Made The Switch But...

[Kuragiman 227]

I actually came across that article and followed its instructions but got little extra power.  The only thing thus far that seems to have worked is downclocking my video card.    I got 45 FPS in the test I just did for about 5 seconds and then...  ASNEXT decided it was time to make thunderstorm over DFW and the FPS went down to 25.   XD    lol.    So I guess this is the best my setup can do.   Which means... no flying a 737NG through bad weather at detailed airports....  T_T

[Appliance 51]

no flying a 737NG through bad weather at detailed airports....

 

Being relatively new to P3D still means you have not probably realised that lower frames need not affect smoothness in the sim.  Indeed many here comment that P3D is vastly superior in this regard compared to FSX at similar frames.  Best to suck-it-and-see and turn off the frame rate display. 

 

Most people are seeing up to 30fps  (with sliders appropriately adjusted) on even modest equipment and with shadows enabled.

 

Remember less is often more in P3D ... the reverse of FSX.  Have fun, just fly ... in your iFly.

[SteveW 1,792]

Right.  So I have 6 Physical and 6 Logical cores...

 

Nope, you have 1CPU with 6 cores that make up 12 logical processors.

 

But it seems my comment about the graphs has fell to deaf ears. You need to look at the graphs, you can see that LP2 and LP3 are the same physical core. It's simple, with one LP of the pair maxed you want to see next to no work on the other. That's usually the reason for poor performance in weather. So you arrange an Affinity Mask to keep them separated onto physical cores when you have HT enabled.

[Kuragiman 227]

Being relatively new to P3D still means you have not probably realised that lower frames need not affect smoothness in the sim.  Indeed many here comment that P3D is vastly superior in this regard compared to FSX at similar frames.  Best to suck-it-and-see and turn off the frame rate display. 

 

Most people are seeing up to 30fps  (with sliders appropriately adjusted) on even modest equipment and with shadows enabled.

 

Remember less is often more in P3D ... the reverse of FSX.  Have fun, just fly ... in your iFly.

 

 

Yes it is 'SMOOTH' but if it's a Smooth Slideshow I just can't get into the simulation.   The suspension of reality gets broken and I get disappointed.   With the hardware I have I should be able to taxi down to the runway and have it be smooth.   Lesser machines don't seem to have a problem but the Beast does.   I don't know if I have something wrong in my bios, wrong in my OS or if a piece of hardware is just broken.    I pushed the game around the different cores until it LOOKS balanced with no more than a 50% load on any one core at a time and my video card shows a hit no greater than 55% on it's GPU... so if the cores are showing 50% used and the Video card is showing 50% used... WHY isn't P3D using MORE and giving me better than 19 FPS when I am sitting idle at the gate at KDFW-FSDT?   This is what is driving me nuts.  Looking at all the graphs says to me 'THIS COMPUTER CAN DO MORE!'  But P3D is not TRYING to use more... it's just stuck at 50% utilization and I can find no explanation or tip/trick to make it go beyond.

 

SteveW, I did push the AM around using a utility called Progress Lasso.  I watched the Usage graph change right before my eyes from SPIKED/THRASHING cores to evened out multiple cores as shown in my new screen shot but the effect was small on the FPS.   

 

I need to know what piece of hardware... or what background program may be choking this simulation... They ALL DO IT.    X-Plane, FSX, P3D... They all CHOKE and its maddening because I watch videos and people list their specs and my specs crush theirs but they are running smooth and I am clunking along, SMOOTH, but SLOW FPS.   Everyone says ignore the FPS.   You can't ignore it when it drops below 20.   I start to see that frame lagging and it makes me want to punch cute fuzzy kittens in half and I love kittens.  T_T

 

I spent the entire damn weekend parked at gate A11 at KDFW just trying to get good frames.   I got up to 40 FPS sitting in a Cessna Caravan and I thought THAT'S IT!  I got it!   I'll buy iFly now... Load it in.  Load up my scenario.. 19 FPS...   I was like...   no way! There is no way ONE plane is sucking out 21 FPS.   So whatever setup I had is not a good setup for iFly.

 

Why can't my sim run like Froogle's?  T_T     Going to fight it again when I get home.       

 

Seriously though... shouldn't an i7 3930k 6 core with a GTX 770 OC II be able to push this sim good with high settings?

[SteveW 1,792]

I did push the AM around using a utility called Progress Lasso.  I watched the Usage graph change right before my eyes from SPIKED/THRASHING cores to evened out multiple cores as shown in my new screen shot but the effect was small on the FPS.

 

In your first screenshot it is clear that the LPs are utilised incorrectly, but in the second I still can't see that your simulator is running correctly. What AM are you using?

[Kuragiman 227]

In your first screenshot it is clear that the LPs are utilised incorrectly, but in the second I still can't see that your simulator is running correctly. What AM are you using?

 

I wish I was home right now.   I've been keeping each one I tried in the CFG file, commented out, as I try them.  Off the top of my head I can remember using;   14, 15, 4080, 4086 and the one I currently have is 1364.

 

I told PrePar3D to only using PHYSICAL cores in one run but that wasn't with the AM.  I did it through Process Lasso which has a feature to set the AM directly just like the Task Manager can.  I told it to only use the physical cores.     

 

So if I get it right are you saying that every single graph should be used and all relatively the same percentage of utilization?   I'll let you know more when I get home in a few hours. 

 

I really appreciate the attempt to help.   I watched more videos at lunch today and just sighed.   One guy stated that his specs in the video were  i7 2500k with GTX 580.   His frames never dropped past 30 while recording in a complex 146 aircraft.   He had the Out-Of-Box settings which look pretty darn good.   I would be happy with that but I know my system can push it.    I watched another guy wtih an i7 3770k and GTX 780 pushing max everything and he was doing pretty good for the most part, even over dense cityscapes.    

 

I saw something in regards to FSX that sounded interesting.   It suggested installing the simulator BEFORE overclocking the system and then once its installed then you start pushing your OC up and up until you are stable and fast.   I assume that is because the CFG gets made basd on your current system specs?    So in theroy, if you set it at your default speeds and then ram up afterward it would boost your performance.   I don't know.   All I know is there a ton of video evidence that my system isn't working right for this simulator and others have gotten theirs to work awesome with lesser hardware. 

[SteveW 1,792]

So if I get it right are you saying that every single graph should be used and all relatively the same percentage of utilization?

 

One will be maxed out, the others will be medium. Try an AM of 2720 (101010100000) which utilises the last 4 cores.

[Kuragiman 227]

One will be maxed out, the others will be medium. Try an AM of 2720 (101010100000) which utilises the last 4 cores.

 

Will do when I get home.   I am also going to delete the CFG file and let it rebuild since I did change settings in BIOS..  I notcied my RAM was only running @ 1333mhz when it is rated for 1866mhz.   I fixed that and downclocked from 4.6 ghz to 3.8 ghz just to see if I was hammering the system.   I'll let you know the results.  Thanks.

[SteveW 1,792]

OK!. Remember that the proper AM can only prevent the sim loading threads unnecessarily onto the same core, to prevent performance degradation, rather than improve performance.

[Kuragiman 227]

Okay.  I killed off the CFG file and let it reload and did the AM mask and WOW.    Sitting at Langley with default settings is yielding 55-65 FPS.      When I load the iFly 737NG it plummets to 25FPS.  T_T    That plane CANNOT be costing THAT much processing time?        I loaded up my DFW scenario with the Caravan Cessna parked at gate A11 with the payware FSDT and it's doing 45-50 FPS where it was doing 22.       So that is a huge improvment.    Now... if ONLY it would do that.. while I am in the 737 I would be done and able to fly.   Attached are two screencaps showing the FPS.   My GTX 770 OC II in BOTH scenarios wasn't using more that 50% of the GPU.   <----   THIS.   This needs to be used more.   P3D is suppose to be more GPU intensive than FSX which relied heavily on CPU power.    And you can see at the bottom the CPU isn't even being used as hard.. 14% max.

 

 

[SteveW 1,792]

looks good now on cpu use - the last four cores have their secondary LPs utilised with their primary LPs practically doing nothing

[Richard Sennett 2,499]

Okay.  I killed off the CFG file and let it reload and did the AM mask and WOW.    Sitting at Langley with default settings is yielding 55-65 FPS.      When I load the iFly 737NG it plummets to 25FPS.  T_T    That plane CANNOT be costing THAT much processing time?        I loaded up my DFW scenario with the Caravan Cessna parked at gate A11 with the payware FSDT and it's doing 45-50 FPS where it was doing 22.       So that is a huge improvment.    Now... if ONLY it would do that.. while I am in the 737 I would be done and able to fly.   Attached are two screencaps showing the FPS.   My GTX 770 OC II in BOTH scenarios wasn't using more that 50% of the GPU.   <----   THIS.   This needs to be used more.   P3D is suppose to be more GPU intensive than FSX which relied heavily on CPU power.    And you can see at the bottom the CPU isn't even being used as hard.. 14% max.

 

 

 

looks good now on cpu use - the last four cores have their secondary LPs utilised with their primary LPs practically doing nothing

 

Is Steve awesome or what - just like magic - well done Steve

[CrownCityMisfits 58]

Crank that 3930 up to 4ghz -  it's a safe preset when you launch the BIOS on startup. This may help.

[Kuragiman 227]

Crank that 3930 up to 4ghz -  it's a safe preset when you launch the BIOS on startup. This may help.

I had it at 4.6ghz for a long time without any BSOD or crashes of any kind.   I am most likely going to push it back up to 4.6ghz.    I mean I can push it to that from the desktop thanks to the ASUS II Suite but I don't think it does a lot of the special stuff that is recommended to do to keep it stable at that temp.   I have a corsair H100 hydro cooler on that bad boy so it can take the heat.

[Kuragiman 227]

Is Steve awesome or what - just like magic - well done Steve

 

60 FPS with default settings at KDFW in the Cessna Caravan.   T_T  Glorious.  Stutter free.   I took off, did a circruit around Dallas and came back and landed.   Frames never dropped below 45 the entire flight.   Thank you so much for your help.  Now to tackle the iFly 737 problem which I think is an issue with the Mipmapping in the VC according to a thread by Firehawk.  He turned off VC and was getting a good 40FPS in the VC.