I'd just like to clear up the whole FSX's RAM usage dilemma here...Although FSX is a 32-bit application, and thus can only address a maximum of 4GB of RAM, if you are using a 64-bit operating system, it can address more than 4GB. Thus, with some simple mathematics we can deduce the following:With say, 6GB of RAM, FSX can have the full 4GB it's capable of, whilst still leaving another 2GB of RAM for the operating system and other applications running. When there's only 4GB of RAM in the whole system, FSX, the operating system, and other applications still have to share it. That's why FSX produces OOM errors on 32-bit operating systems...Furthermore, if you have 8GB of RAM, that's a full 4GB for FSX, and another 4GB for the operating system and other applications. And you also have to take into consideration that neither FSX nor the operating system will use that much memory in RAM all of the time. This leaves headroom for more programs to be running without getting in the way of FSX.So, indirectly, you could improve FSX's performance.

But it has been shown on this thread many times already, FSX will NOT use above roughly 2.75GBys, no matter if you had 24GBy of ram installed, FSX just doesn't use above that amount! It's the way the sim is programmed. So upgrading is pointless. If anyone here has a 1156 system with 8GBy Ram, please remove 4GBy and tell us if there is any performance difference.

Another question:[/u] Would it make sense to change the producer of my RAM? I´m actually running some Vdata RAM and I´m not knowing if there is any difference beteween my actually and an Corsair factured one.

Could someone concentrate on my second question rather than blaming each other for misunderstanding ther words RAM and adress space?

Only if it is faster, and lower latency. Otherwise no.

But it has been shown on this thread many times already, FSX will NOT use above roughly 2.75GBys, no matter if you had 24GBy of ram installed, FSX just doesn't use above that amount! It's the way the sim is programmed. So upgrading is pointless. If anyone here has a 1156 system with 8GBy Ram, please remove 4GBy and tell us if there is any performance difference.

FSX can use more Ram than 2..75 easily, for instance; watch what happends with a LOD of 8.5 or higher used with High quality Landclass and HD texture set+other add-ons like AI, clouds and flying a complex aircraft, do this over ManhattenX with FSDT-JFK with all your usual high quality settings. Certain theory about FSX memory usage may look good on paper but doesn't translate to all real world situations, either that or limitted experience.Just because you persoanlly have never seen it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.A few in this forum like to talk without knowing without really owning or never have owned certain hardware but yet talk about it as some kind of expert, maybe the same here with memory usage, ...fascinating!

Still bitter about the $600 you wasted on the 580?

FSX can use more Ram than 2..75 easily, for instance; watch what happends with a LOD of 8.5 or higher used with High quality Landclass and HD texture set+other add-ons like AI, clouds and flying a complex aircraft, do this over ManhattenX with FSDT-JFK with all your usual high quality settings. Certain theory about FSX memory usage may look good on paper but doesn't translate to all real world situations, either that or limitted experience.Just because you persoanlly have never seen it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.A few in this forum like to talk without knowing without really owning or never have owned certain hardware but yet talk about it as some kind of expert, maybe the same here with memory usage, ...fascinating!

Sounds great, I'm all for FSX using much RAM as it can. To leave theory aside and go for the practical, for the benefit of the rest of us, can I ask you to push FSX RAM usage under x64 as far as you can and post a Task Manager screenie so we can all see? I truly am curious as to what that max RAM number is going to be. Thanks! :-)Cheers,- jahman.

This is how you do it... you go to an airport like FSDT put it to max, you go to the AI settigns and max those, oh an run the 747x as well. Then come back to us and claim you're still getting even 3fps.

FSX, like any other 32-bit application, is capable of addressing a maximum of 4GB of memory. However, it's also possible that the need will ever arise for FSX to address this much memory. You have to remember 4GB is just a limit and FSX will not use 4GB all of the time. It may not ever use anywhere near that, though I don't have any figures as to how much RAM FSX actually uses on average, perhaps Chris B. can provide more info on that...

How exactly does the texture loading work then and the autogen?... If 32 bit application could use 4 gigs.. that would mean 12 gigs maximum not 4. FSX SP2 is 3 different applications as far as the OS is concerned.

I don't want to get kicked in my arse for not reading through the whole thread, but here are some corrections of some posts I did read:1) FSX can address max. of 4GB of virtual space - this means the memory space FSX is working within2) Virtual space has nothing directly to do with physical memory you have in your computer3) NOT every 32bit application is capable of addressing 4GB of RAM, only if it has been programmed to4) You will NOT see an OOM on the 64bit system with 2GB of physical RAM and enabled swap file, not more often than you would see it on the 6GB system5) My FSX uses around 2-3GB of addressed space, and I know how to push it over 4GB if I want it to, but... no real sense to it, right?6) I can tell you how to check those "usages", and even see when FSX is going to OOM, it's really extremely simpleInterested? :PSo basically, having 8GB of physical RAM, would potentially help. But as I said, when the app is using 3GB of virtual space, it DOES NOT mean it uses 3GB of physical RAM.

How exactly does the texture loading work then and the autogen?... If 32 bit application could use 4 gigs.. that would mean 12 gigs maximum not 4. FSX SP2 is 3 different applications as far as the OS is concerned.

Huh, it's ONE application. Not 3 applications each running separately?

Huh, it's ONE application. Not 3 applications each running separately?

How do you run on three different processors then without forking out 2 seperate processes?

How do you run on three different processors then without forking out 2 seperate processes?

Not a programmer, but I guess you can offload process inside the app to another core. Whereas OS "sees" only one application running, thus being able to assign memory only to it.If you would want to give each process more RAM, FS would have to automatically run more processes which would have to be visible in the task manager.Even then, it would be the question if it could work. More than one address space, and we already have so many troubles with one? Dunno...

Well how would two cpu share the same ram then? Wouldn't they eventually step over each other?