You're not doing anything wrong. I used to get 23 at tops over KSEA in the C172 with an i7-950 at 4.48 - could never hit 4.5 - drove me up the wall. I discovered that sliding the FFTF down relieved the stutters, and winding back a few other things. ok - a lot of other things...

 

4.5 and a 560 + the NGX and KLAX are the problems, Kyle - they're both known hogs, so you need to turn something more back. Did you move all of the suggested config parameters back some? A 19" monitor isn't much of a load for a 560, but italso isn't the fastest deer in the woods, either.

 

 

 

tried disabling bufferpools

 Don't "guess" at fixes. All of these parameters are there for a reason, and affect the sim in different, but specific ways. The Killers are:-

Cloud levels, their type, detail, draw distance, 32 bit, DXT1. Find out and fix them, or clear weather altogether.

Traffic:- AI and GA at the same time, is a killer.

More that "1" airport vehicles is a killer.

No boats, no ships.

Image complexity.... is it still at 5?

Swap Wait Timeout is better at 3

Are you loading all of Europe, all of Australia, Asia, India, South America???

Is your LOD still at 6.5?

 

OK!

 

 

I can't get above 20fps at FSDT KLAX with NGX VC.

 

I just looked at your NI settings and see that your have AA - Transparency Supersampling (4x Sparse Grid Supersampling).  According to NickN in that link I provided to you above (sorry PJ), this is a framerate killer and you should not use it unless you absolutely have to and then it should be no higher than 2x Sparse Grid SS.  According to his site he use to work with Nvidia as a tech and did a lot of research on the best settings for FSX.

 

Best regards,

Jim

Hiya, Jim. I thought so too, but 4x is kinda low already, and if there was some other way.... well, you know! But you're right, of course. We also have no idea about how the rest of the pc is set up. One has to pull back on the things that we KNOW are frame killers. One can always then inch them up while testing. Unfortunately with the kind of water detail we now have - I expect it may contribute to shimmering.....

 

:wink: 

You're not doing anything wrong. I used to get 23 at tops over KSEA in the C172 with an i7-950 at 4.48 - could never hit 4.5 - drove me up the wall. I discovered that sliding the FFTF down relieved the stutters, and winding back a few other things. ok - a lot of other things...

 

4.5 and a 560 + the NGX and KLAX are the problems, Kyle - they're both known hogs, so you need to turn something more back. Did you move all of the suggested config parameters back some? A 19" monitor isn't much of a load for a 560, but italso isn't the fastest deer in the woods, either.

 

 

 

 Don't "guess" at fixes. All of these parameters are there for a reason, and affect the sim in different, but specific ways. The Killers are:-

Cloud levels, their type, detail, draw distance, 32 bit, DXT1. Find out and fix them, or clear weather altogether.

Traffic:- AI and GA at the same time, is a killer.

More that "1" airport vehicles is a killer.

No boats, no ships.

Image complexity.... is it still at 5?

Swap Wait Timeout is better at 3

Are you loading all of Europe, all of Australia, Asia, India, South America???

Is your LOD still at 6.5?

 

OK!

 

 

Traffic: 0% AI and 0% GA, 0% boats, 0% ships.

Image complexity is at 3

"Are you loading all of Europe, all of Australia, Asia, India, South America???" - I assume so... Haven't seen much on this except all those areas are default and when I'm not flying in an Orbx region I disable them.

LOD is at 4.5

I also turned off lens flare as I know that has caused frame issues before.

 

With my system specs it should handle this all pretty well, I've also got FSX on it's own dedicated HDD. I can say this with a fair amount of confidence because in DX9 I can run the NGX VC and FSDT airports with a steady 25fps, down to 15-20 in DX10. I'm not arguing (you guys are the kings when it comes to DX10 and FSX  B)  ) I am just confused as to why it isn't at least the same performance.

 

 

I just looked at your NI settings and see that your have AA - Transparency Supersampling (4x Sparse Grid Supersampling).  According to NickN in that link I provided to you above (sorry PJ), this is a framerate killer and you should not use it unless you absolutely have to and then it should be no higher than 2x Sparse Grid SS.  According to his site he use to work with Nvidia as a tech and did a lot of research on the best settings for FSX.

 

Best regards,

Jim

 

 

I have also tried with 2x Sparse Grid SS with no noticeable difference. 

 

I, too use a lowered tree and building count, using the figures which Holger Sandemann (who should know!) has defined on a couple of forums in the past.

These are pretty close to Jim's figures, too:-

 

TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_BUILDINGS_PER_CELL=907

TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_TREES_PER_CELL=1376

 

 

Hi Paul,

just stumbled over these odd figures and was curious to see what will happen on my system, so I tried them. I usually have 2800/3800 in my fsx.cfg.

I used a very remote area (HC1A) to check the difference but there was none for me. FPS the same and the amount of trees obviously the same but I didn't count them. :rolleyes:

I guess if a rig is powerful enough than one can't see any difference.

So I decided to stay with my figures but do you know how Holger got these odd figures?

Spirit

There is a post somewhere, Spirit, by Holger detailing this, but it's a couple of years ago, and I don't have the link anymore. Holger has a very long history with the MS flight sim. He has built more 'Misty Moorings', 'Tongass Fjords', Alaska, Vancouver area and PNW territory than you can shake a stick at. He partners up with Jon Patch (Vancouver+), and now does work for Orbx too, but what capacity I don't know. You can also find some of his work here. He is probably one of the world's leading figures when it comes to FS scenery design.

 

 

So I decided to stay with my figures but do you know how Holger got these odd figures?

 

Found this on the internet:

 

1376 trees per 1.2km cell squared. This value was based on a city in South Yorkshire, England called Sheffield that is known for having more trees per person than any other city in Europe.

907 buildings per 1.2km cell squared. This value was based on the building density per 1.0 km squared in the city of Hong Kong, China.

 

Don't ask me why Sheffield and Hong Kong were chosen. ^_^ However, choosing a city to set the max for trees is a bit odd because you obviously (imho) should use a (dense forest) for that: now you will get the same amount of trees in a forest as you would get in a city which is a bit odd because that means you will never ever see a (extremely) dense forest with that setting.

One of Holger's, found this morning here, is the :

 

For buildings the 3000 is a bit silly as even the most densly packed urban areas in FSX don't have more than ~1500 buildings per cell (a cell being 1.2km x 1.2km). For trees though the upper limit can be reached quite easily, which is why reducing the max autogendensity makes sense. That way you can pull the slider to the right and enjoy full or nearly full building density without clobbering your system with a quarter million trees in your viewshed.

So - I will move my buildings back to the default and leave the trees where they are, and see where she goes...