How FSX works and how performance is affected by different hardware explained

[dukeav 46]

Wow. It's an old thread, but by far the most comprehensive commentary on various threads fsx uses and effects on fps.

[SAAB340 28]

Wow. It's an old thread, but by far the most comprehensive commentary on various threads fsx uses and effects on fps.

I'm sorry that the edit of the text has changed and turned it in to one huge lump of text.

There's more information over here if you fancy more reading. http://forum.avsim.net/topic/377105-texture-loading-ssd-vs-hdd/

(The important images that have dropped out in that topic are linked in a post further down)

[nikos 0]

Hi Lars (SAAB340),

 

Congratulations on your tremendous work. I 've tried out AM=249 and it works great for me. Even better frames than my previous and more widely tested AM=84. I test my various settings in a very specific scenario and some really demanding "views" and "spots" of some missions that are mostly CPU hungry, so even the slightest differences can be measured.

 

I was really surprized when I saw the results of your research on Hyper Threading and it's contribution to faster loading of terrain and textures. I always suspected that there must be something escaping most people's research on this. You proved that there is something missing, and it's a great thing to have facts that can't easily be disputed.

 

Now, in the main subject. AM=249 makes use of cores 0, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, right? Core3 though is a logical-non physical core. How can someone put a load on a logical core without involving its physical part? Wouldn't be the same if we assigned an AM=245 instead? What is the difference? Sorry for my ignorance.

 

And something else, please. What is the best FFTF setting for me when I am using these setting under [Display]:

TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=60

TextureMaxLoad=30

UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT=30

 

Thanks in advance!

 

Nikos (Greece)

[SAAB340 28]

Hi Nikos.

This is a 3+ year old thread and I have posted several updated topics. Never the less, thanks. Several of my topics posted later on build on this thread.

 

On to your thoughts about your thoughts about AM=245. You are perfectly right about it being similar to AM=249, especially when it comes to the amount of texture loaders, It's perfectly true that 245 and 249 assign the same amount of texture loaders. (as would 246 and 250). My observation is that Windows scheduling of work(threads) is favouring 249 over 245, 246 & 250 when it comes to keeping the fibers (other threads) away from the same physical core as the main thread.

 

You seem to think that there's always a logical and a physical core when HyperThreading is used. That's not the case. When HyperThreading is used, ALL cores are in fact logical. All those logical cores shares the actual physical cores in pairs. Think about it in this way:

In a maths class, Without HyperThreading on, every student have their own calculator to use during the whole maths class, for a 4 core processor you have 4 students with 4 calculators. With HyperThreading on every PAIR of students have to share one calculator, so for a four core processor you have 8 students sharing 4 calculators. In the first case a calculator will sit un used a lot of the time whilst the student think of what numbers to punch in to it the next time, whilst in the second case each calculator is utilised a lot more but a student might have to wait for another one to finish their number punching before he gets a go at the calculator.

 

It's not ignorance, it's just a lot to get your head around.

 

When it comes to FFTF I've done a bit further research as you can find in my updated topics. I've found that FFTF higher than 0.67 is of no use. And as long as you can keep the FPS you have locked within FSX it doesn't matter what your FFTF is set to.  If you want to make sure you get maximum (ground)texture loading all the time, even at the cost of FPS, set 0.67. If you at demanding times  rather sacrifice (ground)texture loading to keep your locked FPS you can leave it at stock 0.33 or even use a lower FFTF.  I hope this reply makes sense Nikos.

 

Cheers

Lars

[nikos 0]

Thank you Lars for spending time reading my post. Of course it makes sense now. I 'll try to find your up to date topics. I am not visiting the forums a lot lately, and many interesting things are currently escaping my attention.

 

Cheers

 

Nikos