One question guys, if I download any FSDT airport, from what I´ve read on the site the main buildings will disapear after 10 minutes in DEMO. But the fsdt-runways, apron, tayiways/signs dont go away ?

Thank´s !

I run a 670 mate,

Well change your video card spec in your PC profile then, and others like myself don't waste our time trying to help someone who just won't listen. <sigh>

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.

 

They are fine Umberto, Its a 670 EVGA FTW version, they run cool on idle, I live in a cool house, with good fan

Umberto quick question by removing those bump maps on the roofs of the buildings can that help in upping the frame rates ? luv them on the ground but roofs not needed. Thanks my 680 4gig card does a solid 30 to 34 fps on this scenery so I am happy no FTX pnw loaded fyi

They are fine Umberto, Its a 670 EVGA FTW version, they run cool on idle,

 

On idle, they sure do. But if your GPU utilization graph shows 99%, the card wasn't idling. My GTX 670 PNY xlr8, which is also one of the coolest video card around:

 

http://benchmarkrevi...1&limitstart=11

 

Runs at an average of 65C around CYVR, you reached a *peak* value of 18C less than that, which seems a bit low. I can't find on any forum someone claiming as low as 47C under load.

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

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.

 

Thanks guys. Duly noted. I actually use Process explorer alot to keep an eye on the VAS both with FSX and P3D. But Im planning to reinstall FSX clean and see right off the bat what CYVR does. Nothing else will be loaded. Then ill start loading aircraft. Check VAS every step of the way. The MD-11 uses far less than the NGX. My FSX install is old, so its time. P3D FPS is smoother and a little higher and much less crashes but slightly higher susceptible to OOMs probably from whatever tweaks LM did initially.

 

 

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.

 

This is what Im getting here too minus a few FPS. I dont have that much OC ability with mine. But with the right settings, its not much different from other FSDT sceneries.

<br />I actually use Process explorer alot to keep an eye on the VAS both with FSX and P3D<br />

 

Could anyone provide a quick explanation of how to monitor VAS using Process Explorer? I have the program, but I'm not sure which graph (if any) represents VAS...thanks!

Could anyone provide a quick explanation of how to monitor VAS using Process Explorer? I have the program, but I'm not sure which graph (if any) represents VAS...thanks!

 

In process monitor, go to View --> Select Columns and click on the "Process Memory" tab. Tick "Virtual Size". You will now see a column in the main display labeled "Virtual Size". That's the value you want to monitor.

 

I'm not sure where Umberto is getting the graph he's shown. You can display a number of different process performance parameters graphically (including Private Bytes, which is a subset of VAS) by selecting "Properties" for an individual process.

 

Hope that helps,

 

Scott

For those with oom errors, what helped in my case was to uncheck the "force 4096x4096 bitmaps" or similar wording in thr virtuali addon manager.

 

Good luck

 

Another thing, use 1024k clouds, reduce some clod coverage etc. anything can help. Personally i think lower res clods look better anyway. Hi-res plane textures don't make much sense as we sit in the cockpit. Like anything that has to do with computers it's about compromising. unfortunately we have the fsx 32 bit addressable memory hard limit, we have to play within it. Thats a hard stop.

We really cant blame developers if we chose to fly pmdg ngx with hi res cloud textures, orbx scenery and an addon like cyvr.

 

 

Just worked on a fresh install of FSX. (wow forgot how tedious it is to go through everything. ) The results are quite surprising. Halfway through my venture installing a little bit at a time and watching the VAS. I have screenshots later, but never seen FSX get in upwards of 40-60FPS even in KSEA at MAX settings for everything except non aviation traffic. I chose Seattle to start as it is notoriously and historically punishing. And DX10 saved a little but it also looked way better, and on occasion gave me extra FPS. This is without any DX10 tweaking, and none of Steves fixes. DX10 so far is somewhat of a bandaid fix but relative to what you have. It saved me 3-400mb at times. But whats astonishing, is that a clean install of FSX sits at 1.8-2.0 GB at max settings, Generic weather, default aircraft. Thats quite a bit to start off with without any addons. This leaves 2GB left for addons which is nothing really. Installing FSDT CYVR first and preliminary findings im at 2.4-2.6GB depending on view. More tests to come when I start installing NGX, and weather textures.

I simply reload the flight while in flight. That way I "unload" the initial scenery, allowing FSX to continue cleaner and I can land. It's all about knowing how you handle it.

 

This is an interesting quote. Why hasn't the initial scenery already been unloaded? Surely it should be wiped from memory/VAS as soon as it is left behind?

This is an interesting quote. Why hasn't the initial scenery already been unloaded? Surely it should be wiped from memory/VAS as soon as it is left behind?

 

There are two flights that causes me an OOM every time. ConcordeX EGLL-KJFK and KJFK-EGLL. I have concluded that what I need to do is when over the middle of the Atlantic, I need to reload the flight and carry on. It will probably only take 30 seconds and will give me enough headroom to complete the flight without an OOM. Good idea Christopher.

Hoping to not mix up things, but I think a frequent autosave running in the background sometimes got reported to help a bit on the oom problems. Not only by delivering a point to restart the flight if FSX crashed, but also due to some kind of free-up process taking place and perhaps avoiding the worst. Or just delaying it. :unsure:

 

I'm looking for a source, but, from memory ^_^ , I think Pete Dowson once explained that possible effect.

Hoping to not mix up things, but I think a frequent autosave running in the background sometimes got reported to help a bit on the oom problems. Not only by delivering a point to restart the flight if FSX crashed, but also due to some kind of free-up process taking place and perhaps avoiding the worst. Or just delaying it. :unsure:

 

I'm looking for a source, but, from memory ^_^ , I think Pete Dowson once explained that possible effect.

 

I've also heard that CoolP. It would be good if this could be substantiated by Peter or anyone...