PMDG 777 extremely slow on overclocked 3930K

[onebob 125]

I think you need to go through your fsx.cfg file, there appears to be an additional  entry for a hd 7000 series when you have a R9 200.

you have also entries under the [bUFFERPOOLS] section which should be in the [GRAPHICS] section, which may have been duplicated.

I agree with Gabe_62 above rebuild your fsx.cfg file and take one step at a time.

 

bob

 

ps    you may have  to rebuild the Shaders files as well, however as you have gone down the dx10 road its a choice you have to consider.

[ryanbatc 12,971]

I saw that to but assumed a second monitor.

[Sportsfan23 2]

 

 

Try unlimited frames. FSX is weird. I've noticing limiting frames to 30 actually hurts fps.

 

Yea each time I have tried to use a FPS limiter my FPS has dropped dramatically. When I turn the FPS limiter off my FPS go back to a good FPS with all the same settings and everything.

 

 

1024 and autogen 1 is fine for tubes. Airport scenery density; yeah nope 1 is fine not 3

 

Could you explain what you mean by airport scenery density? I have not seen that setting anywhere.

 

Also another thing to look at is your water setting. Every guide I have seen says keep it at 2.x High and it just destroys FPS. Sure the water looks nice but I am not sure why that is the recommended setting. Perhaps somebody can share why that is the suggested setting. Anyway I lowered the water down to 2.x low and I gained like 20 FPS. 

[Bandyair 0]

 

I understand that, but would an R9 280x not be able to match a GTX 560Ti? The OP hasn't yet told us how much VRAM it has, but I would bet that it is more than 1GB.

 

 

3GB DDR5 so that should be plenty. This card is top of the line anything runs faster on it than on my previous GTX 670 without even making any noise. The GTX was really noisy and struggling compared to the R9.

ohh yes forgot to add I am using FSX on a 120" inch Full HD projector. I believe that's the way to enjoy it:) That however should not make any difference to the video card.

the second video card entry just refers to a card that I swapped out it's not there I will delete it.

[dgraham1284 92]

I Quickly went through your cfg file. I would start there. I see duplicate and conflicting entries. Delete, start new. 

[Bandyair 0]

Also I noticed the sudden FPS loss after the first flight on the PMDG 737 which of course may be a coincidence but now ALL aircraft are slower than they were.

 

I think you need to go through your fsx.cfg file, there appears to be an additional  entry for a hd 7000 series when you have a R9 200.

you have also entries under the [bUFFERPOOLS] section which should be in the [GRAPHICS] section, which may have been duplicated.

I agree with Gabe_62 above rebuild your fsx.cfg file and take one step at a time.

 

bob

 

ps    you may have  to rebuild the Shaders files as well, however as you have gone down the dx10 road its a choice you have to consider.

 

Bufferpools IS in the Graphics section and once only. Do you mean it perhaps should not be in brackets??

 

What fps do you get if you fly from a default airport in the middle of nowhere?

 

What I'm interested in is to set your fps to unlimited. Go to KEDW (good test airport away from payware scenery) - turn off weather and AI. Load the default Cessna - what are the fps? Load the T7 - what are the fps? Finally load the Q400 - what are the fps? This will tell the performance in comparison to the Cessna. Then I can look on my rig (because I've run all my planes against the default Cessna) and see if your fps drop is normal.

 

 

OK here is the test and is completely without add ons and all sliders requested as 0 and FPS at unlimited.

 

Default Cessna: average 140 fps

Majestic Q400: average 60-70 fps (nearly the same outside)

PMDG 777: average 30-35 fps

They were all recorder in the VC the biggest difference is in the 777 the fps doubles in outside view it still takes about 3-4 seconds to draw the view once switched back to VC.

 

Hello Bandyair, 

 

pull up a chair and read carefully what I think the problem/s is/are with your setup. 

 

First thing first: ATI is not a good video card for FSX. FSX has an old rendering engine, and ATI made very clear they won't make any changes to their cards design to accommodate it. The card for FSX is Nvidia, I know, bad news, but that is what it is. 

 

Second: the video card you bought has pretty much the same printed circuit board as the Radeon HD 7970, but you pay more, only due to its cooling solution, that is all you pay for. That card is slightly overclocked by roughly 30 Mhz from the stock one, and its DDR3 memories are at stock speed, which is a shame on ATI's part, they could have done mauch better than that, trust me. 

 

Third point: with a 17 3930k you should consider getting a more powerful card. Bear in mind that the CPU and the video card go "hand in hand" with FSX, they both have to be the same quality. You should be looking at a GTX 770 or better GTX 780 from Nvidia, to support the overclock of the CPU, or, as is the case now, your video card will only be a bottleneck for the CPU. 

 

Fourth point: Did you overclock the cpu and then installed and tried all those add ons? By what you are saying, you first overclocked, then installed the NGX, and the 777, to only find out they were kinda sluggish. That is not a good practice at all. First you install FSX with the service packs, then your add ons, and after that you want to overclock. 

 

By looking at your config file, you have activated Antialiasing and Anisotropic filtering.

If I read that right, just know that there is no point in doing that,: AA is a resource hog and will only slow down you sim at the expense of performance. Run something like: Trilinear with no AA. 

 

 

Last, but not least: your config file. Too many believe that by tweaking the config file they'll find the perfect solution to their FSX issues. Trust me, the least you touch your config file, the better, unless you really know what you are doing. There are I believe no more than 3/4 items that are essential, the main one being Highmemfix=1, which Aces forgot to include in the final release of FSX. I see you have the main items needed,. Do not waist your time pasting your config file, and hoping some "guru" will turn it around and give you the performance you want. 

 

Pardon me for sounding harsh, I just want you to understand what might be your problem. I fly the NGX too, and do not have any sluggishness even in heavy add on airports, with weather and everything. 

 

Of course, if I misunderstood or did not read your config file correctly, I am here to be corrected as well....

 

Enrico  :smile:

 

Hi Enrico,

 

You do have some points there. However firstly the R9 uses GDDR5 3GB which is insanely fast NOT DDR3.

As I mentioned on the OP I did use Word Not Allowed's guide and AFTER I was able to use FSX with the Majestic Q400 quite smoothly and all other aircaft. The NGX was installed already before I overclocked I was just not using it I only installed the 777 yesterday and it seems fps have dropped after the first flight with NGX so that is why I am posting here. As in short after OC and .cfg tweaks I was able to enjoy FSX but it went pear shaped after flying the NGX which I think has happened 2 years ago as well hence my frustration and the long brake from FSX. Hope this makes sense. Also I hear what everyone is saying about ATI cards and it may apply to some degree but but not as dramatic as some here says for sure when you use a high end card as such.

[ryanbatc 12,971]

76% fps loss compared to the default Cessna seems like too much. The NGX on my system takes a 50% fps loss. The T7 is better optimized than the NGX.

 

Now we have to figure out why.

 

If there's nothing important on your cfg , delete it and FSX will build you a new one.

 

Setup your AA and AF settings as normal. Only add highmemfix to your config. See what yet fps are now.

[Bandyair 0]

Thanks will do shortly. What exactly do you mean by AA and AF normal? Should is et all else at high or leave settings at default?

[ryanbatc 12,971]

Meaning I'm not familiar with AMD cards - so set AA (anti aliasing) and AF (anisiotropic filtering) first in FSX, to max that is.  Then most in game most sliders can be high or maxed out.  Water to 2x high (or medium), bloom off, DX10 preview off.  Keep traffic off for now until we figure out the basics.  Make sure the only tweak is highmemfix=1 in your config.

 

Later on you might end up running DX10 with shader mods...

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/421849-dx10-fixer-atiamd-aa-and-vsync-guide/

 

Sorry I can't be more helpful.... AMD generally doesn't perform as well as nvidia in FSX so most users have nvidia.

[Bandyair 0]

Thanks will test these shortly however I definitely want to run DX 10 even if it means getting an Nvidia card but honestly I doubt it would be any benefit over the R9.

[Tabs 2,790]

ATI/AMD video cards are known to struggle with clouds and other older shader based effects in FSX. You can't go on reviews of modern games that show them being comparable to the Nvidia cards - they are in those games, but FSX is a nearly 8 year old graphics engine and is built on an entirely different philosophy than the modern engines are. AMD and Nvidia's processing architectures within the GPU chips are very different and while the end result is usually the same in most games, that isn't the case with certain applications. FSX is one of them.

 

One thing that some AMD users have had success with is the "Shader 3.0 mod" by ******* Altuve - look that up and try it. It may smooth things out with the clouds and whatnot.

 

Keep in mind too - there is no PC system in existence that can run FSX 100% maxed in all situations (especially when involving super high detail addon scenery and weather in conjunction with a super high detail aircraft like the 777) and still get stellar performance. The engine is flawed and will always bog down under those kinds of conditions. The Majestic Q400, as good as it is, is just not as complex a product as the 777 is, graphically or systems wise. I don't say that as a slight or anything - the Q400 just simply isn't as complex an aircraft as a 777 either in real life or in FSX.

[Bandyair 0]

Well again you might be right about ATI however I am still not convinced that it is the main cause as the R9 280X is very powerful and odes not even spin up when under full load in FSX. I have deleted .cfg and let FSX recreate it. Pushed settings one by one and now I am nearly at the level where I was with very low fps but now I get the average 14-17fps instead of the 9-11fps which is now enjoyable. This is what I was getting before flying the PMDG aircraft. I still don't get why the .cfg got screwed just by flying the PMDG???One thing I notice is that Fly Tampa airports seem to be much better optimized as frame rates are nearly 50% better than Aerosoft or others and they also look better.HOWEVER I do agree that generating a REX thunderstorm slows things down a notch which may be due to the rendering capabilities of the GPU.Any thought on that?

 

Well again you might be right about ATI however I am still not convinced that it is the main cause as the R9 280X is very powerful and odes not even spin up when under full load in FSX. I have deleted .cfg and let FSX recreate it. Pushed settings one by one and now I am nearly at the level where I was with very low fps but now I get the average 14-17fps instead of the 9-11fps which is now enjoyable. This is what I was getting before flying the PMDG aircraft. I still don't get why the .cfg got screwed just by flying the PMDG???One thing I notice is that Fly Tampa airports seem to be much better optimized as frame rates are nearly 50% better than Aerosoft or others and they also look better.HOWEVER I do agree that generating a REX thunderstorm slows things down a notch which may be due to the rendering capabilities of the GPU.Any thought on that?

 

 

Also forgot to add that I am a professional system builder and have built many systems since day one for FSX and the results were in the CPU and hardly ever in the GPU but that is just my experience.

one more things I used to run FSX on a GTX 670 and on the R9 things looks smoother. This is my first ATI card ever too.

[James Bennett 52]

Well again you might be right about ATI however I am still not convinced that it is the main cause as the R9 280X is very powerful and odes not even spin up when under full load in FSX.

 

What do you mean by spin up? It's more the compatibility issues with shaders that cause the rendering lag, not the load on the core.

 

By spin up do you mean the fan? The heat it generates really hasn't got much to do with it.

[Christopher Low 5,377]

James,

 

He probably means that the fan isn't spinning up to full speed, which presumably means that the card itself is not being pushed to the limit.

[Bandyair 0]

yes that's what I meant and you are right but there is hardly any load on the card, as I just mentioned now I am back to normal performance regardless of the GPU. The only trivial questions is why flying the PMDG have altered performance in the cfg? I guess we may never find out.