I apply venetubo with a freshly built fsx.cfg, too. But I delete the AffinityMask entry afterwards ...

I apply venetubo with a freshly built fsx.cfg, too. But I delete the AffinityMask entry afterwards ...

Another one that can bite you when your not looking Olli, is Sound_LOD=1. Set it to 0. It can cause third party sound to not work correctly in certain circumstances. It was good tweak in the old Pentium systems

^{AMD are better processors for a few reasons:}

^{Price - AMD chips are significantly cheaper than Intel in most cases.}

^{Power Consumption - AMD processors tend to use much less power than an Intel equivalent.}

^{Temperature - AMD chips often run cooler than Intel. This means the computer might run quieter too.}

Maybe those are corrct points.

 

But in my case, when building an FSX PC I wanted to build the best performing PC in terms of frame rate, smooth flight, no blurry textures etc.

 

Power consumption was not important to me (I know that sounds terrible in times like these and I am normally not someone who like to waste recources)

 

Noise is also not important to me because this PC is not in my living room and the sound of the airplane is still way louder than my PC. I even overclocked the PC and bought bigger and noisier fans to keep things cool.

 

Temperature...well if AMD performs less than Intell that could explain why they run cooler (if that is true which I dont know). But I have achieved a 4.4 - 4.5 stable overclock with temps high, but within limits while stress testing.

Now if an AMD can do that while being 10 or 20C or more cooler than that would be something worth looking into. However if that cooler temp comes at the exsepense of even the slightest performance reduction (frame rate, stutters, blurries) then I will stay with the hotter Intell.

 

Price is also a valid point. But like I said, I wanted the best I could afford/was willing to invest. This is different for everybody and so, yes you can choose AMD for that reason.

However one must than also accept the (possibly) lower performance and not complain about it.

 

But as I stated previously ... I'll collate my settings ... with reference to certain basic concepts of hardware assumptions ... and report back to the crowd

Yes, Please do that. I strongly believe that we learn more from the problems and solutions of the layman (not being demeaning here), than we do from the Gurus (no offence intended to them either).

 

Regards,

I guess it is pointless to reply to you....so I am replying here to help others. So that they dont kill as many PCs (or FSX setups I guess) as you. Something you seem to be so proud of.(I just found another thread where you are stating and advising very curios things).

 

By breaking I mean hacking (security research is very interesting), and what dodgy curious things have I allegedly been advising? You will see I am vehemently opposed to overclocking because you can cause an early death of system components, I always advise that you ensure the system runs as cool as possible, and not on the thermal limits like many seem to do, etc...

 

I make posts that resolve problems (such as avoidance of memory leaks due to landclass files). This is hardly a bad thing.

 

So please, instead of trying to tarnish my reputation, how about you come out with facts?

 

As for watching FPS - I don't do that. I merely use it as a guide when testing things. I aim for the fastest performance - stutters have never been an issue for me.

 

As the OP stated on page 3 (and I'll quote if you like), he was so busy flying the Parkway Visual, he didn't have time to look at the scenery. This is why I live with all the eye-candy disabled, because my thing in FS is instrument flying (usually at night or in poor viz which forces you to fly the instruments - no cheating by looking out the window), and to correct an earlier post of yours, I do have scenery, only it is airport scenery, not broader geographic scenery. I only care about whether the nav aids are in the correct place or not.

 

To give you a better idea of how I fly FSX, I sit here with a list of waypoints, distances/bearings, stopwatch and E-6B, and navigate oceanic with only those tools in the A2As B377 on occassion. So, eye-candy is very low on my list of things to worry about. I even wrote an application that produces the nav log and computes aircraft performance (e.g. ToC and ToD points), and plots it on a map (and I don't mean Google Earth - I wrote the mapping system as well - working with Mercator projection was an interesting task). THIS is what I do for fun!

 

You can mock me all you like - I know what I'm talking about. :mellow:

 

Best regards,

Robin.

 

 

live with all the eye-candy disabled,

guess you havnt  got any payware scenery than

.

i will put my 2 cents worth and say i have a 3770k overclocked to 4.5ghz which runs during FSX at about 45c never goes above 51c.

 

I have all sliders on max except AI and airport vehicles

 

i have uk2000 airports, ftx eng and wales, rex, as2012, gex, utx

 

i get around 40fps in the vc at gatwick online using vatsim.

 

i have had 1 or 2 oom but 99% of time i can do a full 15hr flight without any issues.

 

i have tweaked my cfg using  ventuboo and also followed some tweaks on nickn

 

i will say that not all of the tweaks work on my system i assume every system is different.

I do not look for fps tho i am after smooth flight that looks real and i have now accomplished this

 

this is obviously my own opnion and results (others may vary)

 

 

You can mock me all you like - I know what I'm talking about. :mellow:

 

Best regards,

Robin.

 

 

 

Unlike you, with your "superior" AMD rig, that necessitates that you have to dial down all settings to avoid issues in FSX...

 

I have sliders mid way, some high, some very high, Autogen very high. High levels of AA. Last night I found myself in the Lancair at 120 frames per second, would have been higher, but my monitors refresh rate is 120 Hz and VSync is on. The PMDG 777 is 45 frames per second in a HEAVY weather scenario. Never lower than 35. With UTX, REX, GEX. Looks great, and NO STUTTERS. I have never had an OOM in my life. No crashes.

 

BP=0 made a phenomenal difference for me in terms of frame rate and smoothness. So please, don't tell us [those that know from experience] that something fails to work when it obviously does. Do you think we are fools? Do you think we have just added these tweaks and not bothered to test??? Of course we haven't. Most of us have tested extensively, and KNOW that the tweaks we use actually work.

 

The only point you have made that is actually true, is that unlimited frame rate is advised. It is, if your rig can handle it without stutters. Mine can.

 

Everything you claim as impossible, I can do. I get very high frame rates like you do, but WITH reasonable slider settings. high AA. Reasonable eye candy PLUS high frame rate.

 

Want to see a screenshot in ANY weather scenario? I'll gladly provide.

 

 

 

Sorry Robin, but you actually don't know what you are talking about. You are bizarrely wrong. Just like your bizarrely contradictory responses to Rob above. But knowing you for as long as I have, I'm used to this stuff.

BP=0 made a phenomenal difference for me in terms of frame rate and smoothness. So please, don't tell us [those that know from experience] that something fails to work when it obviously does.

 

More assumptions. You think I didn't try it out of sheer curiosity??? Only made it CTD for me, with no discernible benefit.

 

If I want a sim that crashes, then yes, sure, I can turn up all the details, but as I posted further up - what is the point if it means I'm likely to encounter a CTD????

 

It is not my "superior" AMD that is the reason it crashes - it's the fact FSX is buggy as hell.

 

Sorry Robin, but you actually don't know what you are talking about. You are bizarrely wrong. Just like your bizarrely contradictory responses to Rob above.

 

Contradictory? How so? Please quote.

 

Best regards,

Robin.

i will put my 2 cents worth and say i have a 3770k overclocked to 4.5ghz which runs during FSX at about 45c never goes above 51c.

 

I have all sliders on max except AI and airport vehicles

 

i have uk2000 airports, ftx eng and wales, rex, as2012, gex, utx

 

i get around 40fps in the vc at gatwick online using vatsim.

 

i have had 1 or 2 oom but 99% of time i can do a full 15hr flight without any issues.

 

i have tweaked my cfg using  ventuboo and also followed some tweaks on nickn

 

i will say that not all of the tweaks work on my system i assume every system is different.

I do not look for fps tho i am after smooth flight that looks real and i have now accomplished this

 

this is obviously my own opnion and results (others may vary)

Wow 45 deg is pretty good for that o/c on that CPU. I'm maxing out at 53 deg in FSX. What cooler are you using Stewart?

 

Regards,

More assumptions. You think I didn't try it out of sheer curiosity??? Only made it CTD for me, with no discernible benefit.

 

If I want a sim that crashes, then yes, sure, I can turn up all the details, but as I posted further up - what is the point if it means I'm likely to encounter a CTD????

 

It is not my "superior" AMD that is the reason it crashes - it's the fact FSX is buggy as hell.

 

 

Contradictory? How so?

 

Best regards,

Robin.

 

 

More assumptions. You think I didn't try it out of sheer curiosity??? Only made it CTD for me, with no discernible benefit.

 

You are misquoting. I didn't say you didn't test, I said we did, you shouldn't claim something doesn't work simply because you couldn't make it work on your rig. BP=0 will only help those with a GPU that has 1 GB memory or greater. Mine has 4. Your expertise and hardware failed you and ours didn't.

 

If I want a sim that crashes, then yes, sure, I can turn up all the details, but as I posted further up - what is the point if it means I'm likely to encounter a CTD????

 

 

Out of context! The point is many of us including me can "turn up the details" higher than you with no crashes. So you shouldn't make sweeping statements that claims such things are not possible just because you can't. If you can't, look to your own settings, your own components, your own philosophy. You are doing something wrong, I'm not and many others aren't.

 

It is not my "superior" AMD that is the reason it crashes - it's the fact FSX is buggy as hell.

 

And none of those "bugs" affect me and many others. And again, your reply is out of context. I can run with medium to high sliders, GEX, UTX, heavy REX clouds, heavy add-on aircraft, very high frame rates, something you admit you can't do... so trashing tweaks that work for many, Intel processors, and anything but super low sliders is bizarre. Hyper detailed add-on airports cause issues such as OOM's, not a weird FSX deficiency that mans we all have to run with super low sliders.

 

 

 

Hardware has now got to the point [as long as we don't expect miracles] that it can run FSX VERY well. You can't, because your outdated AMD rig hasn't the necessary credentials.

 

3770K @ 4.4 GHz

GTX 770 Superclocked 4 GB Duel BIOS

8 GB DDR3

 

 

 

Contradictory? How so?

 

8 posts up, page 3.

I have a custom watercooled pc inc graphics card and CPU on normal gaming I run at 35-42c

I didn't say YOU didn't test, I said WE DID... so don't claim something doesn't work simply because you couldn't make it work on your rig. BP=0 will only help those with a GPU that has 1 GB memory or greater. Mine has 4. Shame your expertise failed you and ours didn't.

 

Expertise has nothing to do with it. For a start, the base value is hardcoded, and I can't be bothered to reverse engineer FS to find out what it is. Second, the advice is generally "oh set BP=0 and all will be fine". I tried it, and it didn't do anything. FYI my card has 1 Gb memory...

 

You claimed BP=0 was a waste of time, didn't work, and ill-advised

 

Correct. The key words here are ill advised. I never said don't do it. It's your system - break it if you like. Just don't cry if you do.

 

because you couldn't make it work. It isn't for many others including me.

 

Well that is good. Refer to my post where I state that rule number 1 of troubleshooting is strip it back to basics and see if it still works, then go from there. Seems people dive straight in with "it didn;t work so I tweaked it as per 3 people's recommendations". Bad place to start.

 

And none of those "bugs" affect me and many others.

 

Actually yes they do, only for some reason your specific config is causing it not to manifest itself as quickly. A programming bug doesn't choose which hardware it will appear on, unless the bug is in the hardware itself (famous example: FDIV bug: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_FDIV_bug )

 

If I allocate 10 bytes of memory and fail to free it, it will always leak that memory regardless of which system I run the program on. Whether you see adverse effects of that bug depends on many factors. Real-world example: changing the step-climb size in 777 results in FSX locking up (not crashing) requiring me to force-exit. Not everyone sees this bug, but it is there.

 

so trashing tweaks that work for many, Intel processors, and anything but super low sliders is bizarre.

 

...because I clearly didn't make it clear enough that I have NOT set those sliders because of performance! Performance has never been the issue - stability has. AutoGen - results in CTDs after several hours. AI traffic leaks memory (well documented - in fact to be super-specific about it - the ground traffic - the cars - is where the memory leak is - they are drawn, but when they disappear, they are not freed from memory! Memory leak will lead to a CTD or OOME eventually).

 

8 posts up, page 3.

 

* reads *  Can you link it? It seems we have different page display settings. 8 posts up on either page is not my post.

 

Check your PM.

 

Best regards,

Robin.

By breaking I mean hacking (security research is very interesting), and what dodgy curious things have I allegedly been advising? You will see I am vehemently opposed to overclocking because you can cause an early death of system components, I always advise that you ensure the system runs as cool as possible, and not on the thermal limits like many seem to do, etc...

 

I make posts that resolve problems (such as avoidance of memory leaks due to landclass files). This is hardly a bad thing.

 

So please, instead of trying to tarnish my reputation, how about you come out with facts?

 

As for watching FPS - I don't do that. I merely use it as a guide when testing things. I aim for the fastest performance - stutters have never been an issue for me.

 

As the OP stated on page 3 (and I'll quote if you like), he was so busy flying the Parkway Visual, he didn't have time to look at the scenery. This is why I live with all the eye-candy disabled, because my thing in FS is instrument flying (usually at night or in poor viz which forces you to fly the instruments - no cheating by looking out the window), and to correct an earlier post of yours, I do have scenery, only it is airport scenery, not broader geographic scenery. I only care about whether the nav aids are in the correct place or not.

 

To give you a better idea of how I fly FSX, I sit here with a list of waypoints, distances/bearings, stopwatch and E-6B, and navigate oceanic with only those tools in the A2As B377 on occassion. So, eye-candy is very low on my list of things to worry about. I even wrote an application that produces the nav log and computes aircraft performance (e.g. ToC and ToD points), and plots it on a map (and I don't mean Google Earth - I wrote the mapping system as well - working with Mercator projection was an interesting task). THIS is what I do for fun!

 

You can mock me all you like - I know what I'm talking about. :mellow:

 

Best regards,

Robin.

I feel we are finally slowly getting back to reality here.

 

It is one thing to not require much addon scenery but something totally different to imply everybody is better of without that (and AI and Autogen).

I do only IFR flying as well.

And like you I have no need for detailed worldwide scenry like ORBX or huge photogen areas. And yet...I would love to try Mega LasVegas for example or the new Drzewiecki Manhattan scenery :-)

I choose to use GEX and UTX instead as they require enough detail for my use plus they leave some headroom for addons like PMDG777.

And just like you I additionally only buy addon airports because I need the runway layout and nav aids to be accurate.

(The one exception I bought is Manhattan X which definately gets me very close to OOMing when I fly the PMDG777 around it. But this is normal and expected. All one needs to do is set priorities and the OOM problem is gone again).

 

Still though, I would never suggest to anybody that he/she should stay away from ORBX or Manhattan X or whatever.

Instead I would make suggestion that could help make what he/she desires work on his/her system.

And I think if you did just that, then we would not be having this conversation.

 

I am not trying to ruin your reputation.

I was not aware you have one (no sarcasm, I just dont know if you have been around that long that you are generally accepted as a specialist or that you are just claming to be one).

But when you post things like "a three year old AMD does better than a 4770k with a GTX780 and everybody has to shut down AI Traffic and Autogen" you dont need any further help destroying your rep.

 

I said before that I am not a specialist.

So I am not sure I can give you the proof you need.

But first tell me what you want me to prove to you?

Or what facts you would like to hear from me?

I mean that....tell me what it is you want to hear from me.....and I will give you an honest answere.

 

I dont stare at the fps counter either. My main goal is to achieve acceptable FSX settings so that I can maintain 30fps most of the times (over Manhattan X not possible but I accept that) because with the 1/2Vsync method and 30fps I get a silky smooth stutter free FSX experience.

 

quote

I make posts that resolve problems (such as avoidance of memory leaks due to landclass files). This is hardly a bad thing.

unquote

 

No that is a good thing.

But I already asked you somewhere else...are you saying every landclass file will have a memory leak?

Because I dont think I have memory leaks and UTX provides landclass (and more)

Many people use ORBX which also has landclass.....are you saying anybody with a product like that will end up with a memory leak and will end up OOMing?

 

There was a guy here at AVSIM who realy did have a memory leak.

He was sitting at the runway, doing nothing and after a while he would OOM.

He found what product caused it and then found a way to work around it.

A memory leak is a phenomenon where VAS just keeps rising and rising untill you OOM as far as I know.

It is a bug in the product. I would uninstall a product with bugs like that.

I would not move it somewhere else in the FSX library, I would completely remove it.

A memory leak is not the same as just having a steady high VAS due to flying with the PMDG777 over Manhattan X.

And that is why it does not make sence to suggest not using scenery addons or landclass because of memory leaks.

Products dont have memory leaks unless they are buggy.

Which is why I always investigate addons I intend to buy. I read forums to see if others are having problems with the product so I can make an educated decision on whether or not to purchase the product.

Last thing I would want to do is ruin my precious functioning FSX install!

Anyway that is how I understand the memory leak subject.

I dont mind being corrected if I am wrong.

 

Quote

To give you a better idea of how I fly FSX, I sit here with a list of waypoints, distances/bearings, stopwatch and E-6B, and navigate oceanic with only those tools in the A2As B377 on occassion. So, eye-candy is very low on my list of things to worry about. I even wrote an application that produces the nav log and computes aircraft performance (e.g. ToC and ToD points), and plots it on a map (and I don't mean Google Earth - I wrote the mapping system as well - working with Mercator projection was an interesting task). THIS is what I do for fun!

Unquote

 

Very impressive indeed :-) I mean that and I think it is cool!

BUT

And I would love to do that as well...just dont have the time right now.

However this is not the kind of flying everybody wants to do!

And when you suggest things to other users you have to be able to put yourself in their position rather than asking them to fly like you or I do.

Others want to fly VFR with their A2A Piper Cup over ORBX scenery.

And suggesting them to turn off Autogen and not use ORBX or any other landclass because that will cause CTD and OOM, is not getting them any closer to their goal.

 

Regards

Wow 45 deg is pretty good for that o/c on that CPU. I'm maxing out at 53 deg in FSX. What cooler are you using Stewart?

Regards,

I was going to say the same....then I noticed this temps are when running FSX, not when stress testing! I will have a look what my system does temp wise with FsX running.