Hi,All the previous has lead me to something that makes me much happier. Modify the terrain.cfg so that the texture numbering starts by 4096 instead of 1024. I'f written a very primitive program, which runs only in DOS mode (DOSBox) to make the renumbering, I have used starting numbers 2048, 4096 and 8172, but 4096 is the most satisfying on my system Dual Core E6750 @ 2666MHz and with an Nvidia 8600. Next in FS9.cfg, change the number in the [Graphics] section to "TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=4096".On my system this gives really results. Let me know what's your result!Have just tried this and have seen MUCH better load times. I have alot of BlueSky's photo scenery and before could only use it with a cessna 182 or simular or my AC would be flying faster than the scenery could load. Now with this just tested with my IFly 737 at 220 knots and Hi Res scenery loads fine. Thanks

Interesting. Can we get a copy of the program to do this?JimCYWG

Have just tried this and have seen MUCH better load times. I have alot of BlueSky's photo scenery and before could only use it with a cessna 182 or simular or my AC would be flying faster than the scenery could load. Now with this just tested with my IFly 737 at 220 knots and Hi Res scenery loads fine. Thanks

I had to correct my entry: indeed, the faster loading of textures is caused by the renaming of the vector textures. FS can't find the needed textures, therefore FS does not generate the vector objects like roads, river beaches et. If one is using photoscenery those objects aren't necessary or if you do VFR flying in montainous environments and you don't like that the default roads and rivers are going steep uphill, I hate it, it is maybe better to rename them, any kind of name would do. The entry "TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD" can stay on its original value "1024". It's nearly the same as with renaming the "default.xml" wich generates objects, in the "Autogen" folder. But FS would give an error if we would rename or delete the "terrain.cfg" file.Hugo

So GaryGB any new tweaks or cfg changes to dazzle us with now?You said you were working on a few more but were going to be busy for a while.Wondering if you've found the time to see if any new tweaks/changes are actually working and able to be shared with the rest of us?Thanks man - for everything.

So GaryGB any new tweaks or cfg changes to dazzle us with now?You said you were working on a few more but were going to be busy for a while.Wondering if you've found the time to see if any new tweaks/changes are actually working and able to be shared with the rest of us?Thanks man - for everything.

Hi Paul:Sorry for the delay in responding further to this thread. Although I do intend to post more information about maximizing FS9 performance both here and in other threads, my present and ongoing time commitments will make it necessary to defer that until some point in the future. :( In the mean time, I encourage others here to consider some important ideas central to this thread: :( * Use the Search engines at FS websites (AND Google etc.) to find leads on FS tweaks* Don't believe every thing you read, but do examine ideas from others (even when "controversial")* Be open to new possibilities ("Think Outside The Box")* Everyone's FS computer hardware and software configuration is different; testing tweaks on ones' own system is essentialI will continue with my inquiry into the factors which affect performance in FS; after additional intensive review and testing, I'll share my insights with the FS Community again ASAP.Keep up the good work, and don't forget to take time to do some... Happy Flying ! :smile:GaryGB

Hi Paul:Sorry for the delay in responding further to this thread. Although I do intend to post more information about maximizing FS9 performance both here and in other threads, my present and ongoing time commitments will make it necessary to defer that until some point in the future. :( In the mean time, I encourage others here to consider some important ideas central to this thread: :( * Use the Search engines at FS websites (AND Google etc.) to find leads on FS tweaks* Don't believe every thing you read, but do examine ideas from others (even when "controversial")* Be open to new possibilities ("Think Outside The Box")* Everyone's FS computer hardware and software configuration is different; testing tweaks on ones' own system is essentialI will continue with my inquiry into the factors which affect performance in FS; after additional intensive review and testing, I'll share my insights with the FS Community again ASAP.Keep up the good work, and don't forget to take time to do some... Happy Flying ! :smile:GaryGB

Could not agree more. Since I got my computer about a year ago I've been using Active Sky. Until last week I could only use the graphics portion of it and use Clear weather because any time I tried Real weather and flew into heavy clouds my fps would drop to single digits. I've always read that dxt3 clouds were the best for frames but I then just for fun tried disabiling dxt3 clouds in AS and using just the regulare 128x128, No problems at all flying in cloud cover now. Disabled rendertotexture and even better. Seems every system is diferent when it comes to FS9Brade