I was wondering what kind of settings you have, and which setting is the most useable without getting any FPS? Mine are currently LOD_RADIUS=4.500000 Any help is highly appericated.

I use 6.5 but only outside of Orbx areas or without heavy cpu planes like the NGX. It's not so much that my PC can't handle it it's only that my virtual address space becomes over saturated and I get OOM's and G3d.dll ctd's. IT also had nothing to do with physical RAM so don't worry about it. If you use 4.5 I doubt you'll ever see a OOM/CTD.

Thanks for your reply Ryan. I actually dont have the NGX yet, but I was thinking of buying it so in other words with 4.5 I pretty much have the best setting on not getting any ctds,fps impacts etc?

If you like watching the scenery, low and slow, LOD of 5.5 will give you a better experience. With the NGX, I would stay with 4.5, however. I have two settings saved (alt-options-settings-save and load) one for 4.5 and one for 5.5so I can change it on the fly

Thanks alot Bert, I will give it a try :)

Do bufferpools play a role when it comes to lod radius? I'm just researching this phenomenon of crashing with higher LOD, but without memory filling up. I don't quite get it why would sim crash with g3d.dll with LOD 7.5 and NGX and all, while still being at VAS 3.4 or around.

Bert makes a great point about multiple .cfg files. I too use three - 1) LOD 6.5 + basically max settings for light planes and outside of orbx 2) LOD 4.5 with fairly high settings for orbx rural and 3) lod 4.5 with medium sliders for orbx big cities - I think I'll try that new Orbx day and night switcher though which should help big city CTD/OOM's Word Not Allowed, if I had to theorize the reason your VAS is only reading 3.4GB with a crash is because your video card memory is eating up the rest of the space (roughly 600MB of the total 4ish GB useable in the VAS). If you're running 7.5 with NGX I can certainly see your GPU eating that much memory. What is confusing to me is that while VAS isn't equivalent to physical RAM, physical video ram affects VAS... weird. I don't use the BP edit (or any of the ******* tweaks for that matter), except I do use highmemfix=1. Edit: I sounded a bit wordy there, basically you subtract the amount of video ram your gpu is using from the useable VAS to theorize when your PC will g3d.dll or OOM in FSX. Mine's usually around 3.6 - 3.7 GB. While incredible and beautiful, the NGX is a big consumer of video ram therefore I tend to get g3d's or OOM's while flying it. FPS-wise - I'm golden but I just have to watch my VAS as I fly. For anyone who's curious about VAS, simple download Process Explorer from here (safe site its from MS):http://technet.micro...ernals/bb896653

Bert makes a great point about multiple .cfg files. I too use three - 1) LOD 6.5 + basically max settings for light planes and outside of orbx 2) LOD 4.5 with fairly high settings for orbx rural and 3) lod 4.5 with medium sliders for orbx big cities - I think I'll try that new Orbx day and night switcher though which should help big city CTD/OOM's Word Not Allowed, if I had to theorize the reason your VAS is only reading 3.4GB with a crash is because your video card memory is eating up the rest of the space (roughly 600MB of the total 4ish GB useable in the VAS). If you're running 7.5 with NGX I can certainly see your GPU eating that much memory. What is confusing to me is that while VAS isn't equivalent to physical RAM, physical video ram affects VAS... weird. I don't use the BP edit (or any of the ******* tweaks for that matter), except I do use highmemfix=1. Edit: I sounded a bit wordy there, basically you subtract the amount of video ram your gpu is using from the useable VAS to theorize when your PC will g3d.dll or OOM in FSX. Mine's usually around 3.6 - 3.7 GB. While incredible and beautiful, the NGX is a big consumer of video ram therefore I tend to get g3d's or OOM's while flying it. FPS-wise - I'm golden but I just have to watch my VAS as I fly. For anyone who's curious about VAS, simple download Process Explorer from here (safe site its from MS):http://technet.micro...ernals/bb896653

I don't know if you are right about this. I just turned up the LOD to 8.5, took off from EGKK for LOWI and my GPU-Z is reading 750-900mb of VRAM (GPU-Z) and my PE is reading with a start 3.500.000 or above. Even now climbing to 3.7...By this definition it should have crashed.I removed BP or any such edit, except HIGHMEMFIX and AM. It crashes always at the same point in the flight, I don't get it what's "there"... If I turn back to 4.5, it doesn't crash. And 4.5 is UGLY.

I've been using LOD radius of 8.5 for a long time, purely because its the only way I could find of making JustFlights Real VFR scenery look half decent. However, I've been using some ORBX sceneries of late and 8.5 is just too much for it, so I've reduced to 7.5 (though it does impact a bit negativley on the VFR real scenery). It's largely a case of how much your system/setup can handle when coupled with other tweaks you make (like ramping up the cloud settings in the fsx.cfg beyond the limits of how far you can go with the sliders, amount of traffic, water setings, etc. IAN

That's interesting Word Not Allowed. There's probably some missing link that we don't yet know of but the 4GB vas and video ram usage has been fairly accurate for my predictions. It may spike right before a crash and the monitors are showing increased VAS usage or gpu vram usage maybe that explains the discrepancy. Ian, with regards to systems handling LOD variables, I agree with you but it's not as simple as you can run 7.5 in orbx and I can't. I can run 7.5 without crashes for a while, however I use very high if not max scenery sliders, in conjunction with high levels of AA in nvidia inspector which probably adds to vram usage. I theorize that some simmers don't have issues with g3d.dll /oom's because they never push the limits of FSX. For example, they're happy with LOD 4.5 and autogen at dense with 50% traffic etc. I love eye candy, I want my virtual world to look lush hehe, but it comes at a cost. BTW I'm not trying to bash Orbx, there are other sceneries which make the VAS number jump signficantly: FSDT airports, the way they suddenly "pop" into view - I used to get g3d's all the time with my previous system (on a 64bit OS for that matter) - simply something about the way VAS was utilized on that system vs my current system. I don't experience g3d's at FSDT for the most part anymore.

That's interesting Word Not Allowed. There's probably some missing link that we don't yet know of but the 4GB vas and video ram usage has been fairly accurate for my predictions. It may spike right before a crash and the monitors are showing increased VAS usage or gpu vram usage maybe that explains the discrepancy.

Interesting thing is how VAS usage changes as I use different Bufferpool settings. For instance, I use the same situation with some clouds at EGKK loaded with NGX, ready for departure to LOWI. I use this situation to measure my VAS usage at load. I always wait about 2-3min, because the usage goes up after a minute or so, but I noticed different VAS usages between BP=0, BP=8000000 and BP=500000000 (0, 8MB, 500MB). For instance, 8MB is going to cause 3.1 at load, same as 0, but 500MB is going to cause 3.9-4.0, and after takeoff usually very bad graphics, eventually crashing. That is with LOD 8.5.But I still have no single connection between VAS and VRAM usage.The interesting thing about this crash is that only Aerosoft Innsbruck is causing it. Now doing a flight without the scenery, but the same 8.5 VAS. Also no BP setting at all.I wanna know if it's gonna crash with OOM or g3d.dll. Or maybe it flies through... The NGX is the only short-range aircraft which can completely load the situation, that is why I like testing with it a lot. PMDG 747 is also able if I am not mistaken...

I theorize that some simmers don't have issues with g3d.dll /oom's because they never push the limits of FSX. For example, they're happy with LOD 4.5 and autogen at dense with 50% traffic etc. I love eye candy, I want my virtual world to look lush hehe, but it comes at a cost.

Oh, you are not alone here. I also like the max eye-candy, and I really like it.

Claudio, lots of good info from guys, however, as with all cfg tweaks, no tweak works the same on two different rigs. So I would highly recommend experimenting. Personally, I run my LOD at 6.5 but only after setting it at 8 and then testing and gradually lowering it to what I have found to be the nice balance between performance and OOMs. Remember, lots of good advice around this forum, but I would suggest you use cfg values purely as a starting point and not as as a definitive, finite value, as you will no doubt find your rig runs completely different to someone else's!

I recently retweaked my setup, im using an LOD_RADIUS of 5.5 with BP=0 among many many other tweaks and I'm getting 30fps+++ in pnw going low and slow with the Scout. This is using a medium autogen density. I'm not getting any blurries at all and no stuttering either. No framerate limiter. This is on a "modest" setup, i7 920 3.8ghz, gtx260

Yeah, some things that really improved things for me were the affinitymask=14 setting, the bufferpools=0 setting and the LOD radius. I've tried most of the other tweaks out there with some or limited success or they just haven't worked(or haven't worked together). I've just recently applied the highmemfix=1 tweak to see what impact that will have and am still testing. However, initial observations are positive re: stability and I haven't noted any negatives yet. Sometimes,I wil find that if I tweak one area for better visuals or performance or add some high consumption scenery, I may need to tone down another area a little to compensate. That's the way it is when you are close to the limits of your system. IAN

Yeah, some things that really improved things for me were the affinitymask=14 setting, the bufferpools=0 setting and the LOD radius.I've tried most of the other tweaks out there with some or limited success or they just haven't worked(or haven't worked together).I've just recently applied the highmemfix=1 tweak to see what impact that will have and am still testing. However, initial observations are positive re: stability and I haven't noted any negatives yet.Sometimes,I wil find that if I tweak one area for better visuals or performance or add some high consumption scenery, I may need to tone down another area a little to compensate. That's the way it is when you are close to the limits of your system.IAN

Hi Ian, sure the HighMenfix tweak is not a tweak in the true sense, but a value that corrects an intrinsic fault within FSX that causes graphical anomalies. Have good flying!PS you're in my neck of the woods!