I'd like to chime in and report that I had an OOM with the 777 on my first flight. Have not flown it since (no time).

 

The OOM occurred when I switched to external view on (night) approach to FlyTampa's Dubai.

I have not had OOMs in a long time and none at all since building my new rig in June. I have put many many hours on the NGX without issue (and I flew into Dubai on a few occasions with her). LOD radius is 4.5 btw.

 

I can provide more details on my settings if someone from PMDG takes an interest, but the fact that my sim has been carefully configured for performance, smoothness and stability, and has run well for years makes me look at that the 777 with a little suspicion for now. Time will tell if this was an isolated incident.

I had my 1st crash today as well on short final into Flightbeam KSFO 28L. But I was running an LOD of 9.0000. I actually made it into KABQ last night with that same LOD, but of course that's a pretty light airport compared to Flightbeam's. Gonna put my LOD back to 4.5 and give SFO another go here. With my NGX I've always been able to avoid OOM and crashes running low LOD, and from fl340 there's not much detail to loose.

 

 

LOD of 9.0000

:LMAO: :LMAO:

must be a  nice approach there Robin

 

It would have been if the FMC hadn't bust the altitudes. It said it was on profile yet was too high. There was some weirdness in the flight path over the airport so I let it fly it anyway. I'll have another look tomorrow, see if it is bad data.

 

Otherwise - 8 hrs and 41 minutes! 4 minutes ahead of schedule!!!!

 

Still can't quite get used to the way she handles - there is something with the way the system counters thrust changes that I haven't figured out yet.

 

Thanks for following!!!

 

Best regards,

Robin.

Never ever had memory issues with FSX. Just got one on a long haul on the T7.

So far all those reporting issues, have all "tweaked" FSX. Please, delete the FSX.cfg, add HIGHMEMFIX=1, and try it!!!

 

Disable AutoGen and ALL AI. See if with a minimum setup you still get OOME/crashes.

 

There is also a disturbing trend of Intel users having problems. Many are seriously overclocking their processors which is not good anyway, but after all that they still complain of 10 FPS. I suggest the processors are not liking the overclock.

 

Rule #1 of troubleshooting is strip it back to the minimum.

 

One hint is if you do not have FSUIPC installed in FSX, install it. It does NOT require registration. Pete Dowson put some code in there that intercepts a certain class of CTD and prevents it taking out the simulator, helping to increase stability.

 

Above all, remember FSX is not the best piece of software to begin with. Low performance is the FSX way.

 

Best regards,

Robin.

:LMAO: :LMAO:

Lol.....well you never know till you try. It was one of those just for giggles flights. Whats even funnier is I had MSE photoscenery active for CA, AZ, NM, CO, NV, OR, and WA all at the same time, and I made it to KABQ without a hiccup! So now I just took off for KSFO from KSAN, only MSE CA, and LOD of 4.5. Looks like sh*t lol

So far all those reporting issues, have all "tweaked" FSX. Please, delete the FSX.cfg, add HIGHMEMFIX=1, and try it!!!

 

Disable AutoGen and ALL AI. See if with a minimum setup you still get OOME/crashes.

 

There is also a disturbing trend of Intel users having problems. Many are seriously overclocking their processors which is not good anyway, but after all that they still complain of 10 FPS. I suggest the processors are not liking the overclock.

 

Rule #1 of troubleshooting is strip it back to the minimum.

 

One hint is if you do not have FSUIPC installed in FSX, install it. It does NOT require registration. Pete Dowson put some code in there that intercepts a certain class of CTD and prevents it taking out the simulator, helping to increase stability.

 

Above all, remember FSX is not the best piece of software to begin with. Low performance is the FSX way.

 

Best regards,

Robin.

Overclocking a chip has nothing to do with OOM. The market is flooded with products for high end overclocking, from water blocks and radiators, to vapor phase change coolers, to motherboards with hi end components, heatsinks, and water blocks MADE for overclocking. If you know what your doing, overclocking both Intel and AMD cpu's can be very safe and effective, and is used successfully by millions of hardcore gamers world wide. In 20 years of overclocking both Intel and AMD CPU's I have NEVER fried a single cpu, video card, north bridge, south bridge, ram,etc. nadda. One could argue it decreases life of the components, but with moores law 99.9 percent of us move up to the next latest greatest mobo/cpu combo long before that's ever even an issue. My overclocked I7 runs FSX smooth as butter and stable as a rock with settings maxed. Sounds like you don't have any personal experience with the art and science of overclocking.

May I offer a suggestion here because no one seems to target ai as a possible problem, especially in Ultimate Traffic2. By default it is set to spawn 350 aircraft. Imagine 350 aircraft loaded into the sim from the time it starts, that could be too much if you have many AFACD´s installed.

 

AFACD´s increases traffic at airports and adds more structures and buildings. Have you noticed some airports are already crowded when you land. Take Frankurt, Dallas, JFK, Los Angeles, and many other major airports for instance with a modified AFACD and watch the fps drop. This too adds to the VAS and a OOM is possible.

 

Here is a possible help for UT2 users....

 

Now open Ultimate traffic 2 and change these settings under traffic options: 

Set Commercial Traffic to 40 or 50% ( you can play with this setting but 100% will cost you a lot of fps )

Set General Aviation Traffic to 20% ( trust me you skies will still be full of GA traffic )

Take the tick out of Enable Moving jetways on Ultimate traffic 2 aircraft ( this will give you a small boost in fps at bigger airports )

Utilities section - In game settings:

Lower the maximum aircraft to spawn to about 200 to 250 acft ( unless you tend to watch a lot of ai flying around )

 

Just trying to help.

 

 

George Clark

Changed tex max load to 2048.  INstalled the 2048 FSDT CYVR.  Sitting at gate with 2.9 VAS load monitored by Process Explorer.  Sound good?  Who knows what I had before.  Obviously it was not good.  Fingers crossed.  Thanks gents.  I'm out.  

Should be good to go with that. You have a whole 1GB of space as a buffer now.  I always monitor my VAS with process explorer. Very simple thing to do. 

 

I had my 1st crash today as well on short final into Flightbeam KSFO 28L. But I was running an LOD of 9.0000. 

Your just begging and pleading for a crashed OOM arent you.  :lol:

 

May I offer a suggestion here because no one seems to target ai as a possible problem, especially in Ultimate Traffic2. By default it is set to spawn 350 aircraft. Imagine 350 aircraft loaded into the sim from the time it starts, that could be too much if you have many AFACD´s installed.

 

 

Strange as it may seem, alot of people point to this as big OOM contributor. I myself have alot of custom AI running 70%. I noted the VAS, and then put it to zero. It barely changed. Maybe 100mb worth and thats it. If anything , alot of AI contribute to a degradation in performance. Notches the FPS down a bit. 

 

Im not sure if DX10 has something to do with that, and was allocated to VRAM but i doubt it. 

Reading some of the responses above. I know there is a lot of well meaning advice in there, but ultimately the issue seems to be blamed on the user, sometimes with some questionable "technical explanations" if I may say so.

 

In the interest of seeing this issue investigated and to refocus the discussion I'd like to reiterate what I and others have reported here. It can be summed up in one simple sentence:

 

Sim runs fine with NGX, but at identical settings and the running the 777 instead FSX runs out of available memory for some of us.

 

Now if the 777 has a bigger memory footprint I have reduce settings. Nothing else for it, and just as is stated in the manual.

But since PMDG have stated that the 777 is comparable or better performing then the NGX clearly something is amiss here.

 

If that is indeed the case we will see a lot more of this issue. Time will tell I suppose.

The ngx doesnt need to run in 4096 textures. It still looks great at 2048.

The default textures are 4096. They still show even though you have 1024 in your config. That's true for a lot of addons(carenado). If there's only one version of the texture, that's the only one that can show. If you want lower res vc textures, choose them in the performance manager.

It can be summed up in one simple sentence:

Sim runs fine with NGX, but at identical settings and the running the 777 instead FSX runs out of available memory for some of us.

Now if the 777 has a bigger memory footprint I have reduce settings. Nothing else for it, and just as is stated in the manual.

But since PMDG have stated that the 777 is comparable or better performing then the NGX clearly something is amiss here.

.

You do have a point here.

 

even though most previously mentioned advice is valid in my opinion, it is strange that one has OOMs with the 777 but not the 737!

Once I had a OOM and the msg appeared to tell me that, I didn't press the Ok button and it let me end the flight. Don't know if that is normal, but you can try. If you press the ok button, you will exit. You can give it a try not pressing it, and leaving the message box semihided (I was in window mode)

 

 

Should be good to go with that. You have a whole 1GB of space as a buffer now.  I always monitor my VAS with process explorer. Very simple thing to do. 

 

I then just started flying her around wildly over vancouver constantly checking the VAS.  I had to bring down the autogen a tad from what is in the Intro manual to get it to a comfortable level.  

 

 

it is strange that one has OOMs with the 777 but not the 737!

 

I think that is the tone of the thread.  If it's user config, or some difference between aircraft, who knows.