Hi. I tried that but (may be a separate glitch - very odd), now, no matter what value I put in for the affinity, 01,02,03. (with or without the zero) 0E, 0F etc. etc, I always get cores1-4 active - same result every time. I've given up on the whole thing for now!

 

 

FS04 is a single core program, it runs on one thread only

It was written in the single core era, but it is ~not~ single threaded. (As to how the workload is distributed over the 30 or so threads - hard to say. Task Manager doesn't dig that deep.) In any case when you spread the affinity, the CPU's internal architecture does the heavy lifting to make it happen, so results are like so many things with FS - hardware-dependent.
 

 

 

when I look at the affinity settings via Task Manager, FS9 is using cores 2, 3 & 4, not CPUs 2, 3 & 4

In WIN XP, where do you find core useage data? I see only CPU.

 

I am wondering what effect running in full-screen or windowed mode has on FS9 performance.

Certainly the graphics are handled *totally* differently.

What about CPU activity? 

 

There's often discussion about "my FS9 does this, or that" but hardly ever distinction about windowed mode 

Why do people keep saying that Windows processes run on core 0? They typically don't have an affinity either, and they'll run wherever the kernel wants them to, which is an available processor.

 

Honestly, unless you write your own pre-emptive multitasking kernel, you're probably worse at scheduling processes than the folks who wrote the NT kernel task scheduler. Leave things alone.

 

Cheers!

Luke

All,

 

FS04 is a single core program, it runs on one thread only. if you want to adjust which core it uses that is fine,. and you may notice a difference because of what else you are running on core zero. Anything after that is the ol' fish oil effect.

 

True very true. FS9 is a single core program. Affinity mask won't make a difference. However there was a program wrote about a year or so ago for Intel and AMD cpu's to run on multi core systems. It was called auto cpu affinity for FS 2004. It had to be started before FS9 was started, and it would allocate the process across all 4 processors.

True very true. FS9 is a single core program. Affinity mask won't make a difference. However there was a program wrote about a year or so ago for Intel and AMD cpu's to run on multi core systems. It was called auto cpu affinity for FS 2004. It had to be started before FS9 was started, and it would allocate the process across all 4 processors.

 

Snake oil. There's nothing that can allocate a single thread across multiple processors.

 

Cheers!

Luke

I think some here must be confusing thread with process. FS runs in a single process, but with multiple threads. And yes threads on a single process can run on multiple processors, as determined by the process affinity mask. To insist FS is confined to a single core, much less a a single thread is just plain wrong.

 

I think some here must be confusing thread with process. FS runs in a single process, but with multiple threads. And yes threads on a single process can run on multiple processors, as determined by the process affinity mask. To insist FS is confined to a single core, much less a a single thread is just plain wrong.

 

While FS9 may have multiple threads, only one is doing any meaningful work.

 

Cheers!

Luke

recently we had nonsense about fs9 using 1024x1024 textures.  now fs9 is multicore capable? 

 

sad.

FS9 never has been multicore. This is a fact. However, Windows can pick any core (physical/virtual) any time, run FS9 there and in the next second (or even clock cycle) run it in another core. Part of the discussion here is if there is any advantage in restricting the cores FS9 can use. I can remember seeing this discussion since HT appeared.

 

For me, I've just got my answer (select only physical cores, let Windows decide which one), but I'll have to test it before being happy with this solution.

 

True very true. FS9 is a single core program. Affinity mask won't make a difference. However there was a program wrote about a year or so ago for Intel and AMD cpu's to run on multi core systems. It was called auto cpu affinity for FS 2004. It had to be started before FS9 was started, and it would allocate the process across all 4 processors.

 

That program didn't get to be enough snake oil for me. In my old P4 2.8 HT I gained some stability, in my current AMD Athlon 64x2 4000+ desktop didn't notice anything... and in my i5 laptop (see my specs) I gained some stutters.

@
Ultimately test, and use what works best on your system. Affinity settings really make no difference on how FS2004 runs, and for some, appears to make things worse.

@@Martin
Sounds like you've given up on the whole thing for now, and I too will now bow out of the fish and Snake oil discussions.
Let me explain one thing quickly re your config issue. I use many FS9.cfg files that all reside in the root folder of FS2004. Each FS9.cfg file has a different name depending upon what aircraft I'll fly etc. This switch /CFG:NORMAL-fs9 for me, tells FS2004 to use my FS9.cfg file called "NORMAL-FS9.cfg" which is located in the root folder of FS2004. If you used /CFG:NORMAL-fs9 in your batch, you just told FS2004 to create a new FS9.cfg file called "NORMAL-FS9.cfg". I suspect if you look in your FS2004 root folder, you'll now have a "NORMAL-FS9.cfg" file which will contain default settings. If you wanted to, you could copy and paste your original FS9.cfg file into the "NORMAL-FS9.cfg" and use it. Neumanix was correct in saying to discard the /CFG:NORMAL-fs9 section. Sorry for the confusion on that.

RJ

True very true. FS9 is a single core program. Affinity mask won't make a difference. However there was a program wrote about a year or so ago for Intel and AMD cpu's to run on multi core systems. It was called auto cpu affinity for FS 2004. It had to be started before FS9 was started, and it would allocate the process across all 4 processors.

 

it was "fs_affinity_v2_267238.zip" available at AVSIM library.

I dont know how it works, but it avoids long 100 percent use of one cpu and keeps it cooler!

Hi,

 

if I remember correct, this tool made my FS slightly slower. However, when running FS2004, I never experienced such "asymetric" usage of my two cores as shown in the screenshots within the named archive.

 

Regards,

Harald

here are my pics:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 26, 201312 yr by firehawk44
Photo deleted; Both exceed 1600W and 400KB limits. Both photos over 900KB

I only gave up on this because for some annoying reason, whatever value I enter for 'xx' to set the affinity, it always results in just Cores 1,2,3 &4 working. Cores 0,5,6&7 always remain unchecked in the set affinity box. What I was after was to get FS9 working either on just Core 2 (or 4, or 6), or preferably, so that no single core is running at 100% whilst the others are basically idle, on 2 and 4 and 6.

I am not sure why people keep saying that FS9 will only run on one core despite all the evidence to the contrary. I assume they get their information/disinformation from the internet, just repeating what 'gurus' have said elsewhere. Are there any Intel or AMD CPU engineers posting here, or is it just 'internet hearsay'? (Yes, "sad": thanks for your 'helpful' contribution to the discussion, kdfw_). The tired old forums game of a few people trying to make everyone else look misinformed in comparison to them.. :Yawn:

 

FS9 was designed to run on one core, OK, but irrespective of performance issues, when you set the CPU affinity so that FS9 runs on more than one processor, the fact that, instead of now Core0 being at 100% most of the time, you see FS9 now working across more than one core in the Task Manager performance tab (and any other CPU usage monitor you may care to try) shows that it does run on multiple cores if you set it up that way. Maybe it wasn't supposed to run on more than one core and maybe it's not a good idea - but it clearly can do so.

As I said, I was really interested in experimenting with this since when running FS9 my i7-950 runs with Core0 at 100% and the other cores hardly used. Importantly, the temperatures of cores 2-7 are consistently some 15 degrees lower than the hard working Cores 0 (and 1), so spreading the load must make sense from a hardware point of view.

If I could get FS9 working on cores 2, 4 & 6, or maybe just two of those cores, I'd go for it, at least as an experiment, but no setting I make in the batch file enables this. With eight cores showing, how can I set this up?

Martin