I hope someone from pmdg may address this post. I copied from my post in another thread but I wanted pmdg to see it.

 

 Go to the thread in the main fsx forum here at avsim that talks about the new cyvr release from fsdt.  It is a growing thread about memory usage with respect to their release and users using the NGX with it.  The NGX is using like 800MB of memory which is a lot when the limit is 4GB for FSX. Especially when combined with other add ons like third party weather, clouds, scenery, texture addons like UTX/GEX, etc... Some users including Umberto with FSDT ran some solid memory tests.  If we don't want more and more OOM errors going forward we all need to hope the 777 uses less memory.

 

So my question to pmdg is at this stage can you say it will use less memory than the NGX?

 

 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2

 

 

Others there have run into problems with other aircraft too. I was able to use the QW757. It crashed with the NGX and Maddog. With so many people having problems I would say it's their issue, not PMDG's. Umberto recommended running DX10 preview. It's buggy at best and users that made the switch reported problems elsewhere including FSDT LAX after making the switch. Their product is the problem. None of my other scenerys have this problem including all of FSDT's USA scenerys.

Others there have run into problems with other aircraft too. I was able to use the QW757. It crashed with the NGX and Maddog. With so many people having problems I would say it's their issue, not PMDG's. Umberto recommended running DX10 preview. It's buggy at best and users that made the switch reported problems elsewhere including FSDT LAX after making the switch. Their product is the problem. None of my other scenerys have this problem including all of FSDT's USA scenerys.

 

I don't think this has anything to do with the FSDT scenery but rather a broad-based question of the ballpark memory requirements for the 777 (more, less the same with the NGX being the bench mark). I would be very curious to know as well.

The problem he is mentioning in my opinion is FSDT's problem. As to what kind of memory usage the T7 will have, I doubt they know since it hasn't been completed yet. A safe guess would be similar to the NGX.

There has been a patch for CYVR which allows all kinds of options to tailor your memory requirements. As a test with a fresh install, cyvr plus ngx 'orbx and weather gave me a 2.8 GB footprint. So it can be done.

 

Dx10 runs great there and most other places and ngx has no problem with it IF and only IF you apply Steve's dx10 shadder fixes. Its quite easy to do and a little bit of tweaking fsx.cfg and nvidia inspector.

Everything is sharper and some textures can now be loaded into Vram.

Only night lighting is an issue but a fix on the way for that too.

 

Its new life and breath for fsx in the future.

 

 

 

 

I also recently ran into the Out of Memory Error issue recently. I have 8GB 1600ghz DDR Ram (system memory) on Windows 7 64bit - but as FSX is a 32bit program it can only assign about 4GB (actually more like 3.5GB) of addressing space. I started monitoring RAM usage and as soon as the address file for FSX ran up to it's 32bit Addressing limit - boom Out of Memory error.

 

I could actually "ignore" the error (not click ok or cancel on it) and the sim would continue flying - sometimes for several minutes afterwards. However it would stop texturing new objects so eventually you'd be flying over blur-land with grey-block buildings at all airports. If it passed the addressing limit a second time, you'd be looking at a desktop before you could say "What was that?!"

 

I'm thinking pulling back cloud draw distance and LOD Terrain Draw distance has managed to bring it back into limits, but the only long-term fix is a new Sim built in 64bit architecture (or telling the sim that our 2GB Video card really only has 512MB of memory and to pretend the other 1.5GB isn't actually there - and then turning down the graphics accordingly.)

 

It's taken me nearly 6 years, But I'v finally gone from "FSX is pushing my system as far as it can go" to "My system has more juice left over, but FSX has reached it's limits and is incapable of using all of the RAM, GPU and Processor power that is available on my system".

 

Flying into ORBX YBBN with my current setup, I noticed I'm consistently sitting at around 3.1GB of memory usage in the FSX.exe, which is getting quite close to the limits, considering I commonly fly there on Vatsim (with unknown numbers of multiplayer traffic spawning as AI type traffic when other vatsim people fly there) which sometimes causes memory spikes (up to a few hundred MB) when people log in.

 

That said, if the 777 and 747v2 use about the same amount of ram/addressing space, then I'm good to go for another few years on FS

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Does anyone know if prepar3d uses 64bit addressing space? (ie more than 4GB available in the FSX.exe).

 

I'm also wondering if running an SSD for Scenery (Orbx, FTX, GEX, FSDT) would reduce blurry textures. ie load time of textures so they process from "Blurry - LOD "far away" textures to Sharp - LOD "close" " type textures quicker - potentially using more of the GPU/CPU's speed and not increasing Ram usage significantly?

I too am hoping PMDG is or will make a concensious effort to manage and/or reduce the VAS footprint required to run the T7 as compared to previous PMDG products. The VAS limit situation is becoming everyone's problem and needs to be well managed by ALL third party developers. If it turns-out to use much more VAS than the NGX, it will be a problem for many of us, I guarantee it.

If it turns-out to use much more VAS than the NGX, it will be a problem for many of us, I guarantee it.

 

Your probably right

 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2

 

 

I think its the vancouver region in general.

 

I get 10fps - 30fps in any aircraft [including default] at FSDT vancouver, no matter what I do

In the livestream that was on earlier RSR said that right now the 777 is using a little less than the ngx (at least that's what I think he said). Obviously things might change before release, but in it he said it is definitely something that the team is aware of, and thinking about.

I think its the vancouver region in general.

 

I get 10fps - 30fps in any aircraft [including default] at FSDT vancouver, no matter what I do

 

This is not soley dependant on FSDT YVR or PMDG or FSLABS. They will all have to contribute. At the same time they also want to improve on the previous product. Normally that would require more memory so some method of compression will have to be incorporated. Or perhaps parts of the program run externally to FSX. But the final end result still rests on us. If we are bumping up to the 4GB limit, we HAVE to accept the fact we are just running too many addons, and or having our settings too high. HD is nice and all, but its just fact that it takes more memory.

 

We have survived FSX limitations this far for 7 years. Im sure we will all figure it out as a community and to live within FSX means until something better comes out be it P3D or XP.

If you also have a look at the interview that RSR had during the fundraising for Tony, you will hear him discussing this very issue. You will also notice that he had indicated (and I stand to be corrected on the number in this!) that he was informed that the 777X will actually use something like 11% less memory.

 

So yes, I think the issue is, as he had indicated in the interview, very much at the forefront of PMDG's mind when designing their aircraft.

 

Kind regards

He also hinted at an all new 64bit sim platform. He said 5 years from now this OOM thing will be a thing of the past and we will realize Microsoft leaving flight sim was basically a blessing in disguise. And no I don't think he was talking about x plane 64bit or prepare 3d. When you hear him speak it is evident that something from some group is in the works.

 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2

 

 

You have to read Word Not Allowed's article regarding OOM/VAS and solutions.

 

http://#####...ddon-vas-usage/

Im not exactly sure what RSR was alluding too, but its something that has to be taken seriously and addressed in the very near future. The demand is for high quality scenery and aircraft, amongst all the other addons, and there is no way we will be able to sustain a stable flight sim without bumping up to the 4GB. My guess can only be that we will find something out at the Aerosoft flight sim conference on April 13. Hopefully that will be a very special day of announcements.