Oh come on - 9FPS? FSX Performance Issues...

[VOZzer 0]

Hi everyone, This is -sigh- yet another performance thread. I'm experiencing very low FPS when I don't think I should be (I shall explain in this post). The Situation: - Full-Screen- Major Thunderstorm Theme- East Midlands, RWY 27- Level-D 767- GEX/UTX/JustFlight's VFR Real Scenery- REX2 I am experiencing just 9FPS at the above situation. These are my graphics settings: Settings: - Autogen: Normal- Scenery Complexity: Dense- Texture Resolution: 7cm- Mesh Resolution: 10M- Water Effects: Mid 2.0X- AA: Unticked (BUT: I have AA forced on in nVidia Inspector)- FPS: Unlimited- Traffic: All A/C sliders below 50%, Road/Boats/Etc no higher than 20%- Lens Flare: ON- Bloom: OFF My PC's Specs: - Intel i7 920 Overclocked to 3.60GHz- nVidia GTX285 1GB Graphics Card- 6GB DDR3 Tri-Channel RAM- GigaByte EX58 UD3R Motherboard- Windows 7 64-Bit Home Premium OS I have made this thread to see why I can only achieve a maximum possible of 9FPS at East Midlands, which is of course nowhere near as dense as somewhere like Heathrow or Gatwick. Interestingly, adjusting the autogen/scenery complexity sliders make NO DIFFERENCE whatsoever. I can set them both to extremely dense and get 9FPS, or both to sparse and get 9FPS. They don't seem to do anything. My FSX FPS are set to "unlimited", and whilst I used to use the external limiter, I don't use it anymore as it actually made my performance slightly worse. The scenery add-ons I'm using aren't particularly demanding; in fact the VFR Real-Scenery has no autogen and just has photographic textures, as usually runs better than the default scenery. At first, I thought my performance issues were caused by me running the ENB bloom mod. However, turning this off only causes an increase of 1FPS, clearly not the main culprit behind my extremely low frames. I think I should mention that I'm running 4 monitors with TH2G (3 on the TH2G box and 1 on the spare GFX Card output). The TH2G does cause major performance issues; 30FPS in windowed mode, but with all 4 monitors running in Full-Screen, we're down to the aforementioned 9FPS. These are my nVidia Inspector settings (or at least the ones that matter to FSX): I have my cfg file built using Bojote's tweaking tool. Also, I'm frequently receiving "Your Computer has run out of memory" error message when running FSX, which result in a CTD. Is this RAM or GPU memory? Thanks for your time. I don't expect an answer to everything, nor do I want a "miracle". However, I'd appreciate a bit of general advice if you can see anything massively wrong.Cheers, Jack EDIT: I accidently posted this in the main FSX forum too. Please delete that thread if at all possible. Cheers.

[MarkW 667]

Maybe try just one screen and see where you are. It may simply be the THG setup. Mark.

[HumptyDumpty 338]

Possible could be the THG setup as Mark said.

[VOZzer 0]

Ahh yes but what with the Th2G? Is it the resolution it's running? Have I set it up wrong?

[HumptyDumpty 338]

Ahh yes but what with the Th2G? Is it the resolution it's running? Have I set it up wrong?

Could be I have no idea about multi display setup but you could try first on a single display and then all the three by lowering your resolution.

[NGX 1]

What is the resolutions of your monitors and what version of TH2Go is it?

[VOZzer 0]

Thanks for the replies. The TH2G is running at 3072x768, which is equivalent to 1024x768 per monitor. The "main" (non-TH2G) monitor is running at 1280x1024, slightly higher. I have 2 DVI ports on my PC; the Th2G takes the first, and my "main" monitor takes the second. That's a total of 4 monitors. The Matrox Wizards quotes that I'm using "Software Version 2.4.0.11". Please note, I had to configure the Th2G using the nVidia control panel and not using the Matrox software, as the Matrox software just gives an "out of range" error on all the monitors when running at 3072x768.

[Bert Pieke 1,385]

If the large resolution is causing memory distress, try lowering the AA to 4X (no S) vs 8XS as a test.. that should lower memory use.

[NGX 1]

Thanks for the replies. The TH2G is running at 3072x768, which is equivalent to 1024x768 per monitor. The "main" (non-TH2G) monitor is running at 1280x1024, slightly higher. I have 2 DVI ports on my PC; the Th2G takes the first, and my "main" monitor takes the second. That's a total of 4 monitors. The Matrox Wizards quotes that I'm using "Software Version 2.4.0.11". Please note, I had to configure the Th2G using the nVidia control panel and not using the Matrox software, as the Matrox software just gives an "out of range" error on all the monitors when running at 3072x768.

Is 1024x768 the native resolution of the 3 monitors? And is it the TH2Go Digital edition, analogue edition or DP edition?

[VOZzer 0]

HI all, thanks for the replies. 1024x768 is the native resolution for all three of the TH2G monitors. It's the Th2G digital edition by Matrox. Also: How do I "disable" the nVidia Control Panel so it's JUST inspector controlling FSX's settings? Obviously, if both are trying to control my AA, etc, they will conflict with each other.

[NGX 1]

Just make sure that FSX is using the default values in the control panel and Inspector will overrule it. Try running just a single monitor, then try 2, then 3 etc.

[vgbaron 1,480]

With that hardware, in that combination and with those settings - that's about right. you are asking your CPU and video card to do more than it's capable of doing. Change to a default aircraft and see if it still stays at 9. if it does, then start dropping your settings - go to low 2 on the water as it's a frame hog.Sorry but 3.6ghz is not going to cut it with that setup. Vic

[VOZzer 0]

With that hardware, in that combination and with those settings - that's about right. you are asking your CPU and video card to do more than it's capable of doing. Change to a default aircraft and see if it still stays at 9. if it does, then start dropping your settings - go to low 2 on the water as it's a frame hog.Sorry but 3.6ghz is not going to cut it with that setup. Vic

The PC performs excellently; and 9FPS is definitely not a reasonable result. It is a good spec PC, custom built for myself by a gaming centre. It runs everything I have at 75+ FPS, with the obvious exception of FSX. 3.6GHz is fine, especially because I've seen systems run faster with lower clock speeds.Thanks for your advice NGX, I'll experiment with a few more settings.

[NGX 1]

The PC performs excellently; and 9FPS is definitely not a reasonable result. It is a good spec PC, custom built for myself by a gaming centre. It runs everything I have at 75+ FPS, with the obvious exception of FSX. 3.6GHz is fine, especially because I've seen systems run faster with lower clock speeds. Thanks for your advice NGX, I'll experiment with a few more settings.

I think the 1GB 285 just isn't capable of running 4 monitors

[vgbaron 1,480]

The PC performs excellently; and 9FPS is definitely not a reasonable result. It is a good spec PC, custom built for myself by a gaming centre. It runs everything I have at 75+ FPS, with the obvious exception of FSX. 3.6GHz is fine, especially because I've seen systems run faster with lower clock speeds. Thanks for your advice NGX, I'll experiment with a few more settings.

Not saying you have a bad PC. I'm saying that FOR FSX - 3.6 is marginal. Now, you add multi monitors, high settings, heavy cloud cover, a detailed complex aircraft - that equals LOW FPS. As for systems running faster with lower clock speeds - of course but not with those settings. Change settings, change configuration, modify cloud textures, etc - they will all help. The suggestions posted earlier may help so it's worth a try. You can not relate how a system runs other games to how it runs FSX - two different animals. Vic