Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

jbassue

Deteriorating Aircraft?

Recommended Posts

I'll just wait on SP, I wonder if that will fix some problems...Until then I keep fingers crossed.
As Al and a few suggested, pulling back some sliders will probably help. Start with autogen --back to dense or a little less. Water to 2x medium (always [or lower]). The autogen slider alone has solved my long flight CTDs and OOMs (YMMV).

___________________________________________________________________________________

Zachary Waddell -- Caravan Driver --

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/zwaddell

Avsim ToS

Avsim Screenshot Rules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just don't get how people with 500x better PC's than mine have problems like this >.<
I wish I knew, sigh...But for now, I'll stick with my skeleton NGX.
As Al and a few suggested, pulling back some sliders will probably help. Start with autogen --back to dense or a little less. Water to 2x medium (always [or lower]). The autogen slider alone has solved my long flight CTDs and OOMs (YMMV).
Autogen on Low, and Scenery on Par with autogen.My water has always been at 1.x, unless I needed to make a video, thanks for the help Zach!

Regards,
Jamaljé Bassue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just don't get how people with 500x better PC's than mine have problems like this >.<
It's called a bottleneck, nothing to do with new hardware. The 900 series nvidia card were not nvidia's finest, in fact the 800 series far out performs it. Once Jamaljé's video card is upgraded, it will improve a lot. I know this sounds weird, put your autogen to normal, then try dense and see if you see an improvement. Autogen on low in FS9 worked, not in fsx, it can be the opposite.

System: X-PLANE 11.40, P3D 4.5, ASUS Maximus XI Hero,  Intel i7-8086K o/c to 5.0GHz, Corsair AIO H115i Pro, Corsair Spec Omega Case,Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti 11Gb, Samsung 970 EVO M.2 SSD, 1Tb Samsung 860 EVO SSD, 32Gb Corsair Vengeance DDR4 3200Mhz RAM, EVGA 850+ Gold PSU,Win 10 Pro 64-bit, LG 43UD79 43" 4K IPS Panel., Logitech X56 Hotas Stick and Throttle, Logitech/Saitek Flight Yoke System, Multi, Radio, Switch Panels

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's called a bottleneck, nothing to do with new hardware. The 900 series nvidia card were not nvidia's finest, in fact the 800 series far out performs it. One DE's video card is upgraded, it will improve a lot.
Well the 9500 wasn't, maybe. It was low end when it was new (5 years?). The 9800GT, on the other hand... Loved that thing! It was a cheap rebranded 8800GT. Back on topic, tough.

___________________________________________________________________________________

Zachary Waddell -- Caravan Driver --

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/zwaddell

Avsim ToS

Avsim Screenshot Rules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well the 9500 wasn't, maybe. It was low end when it was new (5 years?). The 9800GT, on the other hand... Loved that thing! It was a cheap rebranded 8800GT. Back on topic, tough.
Yeah.... I have an 9800GT and i'm very happy with it.

Cristi Neagu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's called a bottleneck
This is very true, especially when looking at a system overall, since any computer is only as fast as the slowest of the main components which mostly affect its speed, i.e. the motherboard, the CPU, the RAM and the graphics card, all of which have to work in concert with one another. Not all such components work well together in spite of them ostensibly having compatibility in terms of form factor, even if they do plug into the slots on a motherboard and seem to be made for it, which is why it is important to research the hell out of things when building a system, because it is certainly possible to have a super-duper CPU and still have a system that runs like a donkey. And even if you buy a computer from a known maker as opposed to buying components and sticking them together yourself, it is no guarantee of success, because even well known computer companies can arse up their component choices and how they are fitted on occasion, as anyone who ever bought a G3 Apple Macintosh will readily confirm. So it's not enough to say 'I have 10 Gb of RAM', what matters is the clock speed of that RAM, the bus speed of the board, the cooling, what slots that RAM is sitting in, how fast the RAM on the graphics card is in comparison to the motherboard RAM, all of which have a bearing on how the computer will do, since the data has to be shunted about between the components in a slick fashion. Throw in the fact that FSX was developed well before the most recent Windows operating systems existed, and it will be apparent why you will see people on these forums with dual core processor-equipped systems that seem archaic in comparison to more recent multi-core set ups, yet run FSX pretty well. For example, I have a Hewlett Packard laptop with a dual core processor and a mere 2Gb of memory which has no dedicated graphics card, which I actually bought just as a back up for training people on Photoshop when out and about just in case there was a problem with the computers where I was, but that runs FSX at a blistering pace with all the autogen turned up. Hard to believe I know, but it is true. Al

Alan Bradbury

Check out my youtube flight sim videos: Here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...