Would help to know everyone specs as they try this and report their results...-P

EDITED Text for my post (#25) above:http://forum.avsim.net/topic/329728-possible-new-tweak-for-fs9/page__view__findpost__p__1947499TO MINIMIZE CONFUSION OVER COMMENT DELIMITERS "//", AND TO AVOID LOSS OF INFO WHEN FS9.CFG IS EDITED AND FS DELETES THE "TML" LINE, PUT A "COMMENTED-OUT" BACKUP COPY OF THE PARAMETER LINE BELOW THE "ACTIVE" LINE:The "3 Test Tweaks":[GRAPHICS]DETAIL_TEXTURE=2 <-- Tweak #1// <________________> (This is a "commented out" blank line used for example text layout visibility purposes only)// DETAIL_TEXTURE=2 // This line is a "commented out" backup reference showing the prior or default value; it is ignored by FS// TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=262144 <-- Tweak #2 (example calculated for 256 MB VRAM; may vary with video card VRAM size in MB)// // TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=256 // This line is a "commented out" backup reference showing the prior or default value; it is ignored by FS// [DISPLAY]TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=25600 <-- Tweak #3 (may vary with computer hardware speed / configuration)// // TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=400 // This line is a "commented out" backup reference showing the prior or default value; it is ignored by FS// PS: TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=25600 IMHO, this 'should' be used as is without any calculated change (until tested further)Hope this helps ! :smile:GaryGB

Thanks for the re posting this. I was one who got confussed by the // in the lines. I have a question about the DETAIL_TEXTURE= line. I put 2 but it keeps getting changed back to 1. Do I have to change it every time I start FS9? (all the other lines stayed at the new numbers)And I didn't change any settings via FS itself. I changed the FS9 CFG file (saved it after I made the changes), started FS9, took a look at the results, exited FS9, and then looked at the CFG file only to see the number changed.

Thanks for the re posting this. I was one who got confused by the // in the lines. I have a question about the DETAIL_TEXTURE= line. I put 2 but it keeps getting changed back to 1. Do I have to change it every time I start FS9? (all the other lines stayed at the new numbers)And I didn't change any settings via FS itself. I changed the FS9 CFG file (saved it after I made the changes), started FS9, took a look at the results, exited FS9, and then looked at the CFG file only to see the number changed.

NO parameter in FS9.Cfg should change as a result of any change made while FS is loaded / running UNLESS one has failed to "lock" the FS9.Cfg file... by doing one of the following:1.) Open FS9.Cfg in NotePad and minimize it to the Windows Taskbar before launching FS92.) Right-click FS9.Cfg in Windows Explorer file browser accessed via "My Computer or "Computer" icon on Windows Desktop (context menu opens)a.) From that context menu, select "Properties"b.) On the "General" Tab, be sure "Read-only" is 'checked' next to "Attributes"BTW: Above GUI navigation is based on Windows XP Pro using "Windows Classic" theme (another tweak to improve FS system performance ! :( )FYI: If one uses non-default parameter values in FS9.Cfg and does not "lock" FS9.Cfg, when FS exits, it will ALWAYS write into FS9.Cfg to change non-default values back to default values.So one must either "lock" FS9.Cfg... or manually edit / restore certain parameters to desired vales BEFORE re-starting FS9 again.NOTE: When FS "edits" a parameter value, it usually sets it back to the MINIMUM default value and does not re-run the FS performance tuning profiler; consequently, the parameter value one gets is sub-optimal for even "normal" FS performance, so manually inspect / edit FS9.Cfg when in doubt. :( Hope this helps ! :( GaryGB

I have read all the posts,i know where to go and make the changes,but a stupid question. For example TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=25600//400 or TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=25600 Which is correct.Nebojsa

They are both the same.

I click on the "General" tab, made sure "Read-only" is checked next to "Attributes" and clicked applied. Now when I try to run FS9 I get a error message saying "Flight Simulator cannot run from a restricted user account and will now quit. Please log on using an administrator account a restart Flight Simulator.I use Windows 7 so maybe that's why I am getting that error. But the wierd thing is I am the only one that uses my computer so I have all UAC (UAC is User Account Control for those that do not know) settings off.I guess I will have to have the FS9.cfg file minimized when I run FS9 if I want this tweak to work.

The effects look positive. More flights will be required to confirm. Thanks for the tips.I wonder whether the TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD= and TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT= are not not stressing the VRAM as I got the old famous CTD after landing at MIA (default with Free-flow Florida) from YUL with the LeonardoSH Maddog. Of course, I've got the 3GB patch installed. I haven't had this CTD from when I upgraded from a 320MB videocard to a 1GB.Before the CTD (actually atc.dll), I had the usual "warnings": blurries.Has anyone else noticed that or the two are unrelated?Note that I had 100% AI traffic which is massive in the Miami area. Could have contributed.Ghiom

Hello everyone,Initially I was a bit skeptical, but tested these tweaks nevertheless. The terrain.cfg tweak for me just had adverse effects (the cockpit view suddenly turned very bright, like an overexposed photograph, at about 2500 ft and this had nothing to do with the weather). So I changed 1261 back into 238. The tweaks of the fs9.cfg however brought substantial performance improvement on my humble system (AMD Athlon 3200+, nVidia 7900GS 256 MB, 2 GB Ram, using REX, GE PRO, AS 6.5). After a few flights (IFR) I definitely see better framerates, no blurries and almost no stutters at all (one or two small ones were radiotraffic related). Overall the sim seems to perform smoother and faster. I will continue testing, but it looks as if we have a revolution here. After all, for many years we have been made to believe that one should tackle the stutter problem by setting TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_ MULT lower than 400, and now it emerges that one can (or rather should) set it 64 times higher! I’m very pleased with this thread, thank you all, and I'm looking forward to more of your tweaks Gary :( . By the way: Lowering the MAX_UNLIMITED_VIS to the value suggested in this thread may work well when flying VFR at low altitudes, but my experience is that when cruising with ‘heavy metal’ at FL300 or thereabout, max visibility ought to be not much lower than, say, 70000. Otherwise the horizon looks a bit weird.Kind regards,René

I have read all the posts,i know where to go and make the changes,but a stupid question. For example TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=25600//400 or TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=25600 Which is correct.Nebojsa

See my post #64 above for a clarification on how to make this entry in the FS9.Cfg file.http://forum.avsim.net/topic/329728-possible-new-tweak-for-fs9/page__view__findpost__p__1950218All content to the right of a "//" comment delimiter is ignored by when FS reads the FS9.Cfg file. :wink:Hope this helps ! :( GaryGB

The effects look positive. More flights will be required to confirm. Thanks for the tips.I wonder whether the TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD= and TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT= are not not stressing the VRAM as I got the old famous CTD after landing at MIA (default with Free-flow Florida) from YUL with the LeonardoSH Maddog. Of course, I've got the 3GB patch installed. I haven't had this CTD from when I upgraded from a 320MB videocard to a 1GB.Before the CTD (actually atc.dll), I had the usual "warnings": blurries.Has anyone else noticed that or the two are unrelated?Note that I had 100% AI traffic which is massive in the Miami area. Could have contributed.Ghiom

Which are you running: 32-bit Windows XP, Vista, or Win7 ? :( If using the "/3GB switch", do you have USERVA set up correctly at (ex: 2560) to allow room for the OS kernel ? :( Have you set the LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE flag in your FS9.exe file ? :( FYI: Setting the LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE flag needs to be done for FS9 just as it does for FSX.exe, as they are both 32-bit apps that need as much USERVA and RAM made available for them as possible.See my older tutorial on this here:Set FS and WinXP to use the /3GB switch (setting this flag applies to 32-bit Vista and Win7 also)http://forum.simflight.com/topic/55994-set-fs-and-winxp-to-use-the-3gb-switch/BTW: OOMs can still occur if flying at high speed over high density scenery in highly detailed aircraft using multiple complex aircraft module / gauge add-ons, and a PCI-e video card with more than 768 MB VRAM.This can occur since VISTA and WIN7 "virtualize" (I think of it as a hidden 'mirrored cache' of graphics data from PCI-e video card VRAM into the working system RAM address space), leaving less User Virtual Address Space (USERVA) and less physical RAM available for a 32-bit application task session such as FS to function in.Thus, the larger the VRAM in MB on one's PCI-e video card, the less physical RAM is left for FS to run in (almost makes one want to use FS on a high performance AGP video card / mobo platform with a large AGP Aperture and a minimal PCI Latency set for the video card ! B) )PS: If you are instead running 64-bit Windows, use this in place of the "/3 GB Switch":http://www.ntcore.com/4gb_patch.phpHope this helps ! B) GaryGB

Gary:See my computer specs in my signature - would I need to apply the 4GB switch option to my rig? I suppose I still should try it as I'm on Win 7 64bit and FS9 is a 32bit applicaiton?Thanks.

Gary,Yes, I ahve the 3GB patch set up properly with FS9.exe patched and everything.I am using Win XP-32bits on a rather old system (4-years).I think the reason for the CTD was too much stress on the system with all the trafic loaded, as I checked for landclass files, duplicate afcads, texture files and missing aicraft in traffic bgls...I just wonder if the fs9.cfg settings proposed in the tweak (which sound more "aggressive") can make the software more sensitive to CTD.ThanksGhiom

One other question which might be relateded to this or not at all.Right click my computerclick advancedclick performance setting buttonThere are 4 options,which one is the best or which one should be used.Nebojsa

So, I'm a newbie and just loaded FS9 on my iMac and everything looks great. I did Gary's tweak and also modified my terrain.cfg file as suggested by Hugo. Yesterday I added Ultimate Terrain and when I ran the setup, I got an error message saying terrain.cfg file corrupted, no texture 1024. Otherwise scenery looks a little better and FS works fine. I did a short flight around Denver before and after installing ult terrain. I don't know if I should be concerned about the error message or not. Does ult terrain change the terrain.cfg file? Should I try going back to the default terrain.cfg file, reload ult terrain, then redo the tweaks?FYI, I plan to install GE Pro this weekend.