TextureMAXLoad... Does it matter?

[Mean Aerodynamic Chord 269]

Thanks for clarifying.

[Noble. 142]

Ryan thanks for clarifying that. So I'll just leave mine at 2048 since that has no effect and the plane will remain using 4096 no matter what. 

 

Yep, exactly. 

[Tabs 2,790]

I run 2048 myself by the way guys. 4096 clouds and stuff add a ton of texture memory and VAS overhead for (I think at least) questionable visual improvement. What's important is the actual cloud texture size you set in REX or FEX or AS or whatever though, not this setting - if it's set to 2048 in the cfg but you're still loading 4096 files, it's going to still take up more memory and space, but the sim will just downsample them and display at a lower res.

[Mean Aerodynamic Chord 269]

if it's set to 2048 in the cfg but you're still loading 4096 files, it's going to still take up more memory and space, but the sim will just downsample them and display at a lower res.

I didn't know that. I will check on my REX settings. Thanks

[Noble. 142]

For anyone that's using a monitor with a high PPI (for example, 1440p on 27" or 1080p on 21.5" monitors) you can even 'downgrade' cloud textures to 1024x1024 and not lose that much quality. Same goes for anti-aliasing as well, 8xS is beyond overkill on monitors with a ~105 PPI.

[jordanal 70]

I run 2048 myself by the way guys. 4096 clouds and stuff add a ton of texture memory and VAS overhead for (I think at least) questionable visual improvement. What's important is the actual cloud texture size you set in REX or FEX or AS or whatever though, not this setting - if it's set to 2048 in the cfg but you're still loading 4096 files, it's going to still take up more memory and space, but the sim will just downsample them and display at a lower res.

 

Hey Ryan,

I have to respectfully question your determination here; which I'm probably going to regret, LOL...

 

I was having a heck of time with OOM (VAS depletion) using the NGX with FSDT's KLAX, CYVR, and FBST's KPHX quite a while back, until FSDT added the 2048 cfg option in their Add-on utility.  Since implementing the 2048 LOD option, I haven't had any OOM issues with any of these airports.   IIRC, all these airports are 4096 native textures; so if the 2048 cfg option was just affecting the display only, shouldn't my VAS have remained the same and the OOM issues continued?  I wonder what ProcExp would show; I've never taken the time to analyze it. 

[Fabo 213]

 

 

FSDT added the 2048 cfg option in their Add-on utility.  Since implementing the 2048 LOD option, I haven't had any OOM issues with any of these airports.   IIRC, all these airports are 4096 native textures; so if the 2048 cfg option was just affecting the display only, shouldn't my VAS have remained the same and the OOM issues continued?

 

I believe this utility would actually replace the files with 2048 sheets.

[captain420 3,099]

I didn't know there was a specific utility for fsdt airport to switch the texture resolution. I thought all their airports except for Vancouver were already 2048? I also have the same problem as you when using airports like klax, kdfw, kjfk. I get the oom ding warning sound in the background shortly after takeoff. I will definitely to try this utility out? How do you access it and does it only affect the settings for their airports or does it globally effect fsx?

[cmpbellsjc 2,963]

 

 

What's important is the actual cloud texture size you set in REX or FEX or AS or whatever though, not this setting - if it's set to 2048 in the cfg but you're still loading 4096 files, it's going to still take up more memory and space, but the sim will just downsample them and display at a lower res.

 

Glad you said it as I was just about to say the same thing. Its often unknown by a lot of users that think that lowering the setting in the FSX.cfg to 1024 will somehow resize the textures, when in reality the sim just displays the 1024 map but still loads the 2048 or 4096 but doesn't display them in that size.

 

Sean Campbell

 

 

didn't know there was a specific utility for fsdt airport to switch the texture resolution. I thought all their airports except for Vancouver were already 2048? I also have the same problem as you when using airports like klax, kdfw, kjfk. I get the oom ding warning sound in the background shortly after takeoff. I will definitely to try this utility out? How do you access it and does it only affect the settings for their airports or does it globally effect fsx?

 

Vancouver has an option in the installer to install either 1024, 2048 or 4096 textures, but that is the only airport they have that has those options. In their addon manager their is a tick box that lets you select for the sim to display either 1024, 2048, or 4096 sized textures, but this the same as setting it in the FSX.cfg.

 

And, as Ryan mentioned, even if you set FSX to use 1024 in the .cfg or via the addon manager, the larger sized textures will still be loaded into memory but FSX will only display the 1024 or 2048 sized texture. The only way to actually make the sim not do that for one of these sceneries is to manually downsize the textures for one of those airports to either 1024 or 4096. Beware however than sceneries like FSDT's KLAX and KJFKv2 while using a lot of 4096 sized textures for the ground polys and some of the airport building at KLAX (KFK's buildings are already 1024) is done to reduce draw calls. Their thinking is that rather have 60 1024 sized textures for the ground, they can cram all that artwork into 10 4096 sized textures or however the math works it out to be. Hence, if you downsize those 10 4096 textures to 2048 or 1024 they will essentially be a lot lower res than if they were all in 1024 by themselves and will result in blurry ground polys and buildings. Granted you will save some memory but it will look a lot worse than if you just left them alone.

 

[captain420 3,099]

Okay so if my fsx.cfg has 4096 set as the texture size, will FSDT's KLAX/KJFK load as 2048? Since the only FSDT airport that is available in 4096 is vancouver.