I believe that with a Nasa computer like he has, not matter how the sliders are he will get at least 20fps, doesn't he?(:

FS9 used to work like that, FSX does not.

Thanks guys.

I have also noticed a drop when I disabled HT on my I7-2600k running at stock 3.40.Curious though about the part of the tweak not using affinity mask correct. Mine is set to 5....I though that was correct ?

Edited February 18, 201214 yr by William J.S.S

I have also noticed a drop when I disabled HT on my I7-2600k running at stock 3.40. Curious though about the part of the tweak not using affinity mask correct. Mine is set to 5....I though that was correct ?

I get about a 10%-15% lose in frames when HT is disabled also(I7-3930k)It seems disabling hyperthread is only useful when pc is serverly overclocked IMO

See this post http://forum.avsim.n...fsx-i7-and-you/ for info on how to set Affinity Mask with hyperthreading on or off.

Everybody ought to check out the entirety of this thread, it's great. NickN actually included some of his conversations with members of the ACES team who coded the threading/terrain aspects of FSX, and who stated that FSX can in no way take advantage of hyperthreading. There may be some incidental gains to in performance if you have other programs running in the background, including addons such as Radar Contact or ASE, but it is not because FSX is taking advantage of the additional cores. The discussion of the Affinity Mask tweak in the thread is really enlightening as well.The primary impact that leaving HT on will have is to increase your CPU temps, thus reducing the potential overclock of your CPU. In terms of FSX performance, this is the worst thing possible.

Curious though about the part of the tweak not using affinity mask correct. Mine is set to 5....I though that was correct ?

I believe that you mean 15, which would direct FSX to use four cores of a CPU.Affinity Mask Settings:HT OFF15=1111 = ALL 4 cores14=1110 = last 3 cores7=0111 = first 3 cores3=0011 = first 2 cores1=0001 = first coreHT ON255=11111111 = ALL 8 cores254=11111110 = last 7 cores252=11111100 = last 6 cores127=01111111 = first 7 cores63=00111111 = first 6 cores

Edited February 18, 201214 yr by ramrunner800

Huh....well, when I did that auto tweak tool just the other night, it placed 5 in my config for the AffinityMask....but I have the i7-2600K, so that means I am not using all my cores right?But I also have HT on. I leave this on, because I multitask and use a LOT of other applications at the same time.....so then I should but 255 instead? Seeing as how I wouldn't put 15 due to having HT on.....This is confusing a little...I am getting great performance....but....better would be better. Will play around with this later today maybe.

Huh....well, when I did that auto tweak tool just the other night, it placed 5 in my config for the AffinityMask....but I have the i7-2600K, so that means I am not using all my cores right?But I also have HT on. I leave this on, because I multitask and use a LOT of other applications at the same time.....so then I should but 255 instead? Seeing as how I wouldn't put 15 due to having HT on.....This is confusing a little...I am getting great performance....but....better would be better. Will play around with this later today maybe.

From what I could tell reading the other thread, some people experience severe performance drops when they use 255. They recommended moving FSX off of the first core, and reserving the second core entirely for FSX, to avoid thread collisions on FSX's primary thread. This may be rig dependent, so I would recommend running a standardized test, like the FSMark11 Benchmark test (it's a great resource for testing how different tweaks affect your FSX installation, just don't upload the results), and try different settings to see what works best for you.

My preliminary conclusion is that the primary FSX thread, having not been designed originally for multithreaded ops, suffers from performance-killing thread collisions if another CPU-intensive process is run on the other virtual processor sharing the same physical core. The texture loading threads added in SP2, which were probably designed to operate in a multithreaded environment, don't seem to impede each other when sharing virtual processors across the same core. Setting AffinityMask to 244 sets up the cores and vCPUs as follows:CORE 0CPU0 - Free | CPU1 - FreeCORE 1CPU2 - FSX Primary | CPU3 - FreeCORE 2CPU4 & CPU5 - FSX secondaryCORE 3CPU6 & CPU7 - FSX Secondary

I will give it a go then. I placed mine at 84, as from what some other thread said, and it might be just paranoia messing with my rig that is already running great, but I think my scenery is loading slower. I will try the benchmark test with, no af tweak, 5, 14, 84, and 244 and I will see what's best.Also, why do you say not to upload results?

To upload the results you have to run the test with a brand new clean install, so that others can compare it to what their system is getting. If you run FSX with any add ons or .CFG tweaks, then your results can't be compared. It's still a useful test that you can run to see definitively how changes impact your system.As far as tweaking your rig if it's running how you want it, I'd say if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

deltamd11 with that pc? you got a 3960 i7 a very expensive cpu and you get that fps.i have a i7 920 and i get better fps hmm why do you waste your money on such a cpu i dont understand you guysuse so much money and get nothing.i feel sorry for you.

Recently it seemed as if my FPS (and smoothness) have dropped.I use the NYC area as my benchmark and could get between 21 and 12 FPS with complex addon planes. Now I'm getting between 12 and 6(!) FPS. I have modest settings (12% vehicle traffic, 28% airline traffic).Actions:1) Affinty mask change to 244: Read it won't help FSX, but it can stop "collisions" and help addons/system programs perform better (Bojote's Tweak tool set AF at 84)2) Check FXAA to see if the problem is in the GPU (which I doubt, but may help performance elsewhere)3) Check to see if the AFCAD files I downloaded for the area airports is affecting performance4) Read Nick N's guide again. I've lowered autogen to dense and water to low2x, airport vehicles to medium, but I have to make sure those steps coincide with whats in the guide5) If I get desperate enough, maybe I'll allow FSX to rebuild the CFG file the Bojote as maybe the CFG is too bogged down with uncessary clutter (Allowed FSX to rebuild, then used Bojote's tweaks)6) Going to try Low Res NGX textures in the cockpit to see how that affects performance (No Frame or "smootheness" difference. Both Low and hi res settings get around 15-12 FPS now)7) Convert water textures to DT3 (if interested, do a search for "reduce textures") (Seems the AS2012 textures arent as large as REX's. Did not change)Those are some of the things I'm doing.Edit one: Gained 6 FPS at default NYC airports and much smoother versus that slideshow it had become.The 2d panel is doing between 30 and 24 FPS. Recommendation: Rebuild your FSX CFG and tweak it.

deltamd11 with that pc? you got a 3960 i7 a very expensive cpu and you get that fps.i have a i7 920 and i get better fps hmm why do you waste your money on such a cpu i dont understand you guysuse so much money and get nothing.i feel sorry for you.

Comments like this are better left unsaid. In the end you contribute nothing and come off as judgemental. "I feel sorry for you".

Edited February 19, 201214 yr by SKEWR

Mmhhh. Is the system still cool enough? Maybe there is some dust in your cooler which decreases performance. This is the first thing I thought of when you mentioned that the FPS became from bad to worse.

you need to get your fsx.cfg tweaked correctly and your system is sweet. I think fsx just needs to be told how to harness all that horsepower of your pcgo here http://www.venetubo.com/fsx.html

@SKEWR,Have you defragged lately? I found that on my other system, if I let it go to long, I would see a decrease in performance like you are describing.@RamRunnerThanks for the info, it makes sense. And ya, I know you are right about fixing what own broke. I tried the AF stuff, and seemed my system didn't like it too much. I am now back to stock with only the Highmem fix and LOD to 5.5 and she is just fine.

Edited February 19, 201214 yr by William J.S.S

@SKEWR,Have you defragged lately? I found that on my other system, if I let it go to long, I would see a decrease in performance like you are describing.

Good point. With FSX I notice I get wrapped up in the software/tweak side and not the things outside of FSX/NGX. Will do that now. Also, will get some compressed air in the system to clean it even though my temps are nice and cool. It can't hurt.In regard to the MXAA i'm going to use the settings from http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/36537-fxaa-post-process-injection/ and see how they work. It's a pretty intersting read if you were considering the ENB alternative.