Affinity mask setting?

[SteveW 1,792]

AffinityMask=0? Err, yes well you've completely missed my point about it hehe.

[Bewsher 0]

Oh. Got it Steve.

[SteveW 1,792]

Yes, I thought it was worth considering what it means, not suggesting it's the way to go.

[Bewsher 0]

Just a follow up to this! I just received a GTX 770 with 4gigs memory from a 2gig model.  What a difference the Vram made to Prepar3d, and now without the Affinitymask setting it screams along with Ultra settings.Clouds down tho, but scenery up to dense. Just incredible, no overclocking too. I tried with Affinitymask=252 and that came close but geez what a rush.

[RaptyrOne 1,428]

Why do some say 252 and others advocate 84 for an AF setting on a quad core with HT on?

 

Which one is right?

[Bewsher 0]

Works different for different people. God knows ive experimented with all affinity settings and found now no affinitymask line is needed on my rig. For you Just adjust the detail and try 84 then 252 or 254. And then 6 core CPUS that changes again (irrelevant to us). I've played around with the prepar3d.cfg file and adjusted the Texture Bandwidth multi up to 620 and its a bit smoother but again different results on different PCs. Also set your graphics settings for maximum performances.

[Bewsher 0]

Just an observation. With a GTX 770 4gig card with a 4 core CPU you can pretty much max it all out except tessellation and cloud shadows. The texture bandwidth multi thingy does not needed to be edited either (should be left a 30) as I stated above (wrong on that front too). Amazed that Prepar3d comes pretty much ready to fly. But in the end I had to upgrade in order to have this flight sim running well enough as all affinity settings never worked right on the GTX 770 2gig VC. Sorry if im ranting but I just have to get this out as I feel its pretty good template to go by. Lucky those with 6 and 12 cores who will get better performance. Cant wait for 2.3.

[Arwen 289]

Why do some say 252 and others advocate 84 for an AF setting on a quad core with HT on?

 

Which one is right?

Actually AffinityMask=242 works best for me.  Read THIS thread on the official P3D forums:

 

Quote from Beau on April 24, 2014, 08:24

A few other observations we have made in our testing:

- For some processors core 0 is clocked a bit higher.  There isn't actually a dedicated windows core.  Windows and other windows applications may schedule work on any core at any time.  The OS does however try to load balance work, so if you leave a core open, it is much more likely to schedule work on that core.  I don't think it considers a core open unless both HT cores are open.  This is why masking off an entire core tends to help with stutters.  We haven't done a lot of testing to back this up, but some initial findings suggest that you can leave open whichever core you choose.  It might be better to use the first core and leave open a different core:

 

eg for a quad core with hyper threading try: 241/242 ( 11110001 / 11110010 ) or 61/62( 00111101 / 00111110 ).

 

We also noticed that the AMD Phenom processor doesn't like having any cores masked off as anything but using all cores caused odd stutters which seemed to be related to hardware and OS rather than simply having one less core to play with.

[MikeT707 1,181]

 

 

With a GTX 770 4gig card with a 4 core CPU you can pretty much max it all out except tessellation and cloud shadows.

 

I have a 4 core CPU and 770/4 and I agree.  You can pretty much go close to full throttle with your settings.  One note though, I thought that moving tessellation all the way up actually helped if you have a good GPU as it is supposed to move more processing off of the CPU and on to the GPU.  At least that is what I remember form a posting that Beau made on the LM forum some time ago.  I have mine all the way up and do not see any negative impact, but I guess it depends on one's system.

[Bewsher 0]

Yeah. I tried tessellation at ultra and it choked at honolulu scenery. When i went back to medium it loved it. Agreed how each system adjusts to the settings. I heard about that maxing load to GPU. But to be able just to install and go i like to see FSX do that.

[gboz 157]

eg for a quad core with hyper threading try: 241/242 ( 11110001 / 11110010 ) or 61/62( 00111101 / 00111110 ).

 

Actually AffinityMask=242 works best for me.  Read THIS thread on the official P3D forums:

 

Anyone know why they are masking three cores here instead of two?

 

gb.

[vp49p3 216]

The Gatwick Flight Sim Club has an affinity mask calculator.  You click on the number of cores and whether or not hyper threading is enabled and it spits out the correct number for leaving core 0 for the operating system and flight sim on the other cores.  No binary counting needed.  After confirming with CPUZ that hyper threading was enabled, I added the AF mask number it gave me.  I then launched P3Dv2.2, minimized it, and opened the performance tab of task manager.  Voila, core 0 was hardly being used, while the remainder of the cores were all working for P3D.  Put P3d in full screen and maxed all display settings and locked frames at 25.  Flew the A2A 172 over Australia with  heavy cloud layers from FSGRW.   Smooth as silk.  You can Google Gatwick Flight Sim Club affinity mask calculator and find it, as I couldn't figure out how to put a link in this post..

[spirit_66 2]

Can you provide the link, please?

Spirit

[gboz 157]

Can you provide the link, please?

Spirit

 

http://www.gatwick-fsg.org.uk/affinitymask.aspx?SubMenuItem=hardware

 

The problem with Gatwick site is that it has been around awhile and is really concerned with FSX and P3DV1.

It assumes HT is of no value and the first two cores should always be disabled.

Despite the P3D link above these two assumptions are still very debatable when it comes to P3DV2.

 

gb.

[spirit_66 2]

Thanks for the link.

Spirit