Sign in to follow this  
voodoo101

PMDG 777 SP1 VAS usage

Recommended Posts

Before anybody jumps, I know that the PMDG is not the cause of VAS, I also know how to limit the problems with OOMS. As I explained on another forum, FSX is like a tub of water (VAS memory) and the addons are buckets of water. As you add each bucket of water, the water rises and eventually the bath is full and can't cope, read OOM. People normally assume that the last addon they installed is the cause which is why so many people are moaning about different addons.

 

Now with the advent of OrbX global, OrbX vector, HD airports and such wonderful high quality textures in the 777, this limit is quickly reached. Now you can turn down the textures but after all the years of trying to get the textures up by tweaking and buying better hardware, it seems a shame to go back down again. Yes you can turn off certain airports sceneries but again it's a pain. FSX is a 2006 program that we are trying to make look like a 2014 program with all the bells and whistles.

 

So now to my question which is quite a basic one, although the PMDG 777 is not the cause, it does have a high VAS usage, has anything been done to lower this is SP1 or has the beta team noticed a difference. Unfortunately the PMDG 777 does tend to tip the scale, partly because of the high textures, partly because it is a long hauler and so fly's over more scenery for FSX to save up.

 

Please don't let this get into a heated debate on why PMDG has not fixed this or that it's PMDG's fault. If the answer is no then fine, like I said FSX is a 2006 program and was never designed to run this long and never really finished.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

In the interest of not leaving it so open ended such that someone is wondering "why are there so many views but no answers," I'll provide this:

 

I saw the thread.  Read it earlier.  Decided not to respond.

 

The reason I decided not to respond earlier stems from basic stat and scientific method.  I don't have hard numbers from before SP1, and and don't have any hard numbers afterwards.  I simply don't watch VAS that much unless I get the VAS Ding, and by that point, who knows what the issue is.  It could be the route of flight, but there's no way to pin that down, either, unless you've been tracking that for the flights that went off without the VAS Ding.

 

The rest of it would simply be notional, but that's not reliable.  It wouldn't be fair for me to say "VAS use has been improved in SP1" unless I have hard evidence of that fact.  Even a notional drop in getting the ding wouldn't necessarily mean it came from SP1 unless you flew the same route, with the same weather, at the same time of day, and remained in one view the whole flight.  To truly pin it down, you'd need to be testing specifically for VAS use.  I don't think any of us have done that.  As such, I don't think it would be appropriate for us to speak to it.

 

On the next build, I might set the RTM up somewhere and test it, and then the SP1 build, but only if I remember and have time.  I doubt it's changed significantly enough to matter, really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Kyle for your answer. I don't normally worry too much about VAS but a recent reinstall made me wonder on what I could lose to help with the arrival of new and improved scenery and extra's in the past. The only time I have had a problem was once when I tried a flight from OMDB to KLAX, both had quality sceneries.

 

As I said before, it is not really a case of a certain addon but a whole general thing added together, the same as frame rates, each setup is different.

 

I was just wondering if there was any mention from PMDG or anybody knew if they had maybe cleaned up the textures or maybe lost a line of code that was not needed but left in. In my old days of programming on the ZX Spectrum in basic, I often wrote something then found out that I could take a chunk of code to be able to do the same thing with less. I'm sure when it is released there will be a group sharing their view one way or another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question is are the testers getting OOM errors when flying? I don't care about graphs and stats, I'd like to know if the testers have to chase OOM errors like we do using the release version of the 777X.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question is are the testers getting OOM errors when flying? I don't care about graphs and stats, I'd like to know if the testers have to chase OOM errors like we do using the release version of the 777X.

 

Read my earlier post...

Unless we're flying the same exact routes, with the same exact situations, any answer here would be anecdotal at best.  I don't care much for "butt dyno" answers ("butt dyno" is a term used in the car modding group to basically say "it felt like it was performing better, but I have no hard evidence to this fact," as would come from a real dynamometer).  You may not want graphs and stats, but I'd prefer not to give answers that aren't backed by data somehow.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think that if the testers where getting OOMS when testing then PMDG would not be due to release the update. The same as the original release. Some things are not picked up in beta testing because it is on a relatively small scale and everybody's FSX configuration and loading is different. What you have one your system, what your config, what you PC set up is going to be different to mine or Kyle's, because FSX is so modular. I might fly from stock airports over Orbx textures with no weather, You might fly from Aerosoft airports over UTX textures in bad weather. It would be different if PMDG did some texture editing to reduce memory, or maybe suggested to the beta team that they had done something to stop a memory leak. It appears that they have not or have and not mentioned it, which is not surprising considering the special extra's they have added. Only time will tell how it runs on your own system with your add-ons and flying the routes you do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been some optimizations made both on the texture/model and code sides, but it's not going to be anything huge. There was an option added to stop sounds from precaching into memory that may be useful for people having OOM issues too.

 

VAS usage isn't caused by one particular texture or line of code or anything like that though - it's a cumulative thing and the big drivers are the functions in the airplane that have to store large amounts of temporary data in memory and perform calculations on it. This is stuff like the ECL, the EICAS, the VNAV and LNAV solvers, the FBW system etc. There's only so much we can do to reduce memory usage in those systems before functionality necessarily suffers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been some optimizations made both on the texture/model and code sides, but it's not going to be anything huge. There was an option added to stop sounds from precaching into memory that may be useful for people having OOM issues too.

 

VAS usage isn't caused by one particular texture or line of code or anything like that though - it's a cumulative thing and the big drivers are the functions in the airplane that have to store large amounts of temporary data in memory and perform calculations on it. This is stuff like the ECL, the EICAS, the VNAV and LNAV solvers, the FBW system etc. There's only so much we can do to reduce memory usage in those systems before functionality necessarily suffers.

Thanks Ryan, that is the answere I was waiting for.

 

"Improvements have been made.

But nothing huge."

 

I will take any VAS improvement, no matter how little :-)

 

Thanks for taking our VAS problems serious and thx for trying!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can the beta testers confirm if exiting from PMDG 777 to the main menu before exiting FSX still cause a freeze and crash OR is this fixed?

 

This problem also currently occurs when loading another saved game from a current PDMG 777 session.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a work around for the crash on exit and it is noted in the "PMDG 777 tracking thread". It states to delete runways.csv from the FSX folder, if it is there. Also ARPT_RWY.dat in the FSX\PMDG\NAVDATA folder.

 

This post has been up since the 777 was released, so it might be worth a quick read as it also a sort of changelog for SP1, you will see what has been fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no runways.csv, but found and deleted ARPT_RWY.dat.  Tested this afterwards, but am still getting a fatal error on exit from main menu ... except this time with some problem details below.

 

Problem Event Name: APPCRASH

 

Application Name: fsx.exe

 

Application Version: 10.0.61637.0

 

Application Timestamp: 46fadb14

 

Fault Module Name: PMDG_777X.DLL

 

Fault Module Version: 1.0.0.0

 

Fault Module Timestamp: 52256029

 

Exception Code: c0000005

 

Exception Offset: 000a467a

 

OS Version: 6.1.7601.2.1.0.256.48

 

Locale ID: 3081

 

Does anyone recognise or know these problem details?

 

Cheers, Harry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ryan's post was very welcome when it comes to this issue of VAS usage and the 777.  I think those of us (so far in this thread) can appreciate the topic.  It really is going to come down to what other candy we are running, and what our system can handle, as it always has.  It's just in these times we have more candy dedicated to the actual aircraft.

 

By the way - if we are already turning off scenery that we're not flying to, how hard is it to turn off HD textures if that's what it takes to fly the 777 for you?  Or maybe turn some "sliders" down.  We really need to learn to balance it out.  

 

Kyle, your post really said nothing you political devil you  :lol:.  I do like how you admitted to getting some OOM dings.  I'd love to hear the story behind yours.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been some optimizations made both on the texture/model and code sides, but it's not going to be anything huge. There was an option added to stop sounds from precaching into memory that may be useful for people having OOM issues too.

 

VAS usage isn't caused by one particular texture or line of code or anything like that though - it's a cumulative thing and the big drivers are the functions in the airplane that have to store large amounts of temporary data in memory and perform calculations on it. This is stuff like the ECL, the EICAS, the VNAV and LNAV solvers, the FBW system etc. There's only so much we can do to reduce memory usage in those systems before functionality necessarily suffers.

 

Any improvement is a huge improvement. After all, it's the last 1mb that causes the OOM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More food for thought...

 

If you are flying an aircraft that typically flys above say, FL250, then there really isn't a need for hi-res textures and other eye candy on the ground right?  With the exception of good airports (for accuracy and a little extra boost of realism), you could quite possibly get away with basic low-res, low autogen settings for scenery, which should help free up the VAS in the long run.  I bought the T7 last year and realized at that moment that I was upgrading to a new type of flight experience.  So much has been done on the inside as far as the cockpit goes that we really need not be concerned with what is being seen outside, except for weather and while we are at / going to airports.

 

Maybe I'm not making sense, but I guess the point I am trying to make is that when you fly the T7, it is more important to concentrate on the aircraft and what it does, rather than taking leisurely strolls and burning weeds. :)

 

Now I am sure I will get browbeaten from folks who want the best realism possible, taking into account screenshot enthusiasts as well and I do apologize in advance.  For me personally, when I made the decision to purchase and fly the T7, it was a commitment to extending my passion for flying, well beyond the basics and into something serious.  Do to physical limitations since I was a child, my dreams of being a commercial pilot were crushed, so flying a sim is the next best thing, not to mention understanding everything I can about flight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fully agree: The PMDG T7 is about system simulation, not about exploring scenery and sight-seeing during VFR flights.

 

You can easily define a couple of graphics profiles within your sim (high visual quality for GA flying, medium quality for airliner flying, low quality for night flying).

 

So you can switch your graphics settings back and forth according to the flight you're about to do, without ever touching a single slider again, by simply loading a different profile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fully agree: The PMDG T7 is about system simulation, not about exploring scenery and sight-seeing during VFR flights.

 

You can easily define a couple of graphics profiles within your sim (high visual quality for GA flying, medium quality for airliner flying, low quality for night flying).

 

So you can switch your graphics settings back and forth according to the flight you're about to do, without ever touching a single slider again, by simply loading a different profile.

Agreed across the board and yep, yet another feature of FSX I totally gloss over and that's creating multiple profiles. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not going to start browbeating you because I totally agree. Fly a Cessna at low altitude and OrbX global / vector or similar is great, but then the Cessna is smaller, less textures, less workings so lower VAS and you can get away with it. You want nice scenery so you turn things up. When flying the 777 are 30000ft plus and the most you will see is clouds and a bit of land a long way down. Yes on takeoffs in turns you will see some and again on landing, but you need to be reasonable with your expectations on a simulator already pushed to it's limits. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Kyle, your post really said nothing you political devil you  .  I do like how you admitted to getting some OOM dings.  I'd love to hear the story behind yours.

 

haha - yeah, I tried hard to maintain a pretty neutral stance, but again, mostly because I don't have hard evidence either way.

 

The OOM dings a while ago were caused by my autogen slider being maxed.  Dropped it one level, never saw them again until I flew into KSEA (in the NGX), but that was also because my orbx scenery glitched out and populated autogen EVERYWHERE (to include all over the runways/taxiways of the airport).  That was caused by an error in running one of the utilities to switch orbx regions, along with my failure to get rid of an old KSEA.bgl.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More food for thought...

 

..upgrading to a new type of flight experience...  

 

I made the decision to purchase and fly the T7, it was a commitment to extending my passion for flying, well beyond the basics and into something serious.  

 

not to mention understanding everything I can about flight.

 

The same for me and I like your wording!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this