Hey *******,Applaud your great professional effort here, though my opinion may not matter much to you I just want to say Congratulations!!! - On creating a great tool that all members of the community can use directly from the source.I hope you will let me add one suggestion and that is that after your finished here in pursuit of max performance that you put in the same effort to get MAX IQ at best performance as possible as an option as the hardware and FSX interacts quite differently when maxing things out –(things like max LOD, high res etc etc) and I think there are some here that feel the same way and the hardware is here now, but perhaps I am alone in this, on an island, in a hammock, cold drink in hand…just a thought anyway.Again, great job and wish you the best.Cheers *******!

though my opinion may not matter much to you

I respect your opinion, same as others. In fact, last two days I've been applying suggestions to the tool based on user feedback! no feedback = bad news. So, I encourage people to provide feedback EVEN IT IS NEGATIVE! it doesn't matter! but I need it so I know where the tool is lacking and what can be improved for the benefit of all. (specially newbies)

I just want to say Congratulations!!! - On creating a great tool that all members of the community can use directly from the source.

Appreciate it.

I hope you will let me add one suggestion and that is that after your finished here in pursuit of max performance that you put in the same effort to get MAX IQ at best performance as possible as an option as the hardware and FSX interacts quite differently when maxing things out –(things like max LOD, high res etc etc) and I think there are some here that feel the same way and the hardware is here now, but perhaps I am alone in this, on an island, in a hammock, cold drink in hand…just a thought anyway.

As 'some' probably noticed already, I 'removed' the aggresive option. The tool is not changing sliders that affect IQ anymore. It will respect what you have, simply warn you about the fact. That way, you can have the tool 'check' your fsx.cfg without affecting your visuals.I'm also facing a huge challenge here with all the different setup/hardware combinations users have. The tool 'tries' to suggest optimal settings based on hardware characteristics, but even that is not enough because of the wide range of configurations/settings and even problems users might have already with drivers and/or hardware.The tool also has some nice features I'm pretty sure users have noticed. it detects duplicate entries, duplicate sections, incorrect values/ranges. Multiple display configurations and overall integrity. So, it can also be used as a fsx.cfg integrity check tool.My objective is very simple: Use the tool as a way for 'us' to help others get the most out of their setup. So, the next time someone asks YOU for help, are you going to ask the user to 'post' his/her fsx.cfg entirely in a forum post? or would you rather see a summary of the settings he/she may have in a summarized, color coded way? think about it.

The tool adds SWAP_WAIT_TIMEOUT=2, this tells the terrain engine that it should only wait 2 frames before assuming a tile/texture is already loaded in video memory, TextureMaxLoad=30 ENSURES that the textures load into video memory very fast so that SWAP_WAIT_TIMEOUT=2 won't give you any trouble.

Right -- I had those set already.

With this settings, having FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACION over 0.75 is too much!

Oh! I must have misread one or two of your posts, then. I thought it was the other way, that you could push FFTF up as a result. Ooops. As I said, each time you publish a tip I apply it. I recall the .75, then I seem to remember you said in one message you actually use 1. Since I believe you are using a 980X + 480 system like me, I applied it to mine too. I must have missed something.

I'm pretty sure you already have an optimized setup. Are you 100% satisfied with how FSX runs?

Almost everywhere, yes. I still get lowish frame rates and a little jerkiness at Heathrow with a properly realistic AI load (both UT2 and MyTrafficX -- but the latter only "filling in" missing airlines from UT2). I'm using UK2000's Heathrow. It starts off fast enough, just about, but gradually slows over time. So it's generally good as my departure airport, but less so for arrivals as by the time I'm on finals it's a little slow - 15-20 fps, which would be fine if still smooth but it's got occasional stutters.It might be that anti-aliasing transparency setting, as you said, but without that the airport has too much shimmering, really annoying.

what would you change? where do you think you are having the most issues? is it with stuttering? low FPS? FPS fluctuation?

I'm happy with it just about everywhere excepting Heathrow, where I'm happier these days than I used to be, but it isn't yet the perfection I seek. I only fly in Europe, and Heathrow is the busiest airport I have. I always use it for my "are we there yet" test scenarios! ;-). I can abide low-ish (15-20) frame rates if there are no stutters.I would dearly love to re-enable the add-on London ground scenery -- pretty much the whole of central London rendered with correct buildings -- but with that enabled there are nasty stutters on 27L/R approaches and 09L/R departures -- or rather, there used to be. I've not re-tested it since applying most of the recent tweaks, so maybe I should ...Thanks,Pete

The tool also has some nice features I'm pretty sure users have noticed. it detects duplicate entries, duplicate sections, incorrect values/ranges. Multiple display configurations and overall integrity. So, it can also be used as a fsx.cfg integrity check tool.

On that line, I notice that1: it jumbles up the order of the CFG file sections, and in some ways a little oddly -- for instance mine came back with the 6 or so "infotext" sections spread evenly, almost, through the file, where my original had them altogether.2: it sorts the parameters in each section into alhpanumeric order of name. That's okay, as it makes finding the one you want visually easier.If it is going to rearrange things like that, why not arrange the sections in alphanumeric order too?The only other useful way of ordering them, apart from in the same order as FSX itself would put them, is probably to put the "more important" or "more often tweaked" sections at the beginning.RegardsPete

The only other useful way of ordering them, apart from in the same order as FSX itself would put them, is probably to put the "more important" or "more often tweaked" sections at the beginning.

That IS useful :) in fact, is what I do with my fsx.cfg... I'll definitely add it during the weekend. A user also mentioned leaving comments.. that I should do as well. thanks for the feedback!!! appreciate it Pete.Pete, there is one more thing I'd like to add. Some times, add-on developers push FSX beyond its capabilities. users will NOT normally notice this because they got used to stuttering and/or low FPS. However, when you have a VERY FAST machine that is optimally tweaked and which usually works 99% of the time YOU'll notice this problems (stuttering, EXTREMELY low FPS). Unfortunately, add-on developers don't take this very well. You know, everybody thinks their baby is perfect. I suggest the following: When you have a problem with stuttering try to determine if the cause is autogen or regular scenery objects. If it is autogen, try to determine if this is 'custom' autogen OR native FSX. Try disabling autogen/default.xml to see if entries there are causing your stuttering problems. If this is not the cause, jump to scenery objects. Lower Image Complexity, if this fixes it, then a 'particular' 'object' or missing texture is causing trouble. Try to determine 'which' object this is. Or enable this settings to see if a missing texture could be the cause:

[sCENERY]MissingLibraryAlert=1ShowMissingTextureAlert=1

With the above tips you sure will be able to fix any stuttering problems you might have. Please, check this two videos Check the smoothness. The actual 'source' video is 100% stutter free! don't confuse frame skips with stutters, blame it on youtube for the frame skips!Manhattan X + UTX at Night + MAX Autogen/Scenery Complexity + Weather/Clouds + aggresive panning:

ORBX PNW (Seattle) + UTX @ Dusk + Weather/Clouds + MAX Autogen/Scenery Complexity + High Speed Aggresive Low Flying

******* - // This file is optimized as follows: 6 core(s), CPU speed 5, HT 0, GPU 4, PREF 2Tried the tool last night - ignored two of the suggested changes - left the 7cm setting due to Orbx and didn't use external limiter - mine are set at 30. I have dual monitors and I use the ENB Bloom mod - the external lmiter seems to have issues with this. My system is pretty well setup so I didn't expect any major improvements. Everything ran as expected except - I use TRackIR and every time i looked left or right there was the slightest hesitation. Changed back to my orginal cfg file - no hesitation.tried to attach my orginal cfg file here but keep getting "you are not permitted to upload this kind of file" no matter which extension I use.Altho I have the ForceWindowedVsync in the cfg file, it doesn't seem to work in the orginal but it does in the adjusted one.Vic

I use TRackIR and every time i looked left or right there was the slightest hesitation.

That was a CPU spike due to TextureMaxLoad being set to high. Are you using 4096 textures? if you try, for example to reduce TextureMaxLoad to something like 15, its possible you'll not see any stutters. What scenery are where you flying?

using 1024 textures. TextureMaxLoad set by your tool to 12.Flying my usual test flight - kbur to lax - default scenery but I use GEX & UTX & FSG. Tried it with and without ASE weather - no difference.Vic

using 1024 textures. TextureMaxLoad set by your tool to 12.Flying my usual test flight - kbur to lax - default scenery but I use GEX & UTX & FSG. Tried it with and without ASE weather - no difference.Vic

If the tool changed your TextureMaxLoad to something other than 30 it means you are flying with your frame rates locked. I determine optimal TextureMaxLoad for this scenario like this:

                        if (TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT >= 90) {                                optimal_tml = int(TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT/ 10);                                TextureMaxLoad = $optimal_tml;                        }                        else {                                if (TextureMaxLoad < 15 or TextureMaxLoad > 30) {                                        TextureMaxLoad = 15;                                }                        }

Meaning, that if you got '12' it is because you had your TBM set to 120. An interesting observation on your part.. I should lower TextureMaxLoad ever further, because in the above scenario TextureMaxLoad IS probably too high due to TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT being also used in the texture throttling algorithm inside FSX. Thanks for the feedback!

That is exactly the scenario. When I get home tonight, I'll try the tool again or just manually change TextureMaxLoad to 9 and see how it goes.Thanx,Vic

is this a typo? :Pif (TextureMaxLoad < 15 and TextureMaxLoad > 30) {

is this a typo? :Pif (TextureMaxLoad < 15 and TextureMaxLoad > 30) {

LOL - Missed that in my first read through.

LOL - Missed that in my first read through.

Nope, not a typo. A bug! duh. thanks. Anyway. I'm re-working the TextureMaxLoad calculation. The higher you have your TBM the LOWER your TextureMaxLoad needs to be, otherwise you'll get stutters. So i'm changing that now. this ONLY applies to people flying with frames LIMITED inside FSX. Thats why feedback is critical!!So, tonight, when Vic tests the new configuration it should be very similar to what he already has.

I tried the tool. Sim feels smooth but I get a couple of annoying "burps" every couple of minutes.I only flew for max 5 mins at a time so not sure if the system crashes on longer flights-Whenever i tried you other tweaks the sim would be smooth for a little while and then religiously crash every time... so not sure this is the case with the tool. specs i7 980x @4.27, gtx480, 6 gb 7-7-7-24what do you suggest ?ThanksVic

Thank you so much for this tool and all your work in FS. :( It told me partly what I already knew, I'm too greedy with the eye candy, but I followed the advice and I am seeing better performance. One thing is it said my mesh rez was set too high (at 19) and to try 10 or 5m. Shouldn't that be 38m?Intel Duo Core E8400 @ 3GHzSingle ATi 4850 512MB// This file is optimized as follows: 2 core(s), CPU speed 2, HT 0, GPU 2, PREF 2