If the number gets below about 250,000 bytes, you are getting close to the "OOM danger zone". I believe that is about the point where FSUIPC will start sounding the Windows default chime tone every few seconds.

 

Crap ... my number never gets close to 250,000.  Right now I'm sitting in the NGX on 9L in default KATL, and my number is 1349060 ... oh, wait that's million ... never mind.

 

Thanks much for the info.  I'll dive into the FSUIPC manual to learn a little more about this obviously important matter.

Crap ... my number never gets close to 250,000.  Right now I'm sitting in the NGX on 9L in default KATL, and my number is 1349060 ... oh, wait that's million ... never mind.

 

Thanks much for the info.  I'll dive into the FSUIPC manual to learn a little more about this obviously important matter

 

Now that I think of it, the number represents MB, not KB - so, less than 250 MB VAS remaining is a potential problem.

 

If you're showing over 1.3GB free VAS, you're fine. Not to say you couldn't have a CTD with that amount of free memory - just that the crash would NOT be an OOM - but caused by something else.

Welcome to the wonderful world of Computer Software Engineering! Not for the faint of heart. Me? I'd rather fly than tune.

Guys, honestly before this gets too out of hand (I've already received a bunch of tickets yesterday and today asking) - I can't sit here all day long personally setting up everyone's machines and FSX environments for them. What I did with Bob took almost 3 hours. I detailed what the issue was in his case and I think I've given people the information and tools to figure out what's going on with their own setups. If you have a specific question I'll be happy to answer it as best I can but it was not my intention here to announce that I will do "house calls" for anyone having any issue.

 

We have the TeamViewer account mainly to help with troubleshooting issues with our own products where it's just far easier and faster for me to come do something to a customer machine in a few minutes rather than going back and forth with them typing instructions out. Often the people I do this with aren't very computer literate in the first place and they don't understand what to do from typed instructions anyway. The vast majority of these sessions are over in minutes - it was never intended to be a way for me to go do full system setups for people. I've thought about offering that service for a fee actually, but I just don't know that I'd ever have the time given everything else I'm doing here.

 

 

Perhaps you might consider a comprehensive tutorial which, step-by-step, documents your thought process when tuning up a computer for PMDG products.  Your fame would eclipse NickN, K?sta,*******(Venetubo), All support requests would be eliminated with the simple order: "Read and follow Tabs Tune-Up Bible".

 

In any case, I have a couple of hundred bucks waiting for a personal tune-up session. :wink:

 

The revenue would easily cover the car repair EFB costs!!! :lol:

 

 

You mean @Tabs still hasn't coughed up the 5 Million needed for the data?!  :lol:

Perhaps you might consider a comprehensive tutorial which, step-by-step, documents your thought process when tuning up a computer for PMDG products.  Your fame would eclipse NickN, K?sta,*******(Venetubo), All support requests would be eliminated with the simple order: "Read and follow Tabs Tune-Up Bible".

 

In any case, I have a couple of hundred bucks waiting for a personal tune-up session. :wink:

 

lol, believe me I have no interest in any "fame" from doing something like this. Would much rather that our products speak for themselves.

Guys- I've been a flight sim pilot since ACES put the first Cessna 152 on Miegs Field. That sim required a monochrome monitor and a 16 bit processor running around 3.4 Mhz. It was fed from a single sided single density 360 MByte floppy drive.

I also write engineering simulations of complex real world interactions that must be considered in real life high rise architectural and structural design such as the effects of uneven heat and deformation caused by the sun's relative position or climatological variables. Many of these simulations can be represented graphically and lend themselves to large or massively parallel computers such as the Crays and the IBMs. The calculations are also tremendously iterative and deterministic. At some point a relevant range is encountered when additional changes become meaningless.

What we are asking FSX and the current stable of addons to do often results in competing goals bidding on finite resources. An extremely complex aircraft such as PMDG's NGX or the VRS FA18-E models complex multivariate subsystems that in real life are handled by separate computers with redundant backup. In the flight sim we ask the computer to create and control the flight envelope around which the graphical representation of the aircraft is built. Now add in the graphical embellishments such as shading and reflectivity that make for life-like models. If these aircraft flew in a dark vacuum FSX would handle them with ease.

But we aren't satisfied with that are we. We also want the air they fly through and the ground they fly over to be very close to real life and have all that happens rendered in real time. There's the rub. We expect an aircraft flying at 300 KIAS and 200 feet AGL to give us a sharp and realistic rendition of the envelope so if we were to take a snapshot of our flight, the resulting still picture would look like a Leica wide format portrait. Even the camera system on the SR71 Blackbird can't do that.

FSX performance limitations and those of our current generation hardware are capable of providing low altitude, high speed and high alitude high speed realism. Unfortunately they can't do them both at the same time with the same settings. The relative field of view at 300 feet is significantly smaller than the field of view at FL300. The optimal settings for each are quite different so we shouldn't expect even top end systems optimized for say, a military aircraft flying close ground support to provide the same gaming experience that an intercontinental passenger airliner can deliver at FL370.
 
If your hangar is as full as mine, you can take a morning flight in your Carenado Cessna CT182T from Gunnison to Telluride Colorado flying photorealistic mountain canyons courtesy of MegaSceneryEarth. You can land and have a quick lunch then jump into you EagleSoft Cessna CitationX and fly to New York LaGuardia at FL450 and Mach .950 dodging weather created by REX Essential-Overdrive. The next morning you can report as Pilot in Command on an American Airlines B747-8i for a flight from KJFK to EGLL. Oh, and I haven't even had time to clean the windscreen on my Navy F/A18-E by VRS, or qualify for carrier ops.
 
I guess what I'm saying is that FSX lacks the ability to make on the fly changes to critical system variables. Because it can't, it will never be a "one size fits all" platform. That means that the tweaks that work for one of us won't work for all unless we're willing to be satisfied in the "middle" and accept less than optimal performance in several areas of what we call quality. This operates varying aircraft in varying environments without overworking one aspect of your system or another. For instance, be satisfied with 24fps and a 60NM weather range in order to operate a wider set of aircraft in a reasonable though not "perfect" environment.

Far too many of us seek the "perfect" optimization and there ain't no such thing.

Sorry for the duplicate post.

You mean @Tabs still hasn't coughed up the 5 Million needed for the data?!  :lol:

^_^

With the loss of Michael Greenblat last year, there is a gaping hole for professional services in setting up and optimizing FSX properly. This could be a great thing for someone with Ryan's or Michael's skills to start as a paid service. I used Michael for FS9 and FSX a few times, and he has my system setup so great, I'm afraid what would happen if I had to start over again (of course everything is backed up twice to Sunday).

 

Anyhow, thanks Ryan for helping out, it just shows how PMDG is dedicated to making things the best they can.

 

John

I have been having this problem for quite a while, yet I just added RAM from 14 Gigs to 64Gigs.  When they did this, they replaced all of the RAM in my computer to keep my sticks matching. 

So all of my sticks of RAM are brand new, but I am having the same problem.

I can do a memory test on my RAM memory.  I will look at that.  My computer builder gave me a DVD that has a memory test.

Wow! There is a LOT of good suggestions coming out in this thread.  Please keep them coming.  I will try the ones that I can.  Maybe you will help me get over this hump and back into FSX

 

I will do this Ryan.  Thank you very much.

 

Just delete FSX and you will not have to worry about anymore OOM errors !

 

I reinstalled PD3/Orbx a few months ago to see what all the hype was about and 2 minutes into my flight it crashes(OOM), go figure. And this after it took half the day to install because of all the installation errors.

Gents-

 

A couple of thoughts:

 

Robert:  Your simming rig is better than the one I use for development, with the exception that I am running all SSDs instead of the old fashioned spinny-thingy drives.  (I'm trademarking that- nobody try to steal it!)  I had Ryan walk me through optimizing FSX and I haven't had an OOM since very early in the NGX development cycle.  (2010'ish)

 

i use the 777 every day- and my default testing location is at an OrbX airport surrounded by OrbX scenery.  I also bounce around to various FlightBeam and FSDT and Aerosoft sceneries just to make sure nothing bad happens...  It never does...

 

We put a tremendous amount of time and effort into making sure you get a seamless experience and I think it shows.  It does require that the user approach simming thoughtfully- you can't load something created by a developer that doesn't know what they are doing...   Most often when we help customers who are having trouble- we find it is the result of a lazy or inexperienced developer doing something that is KNOWN to create problems in FSX- and has nothing whatever to do with resource consumption.

 

 

P3D:  I keep seeing folks hope that we will "see the light" on P3D.  I think those folks should go back and read my statements on same.  We think P3D is going to be a great platform in the long term for our commercial and enterprise customers.  But because of P3Ds EULA we have no plans to offer "regular simmer" products on that platform.  I recognize that some of you are using P3D as a simming platform, but if you take a good close look at their EULA- you largely don't have that right- and as such they can turn you upside down one day if they decide to enforce their rights...   As such I think it would be irresponsible for us to sell you a simmer product on a commercial platform.  Some disagree, but...  We have a very expensive legal opinion on it- and I trust the lawyers in this case.  (And I don't like lawyers- so that is saying something!)

 

Xplane:  We are very hard at work on a product for Xplane- and our long term vision is to bring our entire FSX product catalog to play in Xplane...  Austin and his team are working hand-in-glove with us to make this happen...  but it isn't a big rush project because we have to take the time to learn the platform- and we are implementing some technologies to make Xplane an easier transition for our very large FSX customer base...  When we get there- you will see what I mean!

 

 

FSX vs. Xplane:  Thank you, gents- for not letting this devolve into a platform debate.  I think this conversation is sitting right on that rough edge- so I pleasantly remind you that we don't tolerate such debates here because it never means anything positive for the participants or others visiting this forum. 

 

Robert has a valid opinion- and I think he voiced it respectfully.  I also think that there are a dozen or so people in this forum that could probably help him squeeze far more out of FSX than he is...  I'll leave that to all of you to sort out- but in the mean time please continue to treat one another respectfully...

 

 

 

Can we expect a PMDG product for Xplane this year ?

lol, believe me I have no interest in any "fame" from doing something like this. Would much rather that our products speak for themselves.

 

Ryan, I don't know about "fame", but you sure have my deepest appreciation.  I'm really enjoying FSX now and will soon (I hope) be enjoying the PMDG777.

I consider what you did for me simply amazing, as far as going so extremely beyond what was expected of you.

It reminds me of another friend of mine that noticed that I wasn't wearing my glasses one day.

He asked me if I got contact lenses and I told him "no" that my glasses had fallen off my face and into the lake when I was lettering the transom of a boat on the peer.

To my surprise, he offered to get his snorkel gear and go down and look for my glasses.

The water by the peer was filthy from boat owners throwing refuge in the water, but that didn't stop him and in a short time, using a strong maglite, he found my glasses at the mucky bottom and brought them up to me.

This, with the glasses, happened years ago, but to this day, I am blown away when I think about it, the same as I feel about your kindness.  Thank you very much.

Can we expect a PMDG product for Xplane this year ?

Noooo.... They still have the 777 to release, the 777 ER addons, 737 ER and possibly BBJ models, 747 2.0, 747-8, DC6 and possibly a 787 but dont worry they have a secondary team for Xplane so its not like the project is on hold but it may take a few years 

Can we at least try to keep this thread on FSX performance and some ideas to help?  Rather than a "PMDG should do..." or PMDG/Xplane product speculation thread?