It's time for a poll on this I think.  It's a chunk of $$ to spend and I can live with that unless it's really come up against the inherent memory limits in 32-bit applications.  It's sad we don't have a 64-bit simulator that can use this wonderful handiwork!  Even so, I can't tell how many users are experiencing this. 

I'm not sure why these threads still keep popping up.  The NGX also had higher VAS than anticipated when it was released, but it was addressed through SP1c.

 

Everyones simulator is different, and just because someone is getting OOMs with the 777 doesn't mean you will.  The only thing people need to know is that the 777 does use more VAS than the NGX (by about 100 - 200MB).  Therefore, if you are flying around the NGX with jacked up settings and getting close to 4GB, there is a chance that the 777 is going to push you over the limit (which is what is happening to most people).  You can get Process Explorer to check your current VAS when flying around the NGX, add about 100 - 200 MB to that, and that is about where you will sit with the 777.  There are, obviously, no 100% standardized method in which to measure what you will get - as weather, scenery, AI, third party add-ons, etc. are all different every time you load the simulator.

 

It's not rocket science that you can only inject so many add-ons into FSX - a 32-bit application - before you have to start making compromises in places.  There are many tweak threads floating around on methods people have used to reduce their VAS.

Why not post this in the PMDG General forum?



People just expect similar VAS usage to the NGX. Many people suggest that we should tweak our settings for the 777. I disagree, many of us have found a very good sweetspot between FPS, graphics, and VAS usage, and we don't want to start testing all over again. Therefore I expect from PMDG to make their aircraft have similar VAS usage as the NGX. I know that doesn't come magically, but then it should be tweaked by them. If that comes at a cost of eye candy, it's worth it. Playability is more important. 

 

 

I'm not sure why these threads still keep popping up.  The NGX also had higher VAS than anticipated when it was released, but it was addressed through SP1c.
 
Everyones simulator is different, and just because someone is getting OOMs with the 777 doesn't mean you will.

 

Here, let me re-explain it to you:  'I can't tell how many users are experiencing this...'

 

Most people here have higher end hardware right now and as the poll so far notes very few experience OOMs in the recent past.  Now there is the occasional discussion so I have attempted to turn pure random anecdote into something somewhat more meaningful.

 

 

Why not post this in the PMDG General forum?

 

Out of concern they might close the discussion, primarily.  From the thread next door:

 

'I have posted my experiences over in the PMDG forum but got no answers and eventually the thread was closed.'

IMHO, saving and reloading a flight is the best way to solve OOM when VAS is approaching 4G limit.

Never had an OOM. Dont have a bunch of that fancy dancy, poorly designed scenery installed either. Just FTXGlobal and a few airports.. Also run  a dedicated sim computer with 16 processes running FSX ONLY.

Yeah, bad wording on the title. Should've read - Are you getting OOM's after 1 hour of FSX use? Then most would say yes. Which is why I'm seeing a few screenshots of the the 777 on short legs.

Good idea I agree, however, how often does anyone fly a T7 for less than one hour?  It's going to take 20 minutes just to get the plane in the air.   That being the case you're saying 'then most ...' people responding here haven't flown over 40 minutes at a time in their brand new T7?  That's sounds pretty unlikely.

I have done KATL-OMDB,VRMM-OMDB and KBOS-EGLL,With only a flexnet issue,after the EGLL flight

IMHO, saving and reloading a flight is the best way to solve OOM when VAS is approaching 4G limit.

very good thinking .

I dont even turn on the VAS counter unless IM in ORBX territory

I was going to avoid this topic because helping never seems to go anywhere and in fact the last thread was shutdown. 

There simply is no two ways to put this. It is not one aircraft, or scenery area, or an airport that causes OOMs. Its a cummulative combination of what is running, in conjuction with your settings. If they dont all fit into the 4gb limit that is like a hard altitude restriction on a STAR meaning there is no ifs ands or buts about it, there is going to be consequences. 

See my post on that thread.  http://forum.avsim.net/topic/418602-out-of-memory/?p=2778959

 

The best way to tackle it is place the ngx or 777 in no mans land where nothing much of anything loads, and note your VAS and work up from there. Each new situation must be a fresh reload of fsx. It is only about balance and compromise. You just cant have it all. Period. If by the time you work your way up to a busy detailed airport with AI and other area scenery and your at 3.6gb from a fresh load your already demanding too much of FSX. Back it off. There are a ton of suggestions to reduce the chances of OOM. Implement them. They are all in that previous thread. We all demand superior quality and detail, and performance but then when 777 comes out we complain there is OOMs. From a software foundation that is old and crackling, with poor code and built 7 years ago. 

Here, let me re-explain it to you:  'I can't tell how many users are experiencing this...'

 

Most people here have higher end hardware right now and as the poll so far notes very few experience OOMs in the recent past.  Now there is the occasional discussion so I have attempted to turn pure random anecdote into something somewhat more meaningful.

(...)

 

 

If I have better hardware I'm tempted to set my sliders farther to the right. If I set them farther to the right the risk of an OOM increases(!).

 

OOMs are not hardware/RAM related - they are VAS/32bit app-related.

FSUIPC is the saving grace here. It auto saves and if you ever get an OOM you are never far off where you last left off, for me I never lose more than five minutes of flight if I do get one.

 

(my OOM became more rare once I set Texture Max Load to 2048, with that keep in mind OOM is getting to be more and more often as we add and add and add more and more to our sim).

Never had an oom with the t7.

 

Have flown VBMM OMDB, OMDB RJGG, RJGG KLAX. I'm now on my way to Cook Islands.

 

All done in real time.

I have had 2 OOM's but not only with the 777, then I have disabled the Regions and the Airports I didn't Need for the Flight and it Runs perfect!! I'm using SceneryConfigEditor with "Groups" that I can deactivate. (I have 16GB RAM)

I was going to avoid this topic because helping never seems to go anywhere and in fact the last thread was shutdown. 

There simply is no two ways to put this. It is not one aircraft, or scenery area, or an airport that causes OOMs. Its a cummulative combination of what is running, in conjuction with your settings. If they dont all fit into the 4gb limit that is like a hard altitude restriction on a STAR meaning there is no ifs ands or buts about it, there is going to be consequences. 

See my post on that thread.  http://forum.avsim.net/topic/418602-out-of-memory/?p=2778959

 

The best way to tackle it is place the ngx or 777 in no mans land where nothing much of anything loads, and note your VAS and work up from there. Each new situation must be a fresh reload of fsx. It is only about balance and compromise. You just cant have it all. Period. If by the time you work your way up to a busy detailed airport with AI and other area scenery and your at 3.6gb from a fresh load your already demanding too much of FSX. Back it off. There are a ton of suggestions to reduce the chances of OOM. Implement them. They are all in that previous thread. We all demand superior quality and detail, and performance but then when 777 comes out we complain there is OOMs. From a software foundation that is old and crackling, with poor code and built 7 years ago. 

Brilliant post..