Trouble is, many payware add-ons, airports, scenery and the like, will not function in DX10 AFAIK.

I dont know how this DX9 thread became DX10, and would really like to keep it strictly to solving DX9 problems.

 

I have tried FSX Dx10 and P3D, and both are smoother more stable than FSX DX9, but addons have all kinds of problems with P3D and FSX DX10, that eventually result in a situation that is much harder to manage than FSX DX9.

 

So please can we keep the thread to app crash solutions for FSX DX9.

 

And anybody whose had a bad day looking to make fun of or be rude to somebody is an energy thief who aint getting none of mine.

 

So please lets keep this to DX9 solutions if you please, there is already a DX10 forum if you dont agree. 

 

 

I dont know how this DX9 thread became DX10, and would really like to keep it strictly to solving DX9 problems.

 

Some may say solving DX9 problems would be to move to DX10 and install some of the "fixes/adjustments" 

Some may say solving DX9 problems would be to move to DX10 and install some of the "fixes/adjustments" 

 

Fair point, dx10 is worth a mention.  But unfortunatly i have been down that route and all the postives are countaerbalanced by addons that dont work or need tweaking in dx10, i mentioned this about dx10 and p3d in my last post above.

 

For anybody who uses anything other than pmdg,rex,hifi and P3D, dx10 will result in addon complexity.

 

My findings are, if your system is has the juice, its setup right, and proper cooling, DX9 is not the problem, or not a problem, but most importantly all addons are designed for dx9.

 

Demand just a bit less juice than your system can supply, turn up the volume a bit on those volatages, in my case FSx does a lot IO demand but mobo voltages were too low to support that level of demand. 

 

 

For FSX PC with numerous disk drives like mine, fast graphics card and heavy IO demand, i suspect some of those out of the way voltages especially affecting IO traffic need turning up, i think its called mobo north bridge or south bridge voltages.

 

I think one of the man issues i was having was that, voltages i set in mobo were too low to support 5 disk drives and heavy FSX demand on disk IO.Googling came up with a suggestion to turn [iCH Core] voltage from default 1.1v to around 1.3v, if you got lots of disk drives and heavy disk drive traffic. In short voltages were tooo low to support the demand from disk drives. 

 

Soon as i did that FSx was much more stable especially the case were FSx would crash first load, but load ok on next attempt. I think this happens cause the disk demand is so heavy it only loads ok when the cache is set up already from previous failed load. Increasing IO and other voltages in mobo solved this problem  in my case. 

 

I use Win7 Process monitor a lot, and often monitor the overview window that shows

 

1. CPU Usage

2. Network Usage

3. Disk Usage

4. GPU Usage [i get via other means]

5. Memory.

 

99% of the time, according to the graphs in win7 process monitor, the only resource that is reaching for the roof fo the charts is disk. So i got SSD's and raptors. Spread the load thin on each drive to the point where only thing on C:Drive, that is win7 drive is WIn7 as installed. FSX on its drive and nothing else, so on so forth, 5 drives in all.

 

With the new setup, the disk charts did not peak and square off at the top so much any more, but texture loading still felt heavy sometimes, definatly at FSx launch, and at high demand periods during flight.

 

This caused a lot of app crashes , but my win7 OS running at 4.7Ghz  was stable as a rock through all this. GTX 690 GPU set to spread the load evernly across both eat up the clouds, so what was the problem i thought.

 

Turning down the sliders, allowed the scientific discovry that FSX app crashes respond to graphics setting and sliders, turn the volume down, and app crashes went away in my case.

 

 

I recommend you load up overview window of win7 resource monitor and check which variable is reaching for the chart roof, i mean reaching 100% usage frequently. In my case, it was and still is disk access check yours.

 

Increasing voltages mentioned earlier seems to have fixed the disk access bottle neck in my case.

 

 

Maybe we need a kind person to do a review of what voltages are best to use for demanding FSX PC's. Cause the vcore,dram voltages  and frequency overclock settings alone wount do. I turned up the IO voltages to get FSX stable. 

 

This is why i never test an OC with anyhting but FSX, especially using a long saved flight and turning up the time accelration to increase the stress. Even with SSD, disk access is still the highest by far variable, not CPU or GPU or RAM, but DISk. Soon as IO volatges went up in mobo FSX disk demand did not stress the system so much.

There are still a lot of addons that do not like DX10, numerous Aerosoft and Simmarket airport sceneries unfortunately.  Also Flightbeam KSFO. Most work fine during the day but problems appear when flying at night. That's the only thing holding me back, full DX10 support from airport sceneries.

There are still a lot of addons that do not like DX10, numerous Aerosoft and Simmarket airport sceneries unfortunately. Also Flightbeam KSFO. Most work fine during the day but problems appear when flying at night. That's the only thing holding me back, full DX10 support from airport sceneries.

 

It is a shame that some developers took the view that because DX10 is called preview they would use that as an excuse to cut corners.

 

Without doubt DX10 DOES add many advantages to FSX not least increasing it's stability further and creating a smoother experience.

 

If we are simply talking stability then the original OP is correct. The story is deeper than that though. DX10 is a further addition to this story based on where you WANT your sliders.

 

Certain addons give us wonders we couldn't have dreamed off, these certain addons also push the limits of the old FSX technology. These limits can be negated because if we want to fly that plane and we want that scenery and we want that weather engine with is great clouds etc. we hit the limits of what FSX is capable of. We have choices, we can reduce the sliders, uninstall something or go DX10 for example.

 

Whichever option each of us is prepared to take we must also be prepared to lose something to keep the equilibrium.

Many thanks to all (well almost all ;-) ) taking part in this thread.  It's very helpful and informative.  Jim, as ever, you have the patients of a saint.

Thanks!!