FS9 and XP64

[jacock01 0]

I've been contemplating moving to XP64. I don't want Win 7. However, searching throught the postings here I am somewhat confused as to what this would mean. I have 4GB installed and would like to be able to use it all. I currently have XP32 and fully understand the 32 bit limitation of 2GB and think I follow the /3GB switch option which I currently use. If I go to XP64 is there anything I need to do to FS9? I've seen reference to a /4GB switch setting but have not seen the specifics. Is 4GB the limit or can one fully use higher for FS9? I.e. if I add more RAM to say 8GB would that be accessible? Would it require a /8GB switch setting in FS9.exe? If I were to install FSX would I have any of these issues with XP64? Lot of questions I know.--Jim

[greggerm 312]

If I were to install FSX would I have any of these issues with XP64?

I believe there is only one memory related switch which is applicable to MSFS... that being the /3GB. I would imagine anyone referencing a 4GB switch is mistaking it with the 3GB, and there is not an 8GB switch at all. I believe FSX has that switch somehow "built in", and using it makes no difference. There's nothing specific that you will need to do with FS9/FSX to make it work with XP64 (*but even though you don't want it, Win7x64 would be my recommendation). One thing you should keep in mind is that with any 64-bit installation, some of the older addons for FS9/FSX may have an issue with the x64 nature of things. The vast majority will work fine, but there are documented and known cases (such as some airplanes which use the Garmin trainer software to function) where the x64 is a problem. I'd do some quick research with the forums of your most used addons to make certain that all is well - it's a topic which has been well covered, so just search for it in the appropriate forums or on Google and you'll undoubtedly find your answer. As you know, FS9 and FSX are both still 32-bit apps, so the 3GB switch is used to extend their memory footprints a bit. Running a 64-bit OS will let you get the operating system itself, AND other 32-bit apps up and into different memory areas, leaving the maximum amount available for MSFS. Flightsim still won't use more than what a 32-bit program maxes out at, but at least you'll have more headroom for other apps and the OS. With 4 GB, you'll have some additional headroom... down the road with 8GB, you'll have even more memory headroom, but as you know, FS9/FSX will still only use the 32-bit max limitation. Aside from that, I don't think there is much else to note!-Greg

[psolk 3,040]

I believe there is only one memory related switch which is applicable to MSFS... that being the /3GB. I would imagine anyone referencing a 4GB switch is mistaking it with the 3GB, and there is not an 8GB switch at all. I believe FSX has that switch somehow "built in", and using it makes no difference. There's nothing specific that you will need to do with FS9/FSX to make it work with XP64 (*but even though you don't want it, Win7x64 would be my recommendation). One thing you should keep in mind is that with any 64-bit installation, some of the older addons for FS9/FSX may have an issue with the x64 nature of things. The vast majority will work fine, but there are documented and known cases (such as some airplanes which use the Garmin trainer software to function) where the x64 is a problem. I'd do some quick research with the forums of your most used addons to make certain that all is well - it's a topic which has been well covered, so just search for it in the appropriate forums or on Google and you'll undoubtedly find your answer. As you know, FS9 and FSX are both still 32-bit apps, so the 3GB switch is used to extend their memory footprints a bit. Running a 64-bit OS will let you get the operating system itself, AND other 32-bit apps up and into different memory areas, leaving the maximum amount available for MSFS. Flightsim still won't use more than what a 32-bit program maxes out at, but at least you'll have more headroom for other apps and the OS. With 4 GB, you'll have some additional headroom... down the road with 8GB, you'll have even more memory headroom, but as you know, FS9/FSX will still only use the 32-bit max limitation. Aside from that, I don't think there is much else to note!-Greg

Actually, what you need to do is use cff explorer to make FS9.exe LARGEADDRESSAWARE This little tool does it with you by dragging the .exe into the app...http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=34392&d=1269231650 This was done by default in FSX SP1 or 2 but FS9 was never flagged as an app able to make use of a 64 bit VAS up to 4 gig instead of the 2 gig ceiling in XP-32, you have to do it manually.So yes, FS9 can take "better" advantage of a 64 bit OS despite not being a 64 bit app and taking Full advantage...No need for any /3gb with any 64 bit OS, just a LARGEADDRESSAWARE flag in the .exe or native 64 bit app...-P

[jacock01 0]

Thanks for the very informative replies. That clears up a lot. Only thing I'm not sure of is how you drag an .exe into an app? I know how to select one from an an app but have never heard of dragging one. --Jim

[psolk 3,040]

Thanks for the very informative replies. That clears up a lot. Only thing I'm not sure of is how you drag an .exe into an app? I know how to select one from an an app but have never heard of dragging one. --Jim

I think the largeaddressaware app has sort of that "flickr" interface where you can just drag and drop the .exe you want to apply the change to into a window and then apply the change. That is it... Like flickr allows you to drag your pics in... I could be wrong though and you might need to point to your FS9.exe by traditional browsing to it...Sorry for not being clear, I haven't actually done the procedure in YEARS!-P

[jacock01 0]

I think the largeaddressaware app has sort of that "flickr" interface where you can just drag and drop the .exe you want to apply the change to into a window and then apply the change. That is it... Like flickr allows you to drag your pics in... I could be wrong though and you might need to point to your FS9.exe by traditional browsing to it...Sorry for not being clear, I haven't actually done the procedure in YEARS!-P

Thanks for clearing that up. Cheers, Jim