Turbine thanks so much - man with that rig you can smoke with my settings shown above - try it - yo u will luv it guaranteed   :yahoo:

Adjusted according to your recommendations flying a Carenado Cessna 185 Tundra

Thanks

Rich

Hope all went well Rich

Yes it did, but would like to balance the cores more though, as it is now the 2nd core nearly always runs at 100% were the 1st usually is only at 10-15%, 3 and 4 75-95%.

Very interesting! Thanks for sharing!

"Yes it did, but would like to balance the cores more though, as it is now the 2nd core nearly always runs at 100% were the 1st usually is only at 10-15%, 3 and 4 75-95%. "

 

Hence AM still a work in progress - as I figure out something better I will post it here

 

"Very interesting! Thanks for sharing!"

 

Welcome Doc

Yes it did, but would like to balance the cores more though, as it is now the 2nd core nearly always runs at 100% were the 1st usually is only at 10-15%, 3 and 4 75-95%.

You've simply masked (i.e. prevented any part of P3D from utilizing it) the first core (Core0) for use by the OS and any other apps you want to assign to it to run side by side w/ P3D, for example REX4.  You're never going to see uniform balance between all cores because P3D and FSX hard-code the main thread to run on Core1 (what you're calling the 2nd core).   It's pegged to 100% because the sim at that moment in time is at some level CPU bound (there is no more CPU power to allocate to the main thread).  Your 75-95% on the remaining two cores demonstrate texture loading activity, so in high-demand areas particularly w/ faster flight speeds texture loading can fail to keep up, leading to less than fully updated textures, aka 'blurries'.

 

If you want to pick up some meaningful improvement you should consider an AffinityMask value of 254 if you're running a quad core CPU capable of hyper threading.  Turn HT on in the BIOS, set AM to 254 and you will now see 0-X% on Core0, 100% on Core1, and now the 6 other virtual cores (instead of 2 available physical cores as you have things running now presumably, will be doing all of texture loading you can do w/ that proc, basically.   I can attest now w/ 6-core (12 virtual cores w/ HT on) processors this is absolutely useful to downright impressive in terms of texture update rates.   A second option would be 255 w/ HT on a quad core.  This essentially prevents any masking, so even Core0 is available for texture loading (and everything else your OS and other apps need to do).

Thanks for your help, it's nice now that things are starting to come together. Do have some minor issues but much better than anything with p3d before

Thanks again

Thanks Noel, I called the 1-4 as my intel cpu monitor lists them as such, but I understand your values. Will adjust as you have recommended and report back

Thanks again

"Turn HT on in the BIOS, set AM to 254"

 

I have tried this first and it was not better for me Noel - sounds impressive but not accurate on my rig

 

Appreciate the input as we can all learn from this

 

Keep in mind I am running a native resolution 2560 x 1440 - 27" wide screen monitor and it takes a lot to push it so I think this has a lot to do with how my rig runs, that being said if I was running a 24" with lower resolutions P3D would be screaming IMO

Hi Rich,

 

I doubt that this

[bufferPools]

  UsePools=0

has any effect in P3D v2.2.1

 

Why is this Bioshock entry in NI so important? I've good results without it!

 

Spirit

 

 

Why is this Bioshock entry in NI so important? I've good results without it!

 

I've used it as well.  I use a 42" HDTV for a monitor and it helps with the jaggies and shimmering.

 

Gregg

I thought we should leave NI with P3DV2?

 

I have no performance difference with cloud shadows at 80km btw. FPS the same.

 

Same goes with HDR on

 

Michael

I have tried this first and it was not better for me Noel - sounds impressive but not accurate on my rig

 

It is what it is Richard, and what one expects from anything will always depend to a great extent on everything else happening in your configuration.  That being said, the logic is sound and the results should be qualitatively the same.  IOW, other issues may have overridden anything positive that could come out of setting your AM to that value.

 

Don't forget to note what happens when you leave AF at whatever setting it was on when you initialize P3D, and fail to change it to another value (then back to whatever value you wish to use).   Without this maneuver you won't be getting the AF value you think you're getting.   I use 16x, so I have to change to 4x, apply, then change back to 16x, apply, then all is well.

I thought we should leave NI with P3DV2?

 

I have no performance difference with cloud shadows at 80km btw. FPS the same.

 

Same goes with HDR on

 

Michael

NI w/ various settings, w/ IMO the common denominator being the Bioshock choice under AA Compatibility DX1x, definitely improve on some aspects of AA.

 

I'm afraid there is as yet no cure, at least none I've read about, for the impact that cloud shadowing does in certain situations in P3D, in particular during dawn/dusk, and w/ higher cloud density.   The key is to use them only when you can as it were--I'm hoping something fundamental changes on how they manifest the effect as it in many situations w/ very high hardware just not able to run well.  

 

 

 

Why is this Bioshock entry in NI so important? I've good results without it!

 

If you're seeing what I see, you'll have better results w/ it, and I have no impact from it.  I use it w/ SUPERVCAA_64x_4x + 2XSGSS to greatly reduce runway line and threshold jaggies, as well as improve texture swimming in the distance.  Dunno why, but it's the Bioshock option that allows the other settings to function.

@noel:

 

Can you explain the AF thing you mentioned about having to change to 4x and then 16x to actually get what you want?

 

There a bug with AF in P3D?

"It is what it is Richard, and what one expects from anything will always depend to a great extent on everything else happening in your configuration.  That being said, the logic is sound and the results should be qualitatively the same.  IOW, other issues may have overridden anything positive that could come out of setting your AM to that value."

 

I tried 254 again and noticed panning in spot view it had a very slight hesitation so back to 84 for me Noel

 

 

==================================================================================

 

"If you're seeing what I see, you'll have better results w/ it, and I have no impact from it.  I use it w/ SUPERVCAA_64x_4x + 2XSGSS to greatly reduce runway line and threshold jaggies, as well as improve texture swimming in the distance.  Dunno why, but it's the Bioshock option that allows the other settings to function.

 

 

This was my favorite selection in the past with this new monitor I take a good hit and not needed at this high resolution - sorry I am not using the standard monitor most are using this monitor adds a lot of AA on its own no need to crank it up on this monitor no difference in quality which is why I bought it but going to seriously consider a g-sync if reports from simmers say its worth getting.

 

==================================================================================

 

"I'm afraid there is as yet no cure, at least none I've read about, for the impact that cloud shadowing does in certain situations in P3D, in particular during dawn/dusk, and w/ higher cloud density.   The key is to use them only when you can as it were--I'm hoping something fundamental changes on how they manifest the effect as it in many situations w/ very high hardware just not able to run well.  "

 

​Totally agree