavy with a default Cessna it could be other problems but I suspect that its a driver issue it was for me and it was driving me insane. its a pain in the butt to install reinstall drivers my video card is a 9600gt used drivers 82.50 couldn't use anything else frame rates were horrible with anything newer.I also believe there something with windows 7 if you play fs9 in emulation mode I think? it will slow it down. in nhancer use this profileAA: 8xQ,GammaAF: 16xVSync: OnSLI: AFR-4W [0x0240000D] (predefined)Perf: QualTrilin- AnisoSam-NegLOD: Clamp

[i16t24 0]

Hi, It definitely seems you should be getting higher FPS. I think the biggest two questions are 1) is this a fresh install of Windows and FS? and 2) what addon planes are you talking about? Also make sure you don't have the frame rate limiter set at 30. I get about 60 fps (locked at 60) most of the time with my pc (i7 860 2.8ghz, 4gb ddr3 ram, gtx 260) using UT CAN/US, GE2006, AS6.5, Rc4, Ultimate Traffic etc but I only have some general aviation add on aircraft at the moment. I haven't tested with any PMDG, Level-D etc stuff yet. I have everything maxed and using 1600x1200. Two other things that may affect your FPS are your traffic settings and the cloud resolutions you are using. Al

This was a fresh install of Windows as opposed to an upgrade. I also have Windows and FS9 on physically seperate hard drives. Examples of the addon planes I most often use are the Leonardo Maddog2010, Flight1 ATR, and the Captainsim 757. I also use REX for my clouds and other environment textures with the cloud textures set at 512x512 but I keep the visibility at 30 miles or less depending on the weather at all times as I find it to be more realistic. Traffic density is also set to 90%, commercial aircraft only and I don't think it matters since I've noticed absolutely no impact on performance but I do also use the bloom plugin.

Your issue seems somewhat odd considering I run FS9 at 35fps at KLGA full traffic, medium clouds, all other sliders to the right and 1600x900 and my system is much weaker than yours.Are you running FS9 in XP SP3 compatibility mode?Are you running it windowed or full screen? Some people have issues with Win 7 x64 where if you're running FS9 windowed and the bottom of the game window touches the task bar it will kill FPS, also if you're running two monitors and the image from one is even one pixel onto the edge of the other it's an instant loss.

I am not running FS9 in any compatibility mode, should I be? I also run the sim in full screen mode at 1280x1024 on a single monitor. The monitor's native resolution is 1680x1050 but I don't like the stretching of 2D panels so I have it set to auto-scale the program and the monitor just displays black bars on both sides of the sim, should I just run native res and deal with the stretching?. The taskbar is set to auto hide so whenever a program is running it is not visible.

I feel your pain its sometimes as simple as going back to older drivers bad part is that if you do find a good driver for fs9 you might lose some frames are optimization's on newer games. believe me I had this problem myself no mater what driver I installed most of them gave me horrible frame rates around 9 10. there was only one driver that worked and gave me a big boost to around 20 25 even 30 some times. I would highly advise to test out alot of drivers and write down the fps you get and the drivers number, on a list. on a saved flight say at klga or something heavy with a default Cessna it could be other problems but I suspect that its a driver issue it was for me and it was driving me insane. its a pain in the butt to install reinstall drivers my video card is a 9600gt used drivers 82.50 couldn't use anything else frame rates were horrible with anything newer.I also believe there something with windows 7 if you play fs9 in emulation mode I think? it will slow it down. in nhancer use this profileAA: 8xQ,GammaAF: 16xVSync: OnSLI: AFR-4W [0x0240000D] (predefined)Perf: QualTrilin- AnisoSam-NegLOD: Clamp

I actually recently downgraded my drivers and have noticed an increase in overall frames across the board, not just in FS9, but I still find the performance to be lacking just in FS9. I'll try some more of the more popular driver versions a bit later but you aren't kidding when you say it's a pain the rear to properly remove and then install a video card driver. I will try the specific nHancer settings you mentioned but what do you mean when you say Windows 7 emulation mode?

[Guest simmer9304]

I am not running FS9 in any compatibility mode, should I be? I also run the sim in full screen mode at 1280x1024 on a single monitor. The monitor's native resolution is 1680x1050 but I don't like the stretching of 2D panels so I have it set to auto-scale the program and the monitor just displays black bars on both sides of the sim, should I just run native res and deal with the stretching?. The taskbar is set to auto hide so whenever a program is running it is not visible.

The general consensus I've heard is that because FS9 was built for XP and came out well before even Vista appeared on the scene, it's best to run it in XP SP3 compatibility. I switch compatibility on and off for different planes that need it or run poorly with it on but in general I'd say try turning it on.As for your monitor resolution I've also heard keeping it at native resolution is the best to keep it at but then again I've never played without being in native res.

[kiwiflyer45 123]

This is the first time I've heard of a "compatability mode." I am running XP SP3 but have no idea how to change or set the "compatability mode." Could somebody clue me in on this? Thanks

[cbrown 1]

The OP is using Win 7. I think it only applies to users of Vista and Win 7 in order to make it run satisfactorily as it does in XP.For us dinosaurs still using XP, it doesn't apply. Colin B

[Silverbird 115]

This is the first time I've heard of a "compatability mode." I am running XP SP3 but have no idea how to change or set the "compatability mode." Could somebody clue me in on this? Thanks

Yep thats one couldn't remember the name compatability mode. lol

[kiwiflyer45 123]

From one dinosaur to another, thanks Colin.. :( Whenever I see a thread that gives me hope that I can improve the performance of my poor old PC with FS9 I get excited, but once again, I will just have to sigh deeply and wait for the day I can upgrade.

[Guest simmer9304]

Anybody using XP has no need to worry about compatibility :( The best OS I think you could use for FS9 would be XP SP3 x64 that way you keep the OS that FS9 was built for and still get the advantages of x64. If I had the option I'd switch to XP x64 in a minute.As another thought for people using compatibility mode, I turned it off today for a test flight and performance went up along with no bugs or glitches.

[Arklight1 140]

The OP is using Win 7. I think it only applies to users of Vista and Win 7 in order to make it run satisfactorily as it does in XP.For us dinosaurs still using XP, it doesn't apply. Colin B

I use Win 7 64 now, and before this Vista 64. I have never had an issue with FS9, nor have I ever run anything in compatibility mode. Performance is better for me now than it ever was before. :(

[Bob Scott 7,712]

Which KLGA and other NY area scenery are you using? Add-on clouds? Water effects? 19fps with the ImagineSim KLGA and/or KEWR scenery and traffic is actually in the ball park for a Core2 quad at 3.33 GHz. The NYC area is a well-known frame rate killer, with KLGA, KEWR, & KJFK clustered near eath other plus all the scenery objects in Manhattan. Add all that to the load of a complex aircraft, and I don't think 19 fps is necessarily unrealistic.RegardsBob ScottColonel, USAF (ret)ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VColorado Springs, CO

[i16t24 0]

Which KLGA and other NY area scenery are you using? Add-on clouds? Water effects? 19fps with the ImagineSim KLGA and/or KEWR scenery and traffic is actually in the ball park for a Core2 quad at 3.33 GHz. The NYC area is a well-known frame rate killer, with KLGA, KEWR, & KJFK clustered near eath other plus all the scenery objects in Manhattan. Add all that to the load of a complex aircraft, and I don't think 19 fps is necessarily unrealistic.RegardsBob ScottColonel, USAF (ret)ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VColorado Springs, CO

It is ImagineSim's KLGA and I do also have their KEWR. I use REX for clouds (512x512) and water, with water effects on full. If you say this is normal I'll believe it, I just thought performance should be better given the age of the sim and the progression in hardware since the start. Thanks for the input everyone, I really appreciate it and guess I will just await the day for a sim that uses modern hardware more effectively/efficiently (more than 1 CPU core, more resources from the GPU vs. CPU, etc.) .

[Bob Scott 7,712]

It is ImagineSim's KLGA and I do also have their KEWR. I use REX for clouds (512x512) and water, with water effects on full. If you say this is normal I'll believe it, I just thought performance should be better given the age of the sim and the progression in hardware since the start. Thanks for the input everyone, I really appreciate it and guess I will just await the day for a sim that uses modern hardware more effectively/efficiently (more than 1 CPU core, more resources from the GPU vs. CPU, etc.) .

Well, brute force works...use an i5/i7 CPU at 4 GHz and above and you can get up into the 30 fps range with all the add-ons piled on.One thing I still do is disable the NY add-on airports I'm not using for a particular flight by unchecking them in the scenery library prior to the flight. KEWR, in particular, is a fairly old scenery and a real framerate pig. Dialing down the traffic levels in that area can help a lot, too. 35% in NY is still a lot of traffic.This is probably the most useful config tweak I still use in FS9.cfg:

	[DISPLAY]	TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=400	TextureMaxLoad=10

RegardsBob ScottColonel, USAF (ret)ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VColorado Springs, CO