I know this topic has been done to death here but I've read so many posts and not really had a huge improvement. I wonder if anyone has any further advice?I have a fairly high-end machine (dedicated to FS9 & FSX - specs as per my forum signature) and on the whole both FS9 and FSX run brilliantly. But when changing to spot view I often get areas of blurred scenery which take for ever to come into focus. I've tried editing the FS9.cfg file - mine is like this at the moment (I still get some tearing of ground textures BTW at this setting):[DISPLAY]UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT=0TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=40RUNWAY_LIGHTS_SURFACE_SCALAR=1.0RUNWAY_LIGHTS_VASI_SCALAR=1.3RUNWAY_LIGHTS_APPROACH_SCALAR=1.25RUNWAY_LIGHTS_STROBE_SCALAR=1.4TextureMaxLoad=10[TERRAIN]TERRAIN_ERROR_FACTOR=95.000000TERRAIN_MIN_DEM_AREA=10.000000TERRAIN_MAX_DEM_AREA=100.000000TERRAIN_MAX_VERTEX_LEVEL=20TERRAIN_TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=8TERRAIN_AUTOGEN_DENSITY=5TERRAIN_USE_GRADIENT_MAP=1TERRAIN_EXTENDED_TEXTURES=1TERRAIN_DEFAULT_RADIUS=4.000000TERRAIN_EXTENDED_RADIUS=4.000000TERRAIN_EXTENDED_LEVELS=4[sCENERY]IMAGE_COMPLEXITY=5DYNAMIC_SCENERY=1DYN_SCN_DENSITY=5DAWN_DUSK_SMOOTHING=1SUNGLARE=1LENSFLARE=1I have nVidia Inspector loaded and have set it up as per instructions by NickN on simforums. I attach two screenshots, first to show the problem (as if anyone really needed a picture to know what I'm talking about here!), and one to show that the sim is capable of loading crisp textures way into the distance. I'd just like them to load faster (if possible).Any advice? Thanks,Martin

Hey Martin, try to twiddle with the "TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT"! I suggest a value between 800-2000, mine is on 2000 and the Blurries keep within limits (it may depends on hardware/operating system/drivers and stuff...)Just give it a try and test different values at same conditions in Flightsim.And remember: the more Frames per Second = the faster texture loading time (you may turn of VSync and get eye cancer for more Frames and better loading times :() best regards Marcel

Hi. I can tinker with that setting and see what happens.. If I turn VertSync off however, I get unpleasant effects when panning in spot view.. In any case I get around 60fps on average, so I don't think an increase in fps per se is neededThanks,M.

1) Increase TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT to 400, which is the maximum. Setting it higher is pointless.2) Reduce visibility using FSUIPC to about 30-40 miles and use sky textures which give a smooth horizon.3) Increase AF via your video card drivers to 4 or 8.

Hi. TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT is already at 400, my AF is set at 16 by the nHancer settings and I have visibility at 60 miles in FS (I don't have a registered version of FSUIPC). Still gettingblurred ground textures - they usually resolve but after 30" or more..M.

Same old same old...If I understand correctly, you have a problem with continuous loading of textures.TBM 400 is old story. It is WRONG. Set to 40 and be done with it. It does not load longer or slower. There is a simple test that can be done - set 40, slew to far position, measure time it takes to fully load, repeat with 400. I NEVER saw any difference.Limit your FPS to 40fps internally and try it out.If your FPS is lower than limited and you have it limited (too slow computer?), you might get blurries, that is how FS9 works.You already said your AF is at max. That's fine.Try mips 4 or 8, see which works better for you.One thing that can help you throughout your tests, is "Refresh Scenery" thingy in assignments. I have it assigned to Shift+T.And when comparing screenshots, be sure you compare two at the same spot.

Hello,

(too slow computer?)

Well ..... you kidding ?

Intel Core i7-950 CPU @ 3.8GHz; GeForce GTX 470 GPU, 1280MB; 1 x OCZ Vertex 2E 120GB SSD; 1 x Corsair Force 120GB SSD; 2 x Samsung SpinPoint F3 1TB SATA drives; 6GB KINGSTON HYPER-X T1 TRI-DDR3 2000MHz RAM; ASUS P6X58D-E M/B; Windows 7 x64; FSX/FS9.1

My wishes will be to have a such "slow computer" :( Mine is a 3.16 GHz + 512 MB GPU, limited FPS at 41 and don't suffer those blurries to the extend of the original poster.If this can help (but each install act differently .... )

[GRAPHICS]FULL_SCREEN=1PERFORMANCE_MODE=0DEF_PERF_MODE=6TEXT_SCROLL=1AUTO_LOD=0DETAIL_TEXTURE=1WATER_EFFECTS=2TERRAIN_USE_VECTOR_MAP=16TERRAIN_USE_VECTOR_OBJECTS=552448608EFFECTS_QUALITY=2GROUND_SHADOWS=0SMOOTH_VIEW=1IMAGE_SMOOTHING=1TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=1024COCKPIT_HIGH_LOD=0AIRCRAFT_SHADOWS=1LANDING_LIGHTS=1IMAGE_QUALITY=0TEXTURE_BLDG=1TEXTURE_GND=1TEXTURE_WATER=1AIRCRAFT_TEXTURE=2SEE_SELF=1TEXTURE_QUALITY=3LOD_TARGET_FPS=28NUM_LIGHTS=8UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT=41TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=400[TERRAIN]TERRAIN_ERROR_FACTOR=100.000000TERRAIN_MIN_DEM_AREA=10.000000 TERRAIN_MAX_DEM_AREA=100.000000 TERRAIN_MAX_VERTEX_LEVEL=21TERRAIN_TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=8TERRAIN_AUTOGEN_DENSITY=5TERRAIN_USE_GRADIENT_MAP=1TERRAIN_EXTENDED_TEXTURES=1TERRAIN_DEFAULT_RADIUS=40.000000 TERRAIN_EXTENDED_RADIUS=60.000000TERRAIN_EXTENDED_LEVELS=4

Regards.Gus.

Yes, I think this is a fast rather than slow computer. Even in a PMDG 747 at Aerosoft's Heathrow with traffic at 95% and cloudy skies I get 40fps average. It's not a frame rate problem. As you will see from my original post, I had TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT set to 40 - I changed just to experiment, but yes, the general view is that above 40 there is no difference.I also originally had frame rates limited and have tried changing that again, but once more, no difference that I can see. It is odd to me that I am looking at my a/c in spot view and seeing around 60fps but the ground textures (in patches around the aircraft) stay blurred for up to half a minute before they resolve.I had mips at 4, now at 8 - didn't change anything ... that's all why I posted here really, I thought I'd tried all the 'usual methods'.. I will try reloading the scenery (mine set already to shift+Q) as part of troubleshooting this - and I'll try your cfg settings Gus. Will post back if I get any improvement..Thanks,Martin

Sorry, the slow computer thing wasn't pointed at you dicrectly, but rather a general statement. I also did not check what you have. Of course, your computer is not too slow for FS9 :( Um, I noticed now one thing: why is there TextureMaxLoad??? Shouldn't be there.And UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT=0 should be 40.

TBM 400 is old story. It is WRONG. Set to 40 and be done with it. It does not load longer or slower.

Hi, that's quite strange that it makes no difference to you. It is certainly not WRONG as you put it. It makes a huge difference to me, and I believe to most people. 40 is VERY low, you sit there watching tile after tile of ground textures loading. At 400 it is instant. So I don't know where your argument comes from. Editing that value has a profound effect on texture loading times vs stutters on my system. Your suggestion of 40 is really very very low and your statement is incorrect.

You could search TextureMaxLoad in Google - quite a number of people have reported better performance when set to 10 (perhaps not conclusive), but in any case it doesn't seem to change how fast the textures load.I can experiment more with the TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT= setting, though some people report graphics problems when set to over 40. The default value in FSX is only 34 I think. But as I say, I didn't notice much differenve in texture loading times.As for the 'fast/slow' PC (haha) I am really pleased with it - I get great frame rates in FSX too, where sliders are not quite at max but almost so. I fretted a lot before spending a pretty large sum on a new rig, but thought in the end that FS is one of my great joys in life, and I don't smoke, or drive a car, or (etc. etc.) ..... one can justify almost anything if one tries hard enough! :-) Odd that it doesn't want to load textures a quickly as my old PC though...M.

Hi, that's quite strange that it makes no difference to you. It is certainly not WRONG as you put it. It makes a huge difference to me, and I believe to most people. 40 is VERY low, you sit there watching tile after tile of ground textures loading. At 400 it is instant. So I don't know where your argument comes from. Editing that value has a profound effect on texture loading times vs stutters on my system. Your suggestion of 40 is really very very low and your statement is incorrect.

If you would at all educate yourself from the facts and testing, then you would for the fact know that all those people that use 400 are seeing nothing more than a placebo effect.Source:http://www.jobia.de/Sorry if you don't understand german, but would you have read this 500-page-document, you would understand what the whole deal with the scenery in FS9 is and how it works.I saw that both of those parameters don't work with FS9, and don't cause any change, so I just left it out and my FS9 is working like a clockwork.If the problem is between computers, as it appears it is, then the problem is external, not FS9, and no matter how much you tweak, the result won't be there.

If you would at all educate yourself from the facts and testing, then you would for the fact know that all those people that use 400 are seeing nothing more than a placebo effect.Source:http://www.jobia.de/Sorry if you don't understand german, but would you have read this 500-page-document, you would understand what the whole deal with the scenery in FS9 is and how it works.I saw that both of those parameters don't work with FS9, and don't cause any change, so I just left it out and my FS9 is working like a clockwork.If the problem is between computers, as it appears it is, then the problem is external, not FS9, and no matter how much you tweak, the result won't be there.

There is no placebo effect here whatsoever, the difference is as clear as night and day. It makes a big difference. At 400 I don't notice the textures loading at all. At 40 you can watch each one loading individually. No placebo effect, just fact.I've read many of these flightsim articles and I think even you would agree that only half of them are true. Obviously various systems are also going to respond differently, but the TBM value made huge differences on my old machine and does the same on my new machine.Setting it at high settings makes the textures load instantly but causes stutters. Lower it until the stutters are gone, that's how I tune it. It works, and unlike many of the settings that seem to make no difference at all, this is the one that has the most profound effect for me.

Word Not Allowed, nothing personal, but unless you have a very specific knowledge of the underlying programming of FS - and since you (presumably) are not a member of the former ACES team, I guess you do not - I think you'd have to admit that, like the rest of us, you read what you find on the internet and either take it on trust - or not. I have read parts of that 500-page document before (as I speak German), in fact I have it saved on my hard drive, and it is interesting, but I wouldn't take anything as gospel in these documents, unless perhaps it comes from Microsoft who created the programme (and even then ...!) - you will find that 95% of "trusted" sources of information such as your German document (and not just in FS) are contradicted by some other "trusted" source elsewhere online.I think one needs to be very wary of telling people on forums that they should 'educate themselves', when they, just like you, can only get their information from the web pages and files they read. Setting yourself up as some kind of 'Guru' in replies like that can only make you sound terribly patronising - which I guess you don't mean to. If you were able to explain technically why, in programming terms, a setting of 400 over 40 is just 'placebo' that would be great - but just quoting something you have read and then being so superior about it in your replies is just going to get up people's noses..M.

I don't try to make myself a guru, not at all. Last 10 years I've been simming, I've read so many things on forums and such websites, that I simply formed my own opinion. The source on jobia.de is one of the most trustworthy sources I've come across. That is why I almost take it as an ultimate truth. I've changed 6 computers on FS9 platform, and each and every one gave the one same result. Those facts are for me a good base.So when I come here claiming something, it's not because I've only read about it, but rather because I've extensively tested it. I'm not a programmer, but I can confirm I'm probably one of the craziest tweakers :( I only share my opinion on things, I'm not even telling what to do. Only suggesting. I don't really give a rat's a** how someone else sets up their computer. I only wish to help.So, as I'm getting up people's noses, apparently, I'm just gonna shut up :(