OK martin since you appear in a more friendly manner I thought I might try to defend myself after you pulled me up on seeing frame rates or not:

 

Why rude? I am genuinely fascinated by it. You may have the capability to perceive very slow frame rate as smooth continuous motion. It interests me greatly, thus I am fascinated. I have always been interested in such things. Fascination, is never rude, fascination is good.

 

I didn't say I couldn't spot the difference, and you can't hide the fact you're being sarcastic.

 

You have to compare like for like. We all have different notions as to what we deem acceptable in terms of frame rate, as this thread has highlighted.

 

Surely then there's nothing wrong with me going for 19fps and max sliders, and nothing wrong with my eyesight, so I deserve an apology then?

much

 

Something is amiss. I am familiar w/ the QX9650 & Q9650, and I have exactly 1:1 scaling w/ higher clock speed. If I go from 3.0 to 4.0GHz I experience an ~33.3% increase in frame rate. I killed my QX9650 by overvolting a few times to 1.45v and mostly running at 1.40 to get a stable overclock at 4.0-4.2Ghz w/ good temp control. So I'm using a Q9650 replacement and won't go past 3.72 in order to spare this replacement CPU from an early demise.

 

Bum video driver maybe? I'm using a GTX280 w/ pretty high end settings in NV Inspector. I recommend running FSX in unlimited, and restricting frames using Inspectors 1/2 vertical refresh or locked at 30 for good results on my machine. Bufferpools=0

OK after more testing back on old machine i7-960GTX480 Default fsx.cfg, DX10, Anisotropic, default GPU setting = 3 pre rendered frames, circling high density urban area with water, plus full debug trace.

 

 

set to 90 fps, detailed clouds max cloud draw:

Turned all sliders to left, no shadows no nothing, sim runs consistently at 90.6 to 90.8 fps.

Turned all sliders to midway, sim runs consistently at 90.1 to 90.3 fps.

Turned all sliders to midway, plus bloom etc., sim runs consistently at 89.9 to 90.2 fps.

 

 

This is an older PC running around 2.4-3.1Ghz. It seems no big deal to get high fps with less than max graphics.

 

Next I tried all settings maxed and flying in a circle over high density urban plus water

Set to 30 fps fixed and reduced altitude until fps showed 29.9-30.1fps

 

Usepools=0 now only could set at 28 fixed getting 27.9-28.0

Poolsize=0 seemed to do nothing, maybe saw 30.0 a lot more than 30.1, but it started to stutter every now and then.

 

...Next I run the same tests with IF and it made no impact whatsoever...

I noticed some difference when OC'ing even though it's a very modest OC (3.2 - > 3.7 GHz). I also overclocked the unCore (L3 cache, memory controller etc.) to 2.6 GHz and set the memory timings as tight as I could (1T etc.).

 

However, the low framerate of FS means that you need huge increases in CPU performance to really notice the difference (remember FSX is programmed for 10 GHz single-core CPUs which never materialized).

 

For example, if you're getting 11 FPS, you need to double your CPU clock frequency to get over 20 FPS - so if you're running a CPU at 3.2 GHz and getting 11 FPS, you need to overclock to over 6 GHz to get 20+ FPS. A smaller increase to for example 4.5 GHz would in theory only give you just over 15 FPS instead of your previous 11 FPS. A small tweak like reducing AI traffic by 25% or autogen by one notch might provide a much bigger improvement.

OK martin since you appear in a more friendly manner I thought I might try to defend myself after you pulled me up on seeing frame rates or not:

 

 

 

I didn't say I couldn't spot the difference, and you can't hide the fact you're being sarcastic.

 

 

 

Surely then there's nothing wrong with me going for 19fps and max sliders, and nothing wrong with my eyesight, so I deserve an apology then?

 

Steven... I'm not sure why you've brought this up again, when things get out of hand in regard to certain subjects on a forum, it's best to move on.

 

I was always friendly words like "garbage" related to my opinion of a particular frame rate, not my opinion of the poster. But if anyone misconstrued my intentions, which is possible due to language barriers etc, then they should know that was never my intention.

 

 

I didn't say I couldn't spot the difference

 

Actually, you did, or did I misunderstand you? You said...

 

Well Martin you just aint listening. I started at 10fps and around 14 the stepping scenery out the side window was just beginning to ease, then at 18 it became hard to spot, at 19fps I couldn't see it. So it's smooth at 19 and panning is smooth, more fps than that I have to reduce autogen and then I get little pictures of houses between little houses.

 

 

and you can't hide the fact you're being sarcastic.

 

 

No, I wasn't being sarcastic. I am interested in such things, I write science fiction, and have studied science, technology and human biology for many years.The brain is of particular interest to me... therefore such things fascinate me.

 

 

Surely then there's nothing wrong with me going for 19fps and max sliders

 

Of course not, if that's what pleases you. My only point was that at 19 it could not be perceived as smooth motion. And now, as you seem to be confirming above, you can spot the difference.

 

Misunderstandings occur on forums. We now seem to be on the same page, which is good news.

 

Please... now lets move on in a friendly manner. It's not worth squabbling over who said what. Getting on is much preferred.

Usepools=0 now only could set at 28 fixed getting 27.9-28.0

Poolsize=0 seemed to do nothing, maybe saw 30.0 a lot more than 30.1, but it started to stutter every now and then.

 

 

There shouldn't be any difference between PoolSize=0 and Usepools=0. They should do the same.

 

For me Poolsize=0 provides an extra 14 FPS. But "only" in a bad weather scenario. In clear weather, the benefit for me is no stutters.

Please... now lets move on in a friendly manner. It's not worth squabbling over who said what. Getting on is much preferred.

Sure martin! Once you stop pulling people up in an unfriendly manner and picking holes in them unnecessarily on a public forum simply for making a post of their own observations, since you feel it might not agree with your own opinion or something you posted once. Then yes... :lol:

While going through all the testing and tweaks last night I reconfirmed one most important thing:

 

"The only time I saw stuttering was when time run out to pre render frames."

 

So I concluded that the DX pre-rendering arrangement must be working properly for the optimal experience. This shows up really well when flying choppers. Frame rates didn't cause any issue unless looking out the side window at 18fps or less where it becomes obvious it's a set of stills. I found no benefit from tweaks at all, but if I run my fsx.cfg through a tweak tool I found my shadows trees and buildings reduced, but I'm into keeping an eye on the ground and the sky while flying. The only thing I found bad about flying the chopper at 14fps was that to post about it on a public forum I'd have to be a complete idiot. :lol:

Sure martin! Once you stop pulling people up in an unfriendly manner and picking holes in them unnecessarily on a public forum simply for making a post of their own observations, since you feel it might not agree with your own opinion or something you posted once. Then yes... :lol:

 

Steven... once more. I have attempted to move on several times now, but you won't let it go.

 

Let it go!

 

The contradiction in your posts, has been highlighted four posts up. It's no wonder, I "picked holes".

 

As for unfriendliness none was intended, what you witnessed was incredulity and exasperation the contradiction above is evidence for that incredulity.

 

By posting a laughing smilie it comes over as an attempt to wind someone up.

 

This doesn't do you any good, it doesn't do me any good and it's not good for Avsim's reputation. By not letting this go, in spite of my repeated requests, you are in essence, trolling the forum.

 

Now please, move on and discuss something else. I don't know about you, but I find this sort of thing somewhat distressing.

...and yet you seem to be mixed up in it as usual :smile: snigger smiley

You guys aren't REALLY going to stop, are you?

 

LOL

...and yet you seem to be mixed up in it as usual :smile: snigger smiley

 

 

Your last post makes it absolutely clear, that you have one objective, to cause trouble and troll the forum.

 

Once again, and I've lost count of the number of times I've asked now, let's please move on.

 

I'm prepared to ignore earlier disagreements and misunderstanding in this thread, and discuss things with you in a friendly manner... are you?

Martin and Steve,

 

This is a good way to get nailed from both of you, but may I suggest that neither one of you are making progress towards either convincing or overcoming the other. It reminds me of an old saying:

 

"A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still."

 

Please back away gracefully from pushing each other's buttons and let it ride, for the sake of everyone else involved in the thread.

 

Time to stop and back off.

 

Kind regards,

You guys aren't REALLY going to stop, are you?

 

LOL

 

Yes Dave I am going to stop.

 

I'll do the mature thing and not comment further.

 

I can guarantee he won't.

 

Edit: Above composed prior to Spirit Flyer's post.

Seattle is another

 

Haha - Took me a while to figure that out. I use Boeing Field, in Seattle, as my default airport. Couldn't figure out why my framerates were so low, compared to when I got out of town.

Not really an issue anymore though, once I upgraded to an I-7 (3.5 - Overclocked to 4.2) & Redeon 6850.