Your computer has run out of available memory (KJFK) Approach.

[Patriot3810 182]

for anyone thats still running dx9 in fsx, i strongly suggest you try dx10 and try and get ahold of the scenery fixer tool, i have never had an oom with fsx after going to dx10

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

 

One thing more. For the multicore tweak, nothing changed. The AffinityMask=255 is on 255. And no change so far, i get about 20 fps when the scenery loaded up. And cpu was only 40-60% utilized.

 

This is based on a misunderstanding.. the affinitymask tweak will only move texture loading CPU load around, it will not load up your CPU to 100%, except when loading scenery.

[tsa737 6]

I would suggest viewing or posting on the support forum at http://drzewiecki-design.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=261

 

I tried all their fixes (the problem is mostly the city ftware, not the airports), and w high end PC, DX10 and using Steve's DX10 fixer, there is way to not have an OOM if flying high end aircraft, especially if you came from KBOS or other high end airport.

[math341c 0]

God im stupid!!

I just wroted in Drzewecki Design support. And the first thing admin asked me about, was what i have latest update for New York X. Nope! I have confirmed that i have 1.1. And they released 1.2 to make it compatible with new york airpotrs and less vas using. I bought the prodcuts through Simmarket, i did not get any message, that a new update was released. So im downloading it now, and will write back that everything works

 

@Bert Pieke

Can you explain me more about this cpu usage system? i have been on other forums, and everyone just recomended 2700k for fsx, 2 years ago.That´s why i bought it. The things what i don´t understand why i get low fps, when the cpu is not getting 100% utilized. I have an Asus laptop with a 2.0 Ghz Core I7 CpU. When trying to watch a 4k video on youtube the cpu goes to 100% and the video begins to lag, that´s what i understand > 100% utilized cpu cant handle it anymore, therefore lag. But the situation as you see in fsx is not the same?

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

Correct, FSX is not the same.  FSX was written to run it's main rendering load on one CPU core, and one core only.  The other cores can be used for texture loading.  That is why raw CPU speed is so important for FSX performance.

 

You could possibly have one core at 100% and the other three cores at zero for a total utilization of 25%  (that is an extreme example and your 40-60% is more typical..).

Just open Task Manager and look at the Performance tab.  You will see the individual core utilization in real time.

 

Most FSX systems today are spec'd at 4.0 GHz, or even higher with fancy cooling..

[math341c 0]

Correct, FSX is not the same.  FSX was written to run it's main rendering load on one CPU core, and one core only.  The other cores can be used for texture loading.  That is why raw CPU speed is so important for FSX performance.

 

You could possibly have one core at 100% and the other three cores at zero for a total utilization of 25%  (that is an extreme example and your 40-60% is more typical..).

Just open Task Manager and look at the Performance tab.  You will see the individual core utilization in real time.

 

Most FSX systems today are spec'd at 4.0 GHz, or even higher with fancy cooling..

So the only way is to overclock?

Or buy prepar3d maybe? They fixed this issue?

 

100% there is not any tweak to fsx which can fix this problem?

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

The best way is to get a modern i7 CPU (not laptop)..  The current 4790K runs at 4.0 GHz without any overclocking..

not sure P3D will help much, but you can try ^_^

 

Loading up a 2 GHz CPU with fancy scenery addons will indeed get you into performance issues.

 

If better performance is key, going back to FS2004 is a better strategy for a 2.0 GHz CPU..

 

The only FSX tweaks that will help, are to reduce the settings in FSX..  traffic, weather, shadows, scenery..

[math341c 0]

The best way is to get a modern i7 CPU (not laptop)..  The current 4790K runs at 4.0 GHz without any overclocking..

not sure P3D will help much, but you can try ^_^

 

Loading up a 2 GHz CPU with fancy scenery addons will indeed get you into performance issues.

 

If better performance is key, going back to FS2004 is a better strategy for a 2.0 GHz CPU..

 

The only FSX tweaks that will help, are to reduce the settings in FSX..  traffic, weather, shadows, scenery..

I have a pc with 2700k i play fsx on. But thanks for help.

[math341c 0]

So i completely removed DD New York X and DD New York Aiports. I downloaded the latest versions from simmarket. New York X 1.2 and New York airports 1.5. I installed them to fsx. I set all traffic to 0 ships, airport traffic etc. And i only set airline traffic to 7%. I began to approach, when the scenery loaded up, i could easily see that DD made some improvement to perfomance = I got more fps. But the scenery loaded up, and i was avaible to fly 3 min. I was something like 8 miles from runway. And i got the error again. I really don´t know what to do. And New York Airports should be able to run together with New York X, because DD made this especially for New york X.

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

If you are getting an OOM error with a heavy airplane + 2 heavy sceneries loaded, the three together exceed your VAS limit.

 

Start monitoring your VAS usage in this situation and see where it runs out..  this combination may simply not be possible..

[Jim Young 2,356]

Bert is correct. It may not be possible with high settings with a lot of Autogen and weather. When flying into commercial airport scenery, you should use the settings they recommend as they were able to use the scenery or else they would not have sold it. So there is nothing wrong with your system, you just need to lower settings dramatically so you can use this scenery.

 

Best regards,

[math341c 0]

Well thanks guys. I will write to DD and try to get lucky to get refunds for this. Well im not doing this vs DD, but Microsoft. That´s such a big shame that they did not make a SP3 today, to convert it to 64bit. But i thinking to spare up to a new pc, as Bert says, i am able to get more fps. With better CPU. But how can i get that much more fps with that new Intel 4.0 Ghz stock, when 2700k has stock turbo up to 3.9 Ghz? But i only need new CPU? What about GPU?

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

If you are exceeding your VAS limit, no new CPU/GPU will help.. keep that in mind.

[math341c 0]

If you are exceeding your VAS limit, no new CPU/GPU will help.. keep that in mind.

Yes,yes i know. But i want still more FPS in general FSX simulation gaming. I want smooth as possible, to make it feel so realastic as possible I want at least 50-60 average fps. Now i have about 25, in some heavy scenery areas and 50 in the sky. But im thinking to buy a 4K monitor. I know i need two of the best Graphic Cards for games like Battlefield 4 to get smooth gaming. But as you said FSX is based on CPU and how many Ghz it have. So i will get lower FPS, when i play in higher resolution in fsx? I have One Gigabyte 7970 Ghz edition 3 GB now? 

And i maybe buy a new pc with that new Intel 4.0 Ghz cpu in the future. But why is a Intel Core i7-4790K 4.0 Ghz better than Intel Core i7-5820K 3.3 Ghz for FSX? Because look as this benchmark the 5820K beats the 4790k strong?

 

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

[goates 576]

 

 

And i maybe buy a new pc with that new Intel 4.0 Ghz cpu in the future. But why is a Intel Core i7-4790K 4.0 Ghz better than Intel Core i7-5820K 3.3 Ghz for FSX? Because look as this benchmark the 5820K beats the 4790k strong?

 

One needs to be careful using benchmarks when trying to pick a CPU for FSX. Most benchmarks these days take multi-threading performance into consideration, meaning a slower 6 core CPU such as the 5820K can rank higher than a faster quad core like the 4790. This doesn't help with FSX as it doesn't fully use all cores (few if any games really do, though most are far better than FSX in this regard). You would need to look for benchmarks that focus on single core performance, like the one below. And even then, these are benchmarks and won't necessarily reflect how a specific application will run. More cores is great for those doing graphics, video and 3D modelling work though.

 

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

 

Also, the Turbo function on Intel processors works by disabling individual cores on the CPU to get to the fastest Turbo mode speed, so it isn't necessarily useful. While FSX is largely single threaded, having the additional cores available to load scenery does help.