I am using your guide Word Not Allowed, and my pc specs are very high.

 

So? Even with the best system in the world, that won't make FSX invincible. I have my system overclocked to 5.2 ghz, and yesterday while taxiing in after a flight with the NGX at Flytampa Tampa Rebooted, my fps when down to 15 as well

 

I don't exactly know what you are complaining about, but it seems you are one of the only ones here with such big problems, and I would seriously look into your FSX and turn some sliders down.... etc.

I think its time I revisit and have a go at DX10. Its not a solution, but seems like a band aid fix to the stop a little bleeding of OOMs to allow a little bit of "healing"

 

Dave, before you make a huge investment in time for DX10 JUST for OOM mitigation, I'd suggest a few simple tests in flying scenarios typical for what you do.

 

Get out process monitor, enable DX10 mode (I'd suggest a direct edit of fsx.cfg to turn DX10 on and off so nothing else changes) and check VAS as you do things. Then stop FSX and go back to DX9 and repeat. So far (and I haven't yet added poor wx into the mix and I'll have to re-test with my new graphics card and settings) in areas and with scenery and planes I typically fly I'm seeing DX10 use a little more VAS in most cases but your mileage can and will vary, based on what you fly and with what scenery and system differences.

 

This might give you a better idea if DX10 will help you with OOMs, hurt you or simply end up being a wash.

 

Scott

Well then I guess we are all heading to a point where we will have to choose between either default aircraft or default scenery because it seems like both dev's of scenery and aircraft will continue to build stuff that will push us to that 4GB breaking point were we will not be able to run both at the same time. Some will hit it sooner while some will hit it later depending in their configuration.

 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2

 

 

So? Even with the best system in the world, that won't make FSX invincible. I have my system overclocked to 5.2 ghz, and yesterday while taxiing in after a flight with the NGX at Flytampa Tampa Rebooted, my fps when down to 15 as well

 

I don't exactly know what you are complaining about, but it seems you are one of the only ones here with such big problems, and I would seriously look into your FSX and turn some sliders down.... etc.

 

How wrong you are scarlett, did you read the start of this thread? All my other sceneries run like butter. Interesting how this one is causing me such a headache

How wrong you are scarlett, did you read the start of this thread? All my other sceneries run like butter. Interesting how this one is causing me such a headache

 

Hmm, I have only seen YOU report this FPS problem here. That's why I said look into your FSX settings! Not limited to turning your sliders down, but also see what other addons you have installed AROUND the vancouver area! (Like ORBX)

 

I run this airport with the NGX at the gate at about 22-30fps depending weather my view is looking into the scenery or not. Same with ALL my other sceneries with the NGX. There is something obviously wrong with your setup.

From active runway to departing away from Vancouver

 

Dave, before you make a huge investment in time for DX10 JUST for OOM mitigation...

Scott

 

Scott - to provide a little perspective, my experience was that trying out the DX10 route was anything but a huge time investment. The "How-to" doc available from the DX10 forum here at AVSIM will have one up and running in less than 15 minutes.

Scott - to provide a little perspective, my experience was that trying out the DX10 route was anything but a huge time investment.

 

Fair enough - I wasn't really meaning to imply that it was a terribly tough road, just that it's easy to see if it buys you much from an OOM perspective without fully committing to the process.

 

Scott

 

 

Fair enough - I wasn't really meaning to imply that it was a terribly tough road, just that it's easy to see if it buys you much from an OOM perspective without fully committing to the process.

 

Scott

 

Agreed.

What I'd be more interested in, concerning CYVR directly, is there a way to load lower-res textures, without compromising other high-res textures in the sim? The slider in the Addon Manager has effect on all other sim-textures, right?

 

Yes, the Force HD textures will affect the whole sim (only for objects that have textures bigger than 1024x1024). To affect CYVR only, we would need a texture resizer.

 

However, large textures at CYVR aren't really a problem. Some people might think we use "ultra-HD" textures in 4096x4096 resolution to get a better than normal quality, like the 4096 cloud textures in several weather products, which *increase* over the normal requirements of standard FSX texture.

 

Both with KLAX and CYVR, It's not the case. We are using the same resolution as we always had with sceneries like Zurich, JFK, KORD, KDFW, but we are using LESS textures. A single 4096x4096 texture holds the same information as 16 1024x1024 textures but the advantage is, objects sharing that texture and material paramaters can be batched and send together in a single drawcall, and DirectX will have to do much "state changes" ( a "state change" is a fairly expensive operation that switches the graphic card from rendering with a certain color/effect/texture/alpha mode, etc., to a different one, while rendering ), for the maximum speed, you'd want to minimize your state changes.

 

For example, KDFW hi-res background has 53 textures 1024x1024 each, while KLAX has only 4 at 4096, that contain the same information as if they were 64 1024s, but the graphic card can draw them much than at KDFW. People won't see a large difference in fps, because (due to this) we *increased* detail a lot from KDFW to KLAX, so we have similar fps, but much more detail.

 

CYVR has 6 4096x4096 textures for the background, because the entire island is covered, but it has a couple less than KLAX for buildings because its has less terminals, but in addition to that, there are other 5 that do the shadows. This is the main "addition" to KLAX, which takes about 80MB more RAM, in DX9, and roughly 150-160MB more on the GPU (both on DX9 and DX10).

 

The other big difference, is that CYVR has way MORE polygons than KLAX, and those polygons take RAM too, and we found their impact on memory usage is way more than the texture's.

 

As I've said before in this thread, since the 1st rule of optimization, starts with working first on the most consuming items, we had a look at the polygons, and found out that, by getting rid of LOD levels in all objects, we can save about 200MB, without a visible impact on fps, on a fast video card.

 

This because an object is loaded in RAM together with all its LODs, because it must be immediately available, otherwise you would see stuttering while switching LODs.

 

This means we'll release an upgrade in the next days, maybe even tomorrow, that should bring RAM usage at CYVR down by 200MB, which is *almost* the same saving as DX10.

 

The only possible problem, is that it might be slower on slower system, LODs are there for a reason and are a good practice, but that's the only way we can save a significant amount of memory, that might be just what is needed (FOR THE TIME BEING) to let users which were close to the borderline already, to keep using the scenery without having to use DX10.

 

As I've said, this is just a temporary band-aid solution to the real issue, which is we are finishing those 4GB, and other than switching to DX10 (which isn't a definitive solution either) or waiting who knows how much time for a 64-bit "FSX", it's changing our approach to the simulator, and start to make choices and be flexible on what to use, where, and with which settings.

An update to lower the ram is a welcome update..

 

There is a small area somewhere in the scenery that FSX is stuggling with. Only effects when facing a particular direction, otherwise FPS are completely normal.

 

As discussed, we shall try and solve this on Teamviewer and hopefully find a solution that will benefit others .

 

Alex

As discussed, we shall try and solve this on Teamviewer and hopefully find a solution that will benefit others.

 

We'll try this but, in the meantime, I found something that might lead to some clues to your problem. In the screenshot you posted with the GPU performance graph, the two most unusual values are the GPU utilization value, which looks right, since it's most of the time close to 100%, which is how it's supposed to be, but the GPU Temperature reads 23C minimum, to 47C max. Normal values for this card should be in the range of 36-40C ON IDLE, and 75-80C when under load, and the card can go even higher than 100C for a short time, if needed.

 

That seems to indicate there's something strange, possibly with drivers settings, that is not allowing the card to "push" its power as it should. Maybe that's the reason why you don't notice the problem with sceneries made with legacy code: they are not very dependent from the GPU, and their fps are more or less directly related to the CPU speed. If I had to guess, I'd say that if you have FSDT Zurich, you should have very good fps with it.

Alex,

I see you have a 480,Umberto makes a good point about your GPU temp. 480's run very hot,and if you are not setting a "Fan" threshold in MSI, you are not getting the performance in the 480 that you should. You should at the very least have a min threshold set at 80%. I have a 580, so this issue is not affecting my card. Something for you to look at.

Alex,

I see you have a 480,Umberto makes a good point about your GPU temp. 480's run very hot,and if you are not setting a "Fan" threshold in MSI, you are not getting the performance in the 480 that you should. I have a 580, so this issue is not affecting my card. Something for you to look at.

 

I run a 670 mate,

 

We'll try this but, in the meantime, I found something that might lead to some clues to your problem. In the screenshot you posted with the GPU performance graph, the two most unusual values are the GPU utilization value, which looks right, since it's most of the time close to 100%, which is how it's supposed to be, but the GPU Temperature reads 23C minimum, to 47C max. Normal values for this card should be in the range of 36-40C ON IDLE, and 75-80C when under load, and the card can go even higher than 100C for a short time, if needed.

 

That seems to indicate there's something strange, possibly with drivers settings, that is not allowing the card to "push" its power as it should. Maybe that's the reason why you don't notice the problem with sceneries made with legacy code: they are not very dependent from the GPU, and their fps are more or less directly related to the CPU speed. If I had to guess, I'd say that if you have FSDT Zurich, you should have very good fps with it.

 

Wow, a card running too low .. Erm, It is a 670 FTW version, so it is in a 680 case, so it runs very very cool, and my system cooling is good, so I think the readings are within normal Umberto

Wow, a card running too low .. Erm, It is a 670 FTW version, so it is in a 680 case, so it runs very very cool, and my system cooling is good, so I think the readings are within normal Umberto

 

I knew you run a 670, and your values are very low for that one too.

 

As I've said, normal values for that card are in the range of 36-40C ON IDLE, when doing non-graphical operations like website, email, etc. to 75-80C when gaming. Search around in gaming forums, average temperature under load should be at least 75C, your values are way too low.