2500k = Useless For Me

[DVA7209 0]

Alright guys. I've spent...a lot of time getting a nice, all around stable system for some NGX flying.I bought the NGX when it was released, but my i5 750 system wasn't really giving me satisfying performance.So I built a new system, using the excuse that one of my DIMM slots were going bad anyway...much to my bank account's dismay.After months of trying to get into a rhythm with this new build, I've finally grown frustrated enough to feel hopeless.Here's the system I'm running now:ASUS Maximus IV Gene-Z/Gen3Core i5 2500k @ 4.70 GHz (H80 Cooler) 12 Hours Stable Custom Blend8GB of G.Skill 1600 MHz DDR3 RAMWD Caviar Black 750GB SATA III 6GB/sEVGA GeForce GTX 460 1GB @ 800 MHz CoreCorsair HX850 Watt PSUWindows 7 Ultimate x64Now I know my GPU could use an upgrade. I'm working on that. But it shouldn't be *that* bad, I don't think. I still play ArmA II and BF3 flawlessly...I installed Windows 7 x64, completely optimized my system...running no more than 35 processes at idle, all of the latest updates...and followed the "Setting up FSX and how to tune it" guide...using Nvidia Inspector, used Bojote's FSX.CFG tweaker (making a few adjustments myself). Defragged with Diskeeper...Then I proceed to installing my addons...FS Global...which is really just more accurate terrain. No enhanced, higher res textures or more objects to load or anything. REX. Active Sky. Just the basics. Sure they could cause a small performance drop combined, but nothing serious.Then I run Game Booster, killing all unnecessary apps, including Windows themes, print spooler, etc.Time to do a dry test, in default scenery...with moderate FSX settings...water effects turned *off*, bloom *off*...all the things that really kill performance turned off. Default Cessna 172, flying around in default scenery, with Active Sky running to give me some stormy weather. Shouldn't be too bad, right? Default scenery in Seattle, in a default 172?Oh yeah...that's right. 34.1 FPS. Obviously it'd be impossible to take it up a notch and take the NGX for a spin at 10 FPS.I really don't get it. I see videos like http://www.flyaoamed...ws-impressions/ of a guy with roughly the same system (only difference is an upgraded video card)...running a 2500k clocked LOWER than mine...and he's getting seamless, fluid frame rates over some of the most demanding scenery available for FSX (ORBX), in the NGX, with Fraps running. How is someone like that getting twice the performance out of roughly the same system with a GTX480 compared to a system with a GTX460 in it?

[AliB 0]

1. Seattle is the worst place, but OK for testing..2. If you did what NickN recommended, why use Diskeeper for defrag?You skipped many things, did you not?Do it again, read and apply everything, and don´t be fooled by peoples glossy Youtube vids, they are edited, not the real thing!Oh, and get a new GPU, or try to OC it a bit..PS: Where´s the OS and FSX on this WD Caviar Black 750GB SATA III 6GB/s?PPS: "used Bojote's FSX.CFG tweaker (making a few adjustments myself)" - what did you do??Follow the honchos, or accept the pain and headache if you want to be a "tweaker"!

[Paul J 349]

So copy/paste your fsx.cfg in your next post... then cut out the 'common' bits so it's not too long..

[VeryBumpy 272]

I'd be happy as heck with that since I get about 15fps in that area on my rig, but yeah I'd think you'd be 10fps higher than what you're getting. What zoom level is that VC screen set to?

[Mike T 208]

Uninstall FSGlobal.

[DVA7209 0]

1. Seattle is the worst place, but OK for testing..2. If you did what NickN recommended, why use Diskeeper for defrag?You skipped many things, did you not?Do it again, read and apply everything, and don´t be fooled by peoples glossy Youtube vids, they are edited, not the real thing!Oh, and get a new GPU, or try to OC it a bit..PS: Where´s the OS and FSX on this WD Caviar Black 750GB SATA III 6GB/s?PPS: "used Bojote's FSX.CFG tweaker (making a few adjustments myself)" - what did you do??Follow the honchos, or accept the pain and headache if you want to be a "tweaker"!

I used Diskeeper, because I have it purchased and don't want to throw it away now...I believe it uses roughly the same defragmentation method as O&O...and that shouldn't really be making too much of a difference except for loading times AFAIK. I didn't skip anything, I just replaced the defragging tool. I even followed the Windows 7 optimization guide, by optimizing the prefetch service, and performance counters. Also..Nick's video is not edited. It's uncut. :)The changes I made to FSX.CFG (other than Bojote's) were adding a Poolsize=50000 line. It helps remove black lines that flash around on the screen and helps dramatically with stuttering for me.Also I increased the LOD Radius a little to help with blurries.Also, I did OC my GPU. Default core clock is 720. As I said I have mine at 800. ^_^

So copy/paste your fsx.cfg in your next post... then cut out the 'common' bits so it's not too long..

I'll post it...but do you guys really think some FSX.CFG tweaks would help that much? I expect to be seeing frame rates of 50 at least. NGX should knock off about 20, and get me running at around 30 FPS I believe. I'm also looking to upgrade to a GTX 580 after I get paid, which I'm hoping to squeeze an extra 10 FPS out of.

[bufferPools]RejectThreshold=131072Poolsize=500000...[GRAPHICS]AC_SELF_SHADOW=1AIRCRAFT_REFLECTIONS=1AIRCRAFT_SHADOWS=0ALLOW_SHADER_30=1COCKPIT_HIGH_LOD=1D3D10=0EFFECTS_QUALITY=2GROUND_SHADOWS=0HIGHMEMFIX=1IMAGE_QUALITY=0LANDING_LIGHTS=1NUM_LIGHTS=8See_Self=1TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=4096TEXTURE_QUALITY=3Text_Scroll=1SHADER_CACHE_PRIMED_10=1693500672SHADER_CACHE_PRIMED=1693500672[TrafficManager]AIRPORT_SCENERY_DENSITY=1AirlineDensity=14FreewayDensity=0GADensity=8IFROnly=0LeisureBoatsDensity=0ShipsAndFerriesDensity=0...[JOBSCHEDULER]AffinityMask=14...[TERRAIN]AUTOGEN_DENSITY=3DETAIL_TEXTURE=1LOD_RADIUS=5.500000MESH_COMPLEXITY=75MESH_RESOLUTION=22SWAP_WAIT_TIMEOUT=2TEXTURE_RESOLUTION=25WATER_EFFECTS=3[sCENERY]DAWN_DUSK_SMOOTHING=1IMAGE_COMPLEXITY=4LENSFLARE=0MAX_ASYNC_BATCHING_JOBS=3SmallPartRejectRadius=4.0

Edit - FSX and Windows 7 are both on the same partition...to answer your question.

[MrBenevolent 0]

35ish FPS for Seattle doesn't seem too bad IMO!

[DVA7209 0]

35ish FPS for Seattle doesn't seem too bad IMO!

In a default 172? Mate...imagine trying to fly in a payware PMDG aircraft. That'd be in the teens. That's horrible on a Sandy Bridge system at 4.70 GHz! :(

[Paul J 349]

A smooth 35 around Seattle is better than I would expect with that weather and a 460...

[Sawyer 0]

Yeah you do seem to have some issue there. I just ran I test with the Cessna with Default scenery in Seattle and stormy weather and I am getting between 70 to 80fpsI have a similar set up with a 2500K @ 4.5 and a 460 I do however always use the "bufferpools=0" setting as it works fine and couldn't fly without it.Don't worry about defrag either it has nothing to do with it your program is just fine and I also try not to blame your GPU as I think a replacement will end up doing very little to help.

[Paul J 349]

I run a Maddog from FlyTampa's (modified) KSEA, 35% AI(MTX5.3b), 10% road, low airport, 2.x High Water3.5 LOD and think I'm lucky to get 30frames......

[Boeing or not going 578]

get rid of your bufferpools entry, and change LOD radius back to its default of 4.5

[Paul J 349]

CFG adusted for unlimited fps, KSEA and ORBX PNW disabled, C172, 4000', over the hump just N of KSEA, MS "Building Storms".Ave frames, taken from middle number of[TextInfo.1] // Red info print at top-left corner - Shift-ZLockedFrameRate=1,1FrameRate=1,2AverageFrameRate=1,3facing:....N....48.6....NE (looking at BFI)...61....E Looking at Renton)...58.6....S...55.3********************************************************************************************// VFR.cfg Mar 17, 2012[GRAPHICS]AC_SELF_SHADOW=0AIRCRAFT_REFLECTIONS=1AIRCRAFT_SHADOWS=0//ForceFullScreenVSync=1EFFECTS_QUALITY=2GROUND_SHADOWS=0HIGHMEMFIX=1IMAGE_QUALITY=0LANDING_LIGHTS=1NUM_LIGHTS=8SHADER_OPTIMIZE=1See_Self=1TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=1024TEXTURE_QUALITY=3[sOUND]SOUND_QUALITY=2BufferPools]UsePools=0//PoolSize=8388608//RejectThreshold=524288 // 262144 // 131072//PoolSize=0[JOBSCHEDULER]AffinityMask=14[Display]BLOOM_EFFECTS=0RUNWAY_LIGHTS_APPROACH_SCALAR=0.9RUNWAY_LIGHTS_STROBE_SCALAR=0.9RUNWAY_LIGHTS_SURFACE_SCALAR=0.9RUNWAY_LIGHTS_VASI_SCALAR=0.9SKINNED_ANIMATIONS=1TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=157TextureMaxLoad=3 // 6 //30 ONLY when running 'unlimited' frames.TransitionTime=4.000000UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT=0WideViewAspect=True[Main]DisablePreload=1HideMenuFullscreen=1Maximized=1FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.18 ProcSpeed=15505PerfBucket=7[Weather]AdjustForMagVarInDialog=1CLOUD_COVERAGE_DENSITY=8CLOUD_DRAW_DISTANCE=3DETAILED_CLOUDS=1DisableTurbulence=0DownloadWindsAloft=0DynamicWeather=1MaxGustRampSpeed=200MaxGustTime=500MaxVarRampSpeed=75MaxVarTime=50MinGustRampSpeed=1MinGustTime=10MinVarRampSpeed=10MinVarTime=5THERMAL_VISUALS=0TurbulenceScale=0.500000WeatherGraphDataInDialog=0WeatherServerAddress=fs2k.zone.comWeatherServerPort=80WindshieldPrecipitationEffects=1[DISPLAY.Device.NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580.0]Mode=3840x1024x32TriLinear=1[TextInfo.1] // Red info print at top-left corner - Shift-ZLockedFrameRate=1,1FrameRate=1,2AverageFrameRate=1,3[sCENERY]DAWN_DUSK_SMOOTHING=1IMAGE_COMPLEXITY=5LENSFLARE=0MAX_ASYNC_BATCHING_JOBS=3//SmallPartRejectRadius=4.0[TrafficManager]AIRPORT_SCENERY_DENSITY=1AirlineDensity=29ChangeTime=4.000000FreewayDensity=14GADensity=29IFROnly=0LeisureBoatsDensity=17ShipsAndFerriesDensity=12TransitionTime=4.000000[TERRAIN]AUTOGEN_DENSITY=5DETAIL_TEXTURE=1LOD_RADIUS=4.500000MAX_DETAIL_TEXTURE_LEVEL=21MESH_COMPLEXITY=100MESH_RESOLUTION=22MIN_DETAIL_TEXTURE_LEVEL=21SWAP_WAIT_TIMEOUT=2 TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_BUILDINGS_PER_CELL=907TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_TREES_PER_CELL=1376TEXTURE_RESOLUTION=28WATER_EFFECTS=6*******************************************************************************************************************So 4.7 and a 460 doing 35 is pretty darned good.

[MrBenevolent 0]

In a default 172? Mate...imagine trying to fly in a payware PMDG aircraft. That'd be in the teens. That's horrible on a Sandy Bridge system at 4.70 GHz!

I get around 20-24ish on take off from Seattle in the NGX with ORBX PNW scenery from recollection...though honestly I have stopped using it as a test as I don't really fly around there in general and it is always depressingly harsh on a system!I would certainly worry less about FPS per se and more about smoothness/stability - something which is achievable from around 24FPS upwards anyway.I found it difficult to recalibrate my expectations in FSX initially - when you have a system which will lock in BF3 at 60FPS maxed out that struggles to achieve half of that in a 6 year old game, it can be frustrating to start with I know.

[Paul J 349]

Totally true, Ben: I normally run Inspector locking frames at 30, with FSX locking set to 24, and find this gives me the overall smoothness regardless of weather, traffic or aircraft. Frankly I was surprised to see the average being so high. She was topping around 80 in places with the low end being in the low-middle 30's. A good test, as that cfg is pretty hard.