But, you are ABSOLUTELY correct - it has not been proven that it is not a dead end. I'll wait until it is and then stop using it but meanwhile.......onward and upward.

Everything is a dead end.. should I stop using Windows 7 now because Microsoft will no longer exist in 2042? Maybe buying that new Intel CPU was a mistake, because ARM might dominate the market 10 years from now... With the fuel prices, energy crisis and economy, I guess aviation itself is a dead-end, so why bother with flight sims at all?

At least Prepar3D is more up to date and fixes a number of things that were wrong with  FSX. P3D 2.0 will fix even more stuff. I will enjoy the trip down the cul-de-sac while it lasts. Life is a dead-end, try to enjoy it while it lasts...

Yes it is if your can't get FSX to run and low on funds. Sitting there looking at a slide show, using your imagination that what your seeing is actually great, and fooling yourself that this is the best that it can get is not the answer.

 

One can always go into debt more marginal results and no cure from tweaking. Hey, a fool and his money is easily parted.

 

 

Then what is the answer? Donate and help this guy get a better computer since FSX is the only answer. I for one am not saying FS9 is the best option here but sitting there running a glorified slide show isn't either.

 

He already has a computer that will more then run FSX smoothly.

 

And even if he didn't, the first step would be to compromise on the massive amount of addons he's running to smooth things out. Not go to FS9. If he could just load up FS9 and have everything he already has but smoother you'd have a point.

 

The point of this thread is trying to help him have his cake and eat it to. In the case of FS9 the cake doesn't exist over there for him.

Just because you can't make FSX shine doesn't mean others can't(are you jealous?) The OP has a good system he just need it balanced and tweaked and it will run great. And for me and many others, tweaking was a miracle cure when I realised how to do it right.

Most of these tweaks is even dokumented by the ACES team...

I like the days where you just installed the software and it ran decently. That's one good thing I can say about Flight, it just ran without issue. Tweaking need not apply...

Just because you can't make FSX shine doesn't mean others can't(are you jealous?) The OP has a good system he just need it balanced and tweaked and it will run great. And for me and many others, tweaking was a miracle cure when I realised how to do it right.

Most of these tweaks is even dokumented by the ACES team...

true, fsx/p3d do run very smooth and stable on good hardware.  I never go below 25fps with most settings maxed.

bonchie, on 02 Jul 2013 - 1:36 PM, said:

He already has a computer that will more then run FSX smoothly.

 

And even if he didn't, the first step would be to compromise on the massive amount of addons he's running to smooth things out. Not go to FS9. If he could just load up FS9 and have everything he already has but smoother you'd have a point.

 

The point of this thread is trying to help him have his cake and eat it to. In the case of FS9 the cake doesn't exist over there for him.

Got it well I hope you can help him out. If he has the hardware then by all means see if you can make it work for him. That's what we're all here for to help.

FSX, plug and complain, or live within your limitation of your computer and fly around.   Be conservative with your tweaks and not get fps addiction as it leads to de-lidding your cpu and voiding its warranty. 

 

 

That's one good thing I can say about Flight, it just ran without issue. Tweaking need not apply...

 

Perhaps, too bad it was junk.  ;-)

 

 

I like the days where you just installed the software and it ran decently. That's one good thing I can say about Flight, it just ran without issue. Tweaking need not apply...

 

I would have liked to see MS Flight with the NGX, AI, car traffic, live weather, FS2crew etc etc that we throw into the sim and maxed settings over Seattle. I'll bet we would have had to make some compromises in settings there too...

 

But offcourse in a perfect world It would have been great to have a SIM that just worked without any tweaking at all with maxed settings and fancy graphics etc...but the world is just what it is so right now there are just a few sims to choose from, FS9, FSX, X-plane, Flight, P3D.

And if wanting better graphics than FS9 there are just a few options to choose from... and to me it looks like the OP has choosen FSX so lets do the best to try and help him.

If he wanted to use FS9 we wouldn't have had this thread in the first place

Hello folks, I tried all the tweaks but the only that thing showed positive result was Setting fsx FPS unlimited and using external fps limiter,- Significant changes in fps though not the best but very very good! 

Hello folks, I tried all the tweaks but the only that thing showed positive result was Setting fsx FPS unlimited and using external fps limiter,- Significant changes in fps though not the best but very very good! 

 

Whatever works.

sidh, I don't really have the best system compared to you guys, but I can however run FSX pretty smoothly.

 

1. Start off by letting FSX create a new FSX.cfg file. Do that by removing your current one and put it on the desktop (or wherever), run FSX and it'll rebuild a new one.

 

2. Copy ONLY the [TRUSTED] section from your old fsx.cfg (It'll save you the trouble of re-adding them as trusted).

 

3. Set up your FSX sliders for a BALANCED PERFORMANCE (not maxing everything) and start the default flight. If you feel satisfied with the visual:performance ratio then great.

 

4. Add these tweaks, nothing else (these are the ones I use in my setup, and the only ones I'd recommend using):

 

[bUFFERPOOLS]

UsePools=1

PoolSize=8388608

RejectThreshold=262144

 

[Display]

TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=70 //80 is also fine, don't exceed 120

UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT=0

WideViewAspect=False

 

[Main]

HideInfoText=1

DisablePreload=1

FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.25

 

[GRAPHICS]

HIGHMEMFIX=1

 

My fsx.cfg is essentially vanilla except for those changes and I get a stable, smooth flight every time, less means more sometimes. I don't use the affinitymask tweak, but I used AffinityMask=12 instead of 14 when I did (Got better results with 12. I could OC more and temps were better).

 

I've attached my fsx.cfg too so that you can see in more detail what my settings are.

 

 

 

Coming Soon.

 

This Topic Is Now Being Monitored by AVSIM Staff

 

This topic is being monitored by Staff and moderators because it appears to be at risk of "going south", "getting out of hand", "abusive" or moving toward violating our Terms of Service. Be advised that this topic could be closed without additional notice and you really do not want your post in this topic to be the reason it is closed. Please do not contribute further to the risk of closure of this topic. If you are wondering why this notice is posted on this topic, please re-read our Terms of Service.

 

 

Whatever works.

 

:lol: Yeah, all roads lead to Rome so it doesn't matter wich one you take as long as you get there.

 

 

This topic is being monitored by Staff and moderators because it appears to be at risk of "going south",

 

Oh, I tought we were going west ^_^

 

 

(Got better results with 12. I could OC more and temps were better).

 

How can the affinetymask setting affect how good you can overclock :huh: Think you have misunderstood a few things here. The affinetymask setting just tells FSX wich cores to use.

E.g Affinetymask 14 leave core 1 almost unused and loads things over to core2-4(With HT off). It has nothing to do with how good your overclock is going to be and what temps you get.

How can the affinetymask setting affect how good you can overclock :huh: Think you have misunderstood a few things here. The affinetymask setting just tells FSX wich cores to use.

E.g Affinetymask 14 leave core 1 almost unused and loads things over to core2-4(With HT off). It has nothing to do with how good your overclock is going to be and what temps you get.

For me it does. I should of stated I'm using a laptop with and extreme cpu. My bios options are limited (only options to disable HT, adjust when the fan kicks in and what temps the system should throttle the cpu) and I can manually overclock by increasing the multipliers using ThrottleStop in windows, not by base clock (that's locked in bios). So if I set the affinitymask to use 2 cores (uses the last 2 cores) I have a little more overhead to bring my multipliers up and since it's using less cores (lower power draw - TDP), the temps are reduced. I got a max temp of 86 with AM=12 and 91 with AM=14 @ 3.7GHZ. This is with ALL 4 cores running at 28x (my base clock is 133MHZ, stock multipliers are 18x when using 4 cores).

 

With AM=12 and a TDP of 75W, I can run fsx @ 3.9GHZ without a BSOD. I get an instant BSOD with AM=14 at that TDP and voltage. I don't think the increase of temps from raising the voltage are beneficial so I stuck with AM=12.

 

 

Essentially, my OC is achieved based on TDP, TDC and the amount of cores being used. I don't want to mess around with the current draw as I don't wanna fry my motherboard with that extra juice. Stock TDP for my cpu is 55W, and I change that to 75W when I OC for FSX. My GPU is running at stock and TDP is also 75W. So my 180W PSU has to deal with all that power being drawn when running FSX hahaha.

In all seriousness:  it has yet to be proven that is not a DEAD END.  :-;

 

In all seriousness: PD3 is not an entertainment product.