22Jul14 - Sp1 Monitoring Items Updated

[WotanUK 289]

As an aside, i ran a quick test today:

 

FSX on load with the microlight...1Gb used

Change plane to 777-300...2Gb used

Load in ORBX Scotland, FTX Global, FTX Vector, UK2000 EGPH.  Just under 3Gb used

 

Didn't bother with AS, but was running REX textures.

 

From those add-ons, the 777 was the greatest usage of VAS but not outlandishly more than the scenery add-ons.

 

I asked some of the X-Plane chaps what X-Plane actually uses thinking they would say around 4-5Gb, despite it being 64-bit...but actually they were stating it was best having 16Gb available, some even stated 24Gb. 

 

I think that FSX has just about had it's day.

 

Interestingly, the MOST i can get DCS to use is around 3.5Gb in the A10.

[Boomer 1,619]

 

 

I think that FSX has just about had it's day.

 

No question about that.

[blake7 5]

Now 5.5hrs into KSEA - EGLL and all is  behaving, maybe its a case of don't be shy, give it a try and tweak

[777 340]

 

EGLL - OPLA VAS stayed at aound 2.7 -3.0 in the 773, Im happy..

[WotanUK 289]

 

 

Now 5.5hrs into KSEA - EGLL

 

Is that the UK2000 EGLL V3?  If so best of luck when you get their, it's a FPS and VAS killer.

[kevinh 409]

 

 

I asked some of the X-Plane chaps what X-Plane actually uses thinking they would say around 4-5Gb, despite it being 64-bit...but actually they were stating it was best having 16Gb available, some even stated 24Gb.



I think that FSX has just about had it's day.

Well, if you think size is everything then perhaps it has. Just because something uses more memory doesn't mean it's better. Most of the VAS being used by X-Plane will be the photoscenery textures. Very little of it will be the important stuff (the flight simulation).

 

This is a PMDG forum and photoscenery is pretty much a waste of time at 35000 ft. Sure you might see bits of it for a fe minutes at lower altitude climbing and descending but a lot of that time you'll be in cloud. So I would say there's still a lot of useful life in FSX yet.

[blake7 5]

[kevinh 409]

Is that the UK2000 EGLL V3?  If so best of luck when you get their, it's a FPS and VAS killer.

Most of my VA flights either start or finish at EGLL. I use UK2000 EGLL v3 and only have a modest system. No problems here.

[WotanUK 289]

Well, if you think size is everything then perhaps it has. Just because something uses more memory doesn't mean it's better. Most of the VAS being used by X-Plane will be the photoscenery textures. Very little of it will be the important stuff (the flight simulation).

 

This is a PMDG forum and photoscenery is pretty much a waste of time at 35000 ft. Sure you might see bits of it for a fe minutes at lower altitude climbing and descending but a lot of that time you'll be in cloud. So I would say there's still a lot of useful life in FSX yet.

 

What?  I think perhaps you didn't understand me.  I wasn't claiming that anything was better or worse.  I was simply surprised that X-Plane used so much memory.

 

My comment about FSX was that companies like PMDG keep pushing the envelope with add-ons, at some point these will simply no longer be able to co-exist due to the limitations of the FSX engine.  Yes you probably could fly stock FSX with the 777 and keep to around 2Gb of VAS, but it's also nice to have the scenery, real weather etc...  It's your choice, i was making an observation.

[davidzill 8]

Perhaps the complexity of PMDG's 777 has in some cases reached the limit of FSX's processing ability. Some users don't experience issues because they don't have very many hi-fidelity add-ons. Those of us who have the popular add-ons cannot get too far in flight, because the complexities of the 777 breach FSX's limit of memory usage. Hopefully the software company who bought the rights for FSX are going to release a 64-bit service pack, which would basically bring FSX up to date.

[NovemberUniform 156]

Hopefully the software company who bought the rights for FSX are going to release a 64-bit service pack, which would basically bring FSX up to date.

 

If it was only that simple...

[Hirdy2013 104]

Perhaps the complexity of PMDG's 777 has in some cases reached the limit of FSX's processing ability. Some users don't experience issues because they don't have very many hi-fidelity add-ons. Those of us who have the popular add-ons cannot get too far in flight, because the complexities of the 777 breach FSX's limit of memory usage. Hopefully the software company who bought the rights for FSX are going to release a 64-bit service pack, which would basically bring FSX up to date.

Not true at all. I own all ORBX regions, FSDT, FB, T2G. In fact I've got over 80 payware airports, ASN, GSX.....THE LOT.

 

My LOD is at 5.5 with traffic at 40%. 2048 Textures.

 

No issues with OOM. I push it close but the T7 doesn't push me over the edge.

[boxman83 32]

:mad:

 

Here's a data point...

 

I spent the better part of the last two days flying PHX-SYD with the 77W. About 10 minutes ago, I'm 14.5 hours in, just beginning to start my initial descent and.......BLAM! Fatal error, do not pass go, do not collect $200, please restart the program and try again. Thanks, and have a nice day.

 

I'm batting about .500 with my longhaul flights and successfully completing them with the 777. Other than the 777, the only other add-ons I'm running are AS2012 and Traffic X. I'm going to give PHX-LIH a shot here in a sec, hopefully I can finish that one.

 

-jp

[blake7 5]

yeah it is. look forward to meeting my doom

Well KSEA - EGLL complete, non eventful, not sure what I was expecting but was on the edge waiting for a freeze or fatal but nothing.

 

Frames remain smooth all the way, through storms, using Rex and UK2000 EGLL v3.

 

Was a pleasure to fly the 300ERX.

 

Will try installing ORBX global and see how far I can push VAS with my next flight to WSSS and then onto YSSY.

[kevinh 409]

What? I think perhaps you didn't understand me. I wasn't claiming that anything was better or worse. I was simply surprised that X-Plane used so much memory.

 

My comment about FSX was that companies like PMDG keep pushing the envelope with add-ons, at some point these will simply no longer be able to co-exist due to the limitations of the FSX engine. Yes you probably could fly stock FSX with the 777 and keep to around 2Gb of VAS, but it's also nice to have the scenery, real weather etc... It's your choice, i was making an observation.

As it happens I use ASN weather and have a lot of additional airport scenery. Certainly not stock FSX then. Yet I fly the 777 long haul in real time and don't get OOMs. FSX can use all 4GB available so you don't have to limit to 2 GB VAS. If you want to use large areas of photo scenery then that is a problem. Personally I don't see the point of it when using PMDG airliner addons.

 

You didn't just remark that XPlane could use so much VAS, you said FSX had had its day. You're entitled to your opinion but you stated it as a fact.