Loaded the MD-11 first, then the NGX. Improved my rates as well. My main gain is that I don´t have these sudden yet frequent drops in frames to 8 or 9. It now is a more constant frames per sec.Hope PMDG solve this one. Menno

Guys, Vin and myself just tried multiple times on our machines to reproduce what you guys are talking about here - we can't. Both of us see the EXACT same average framerate loading the 747 first as we do just loading the NGX alone. The entire idea honestly doesn't make any sense to us - the 747 and NGX don't share even a single bit of code. The NGX is 100% made from the ground up. ---- As an aside here too because this mistake is annoying and makes us look like bad programmers - please stop using the term "memory leak" if you don't know what it means. Low performance does not = "memory leak". A memory leak is a very specific situation where RAM is getting used up infinitely because the program is not releasing its already allocated memory. A real memory leak will eventually crash the computer as all the RAM and all the disk swap space gets used up. There are no memory leaks in the NGX, we ran it for days straight during testing without any issue.

If this does work, which I cannot test for myself using the 747X or MD-11, although I can give it a go on the J-41, but then the next step would be to pin-point what causes this. I do find this interesting, and it does seem explainable, but if I am correct, was the 747 originally designed for FS9 and then transferred/converted over to FSX? Could it initiate processes the NGX uses but they are older?

I gave it a try Tom and I noticed no performance increase, it actually got buggy and CTD'd on the second try.

Guys, Vin and myself just tried multiple times on our machines to reproduce what you guys are talking about here - we can't. Both of us see the EXACT same average framerate loading the 747 first as we do just loading the NGX alone. The entire idea honestly doesn't make any sense to us - the 747 and NGX don't share even a single bit of code. The NGX is 100% made from the ground up. ---- As an aside here too because this mistake is annoying and makes us look like bad programmers - please stop using the term"memory leak" if you don't know what it means. Low performance does not = "memory leak". A memory leak is a very specific situation where RAM is getting used up infinitely because the program is not releasing its already allocated memory. A real memory leak will eventually crash the computer as all the RAM and all the disk swap space gets used up. There are no memory leaks in the NGX, we ran it for days straight during testing without any issue.

Lol And then the storm calmed down again...and we all got some sleep... Good Night to you all folks!

Guys, Vin and myself just tried multiple times on our machines to reproduce what you guys are talking about here - we can't. Both of us see the EXACT same average framerate loading the 747 first as we do just loading the NGX alone. The entire idea honestly doesn't make any sense to us - the 747 and NGX don't share even a single bit of code. The NGX is 100% made from the ground up. ---- As an aside here too because this mistake is annoying and makes us look like bad programmers - please stop using the term"memory leak" if you don't know what it means. Low performance does not = "memory leak". A memory leak is a very specific situation where RAM is getting used up infinitely because the program is not releasing its already allocated memory. A real memory leak will eventually crash the computer as all the RAM and all the disk swap space gets used up. There are no memory leaks in the NGX, we ran it for days straight during testing without any issue.

In no way are we implying that PMDG has bad programmers. In fact, we all think you guys are brilliant, this aircraft is beyond amazing. But I'm going to have to disagree with you Ryan. When I load the 747X before the 737NGX I do see a noticeably nicer frame rate. I understand that the two share no code, so it may be something within FSX, I'm not sure. And as my aside: early on, someone on the team had mentioned that the frame rates were comparable to the MD-11. This was the deciding factor for me, but after flying around I quickly noticed that this was not the case, not in the least. And when I fly around on VATSIM, I have people PM me and ask if I am experiencing good frame rates..I say no, and every single person I've spoken to has the same issue. You guys have worked tirelessly on this aircraft, and it shows. But not everyone can afford a supercomputer, especially in this economy, to run it somewhat smoothly, and the MD-11 comparison has left a bad taste in my mouth. Though I admit I should have waited for some user feedback before purchasing it. I apologize for using the term "memory-leak" incorrectly, but I think code optimization should be one of the key points in moving forward. That's my opinion, and you can disagree with me all you want...that's fine; I'll just hold off buying the expansion packs. And one more thing: When a large percentage of your customers are expressing frustration about an aspect of your product, it is rather insulting to act as if we are making it up...that reflects more negatively on a company than "bad programming."

Would you care to explain how to reproduce it then? I know of no reports of the FMC going runaway with memory.

As an aside here too because this mistake is annoying and makes us look like bad programmers - please stop using the term "memory leak" if you don't know what it means. Low performance does not = "memory leak". A memory leak is a very specific situation where RAM is getting used up infinitely because the program is not releasing its already allocated memory. A real memory leak will eventually crash the computer as all the RAM and all the disk swap space gets used up. There are no memory leaks in the NGX, we ran it for days straight during testing without any issue.

For the record, been running my FSX with the NGX for a couple of days now, non-stop. Zero problems. I fly, park it with ground power on, go do something, and then come back and fly some more. Rinse and repeat. I don't believe there to be a "memory leak" in the NGX...my system would've exploded by now if there was. ;) ASE, EFB, GEX, UT2 equipped...

no diffrence for me, but today I had increase in FPS about 10-12 while I was on the runway at LAX and I couldn't know why I was getting these extra FPS. I was testing and loading other airplanes at the sametime without exiting to the main menu. I can't reproduce what gave me the extra FPS now after I shut down my PC.

Are you suggesting that I should try reinstalling?Could the old AIRAC be the issue? I'm sure that everyone who's getting a higher FPS from doing this have something in common with me, so I'm going to list everything, and hopefully we will find the culprit. First - System specs: Motherboard: intel i7 2600k Automatically Overclocked to 4.4 GHZ (voltages checked and IBT 100 runs passed, temperature not exceeding 70 degs)GPU: EVGA GTX 580 STOCKRAM: 8 GB DDR3 1333MHZ 9-9-9-24 also slightly overclocked by the automatic overclocker.PSU: Antec High Current Pro 850wHD: Western Digital 300 GB 10k RPM drive Second - FSX FSX SP2 with Acceleration installed Addons: PMDG 747-400X, PMDG 747-8i EXT, PMDG MD-11, PMDG NGX Active Sky Evolution, REX textures, Frankfurt Airport Landclass, Fly Tampa's VHHX. AIRAC 0808 in use. Everything is maxed out besides water quality, special effects and traffic. (2x low, 0 SFX, 0 Traffic) 50 FPS in Frankfurt Main - 20 FPS in Snohomish Co, 50 FPS if load the 747 first. It all goes down the the drain once the IRS systems complete alignment. I'm not accusing you of being bad developpers, PMDG. This product is AMAZING. I used that term because I don't know how to call it, it just feels like its sucking in too much resources than it needs. PS: Go easy on me, I've been having a terrible tension headache for the past 3 days, I feel like I'm Atlas or something now. :(

In no way are we implying that PMDG has bad programmers. In fact, we all think you guys are brilliant, this aircraft is beyond amazing. But I'm going to have to disagree with you Ryan. When I load the 747X before the 737NGX I do see a noticeably nicer frame rate. I understand that the two share no code, so it may be something within FSX, I'm not sure. And as my aside: early on, someone on the team had mentioned that the frame rates were comparable to the MD-11. This was the deciding factor for me, but after flying around I quickly noticed that this was not the case, not in the least. And when I fly around on VATSIM, I have people PM me and ask if I am experiencing good frame rates..I say no, and every single person I've spoken to has the same issue. You guys have worked tirelessly on this aircraft, and it shows. But not everyone can afford a supercomputer, especially in this economy, to run it somewhat smoothly, and the MD-11 comparison has left a bad taste in my mouth. Though I admit I should have waited for some user feedback before purchasing it. I apologize for using the term "memory-leak" incorrectly, but I think code optimization should be one of the key points in moving forward. That's my opinion, and you can disagree with me all you want...that's fine; I'll just hold off buying the expansion packs. And one more thing: When a large percentage of your customers are expressing frustration about an aspect of your product, it is rather insulting to act as if we are making it up...that reflects more negatively on a company than "bad programming."

I don´t know who started the myth that the NGX would perform as good as the MD-11.....surely no one from PMDG did! If you can prove me wrong, then do it, I would really like to know when such a statement was made! People make PMDG look like they lied to their costumers about the performance of the NGX, but I can´t remember anyone saying that it would perform like the MD-11.

Loan, you should be using 1108 airac, not 0808. When you install the NGX, it comes with 1108, and your Md11 and 747 would have been updated as well. Do you subscibe to Navigraph ? When I reinstalled the main installer again which included hotfix 3, I also re installed airac 1108 just to tidy things up. I do not experience what you are, so get hold of the latest airac if you can, and test again.

Re-downloading as we speak, won't change the airac this time. The thing that annoys me with the newer airac are the ILS discontinuities, I have to check every destination for ILS matching with new airacs. A bit annoying but if that's the price.. PS: are the installers updated with the hotfix?

Might be better for everyone to post what airac they are using in the 747X, not the NG. Just in case it is an airac database issue, and would help narrow down what is creating this odd behaviour. I will test shortly, but my airac cycle in the 747X is 1108

both aircraft use the same airac data

Yes, hotfix 3. All good here. Excellent performance. Not sure why your getting ILS disco's, not struck that, I fly mainly around Germany, UK, Spain, Portugal, using Aerosoft, and German Airports.

Reinstalled, didn't change anything, default AIRAC Absolutely no difference, 20 fps out of the box, 50 after loading the 747 first.

Yes, hotfix 3. All good here. Excellent performance. Not sure why your getting ILS disco's, not struck that, I fly mainly around Germany, UK, Spain, Portugal, using Aerosoft, and German Airports.

Because I don't use scenery addons.