Just put in the last line of the texture heading are - that will be fine but jury is still out on this being added I am not noticing anything different - try 27 or 30 like posted by others

If you don't see the occasional black square around high density sceneries, then the default setting is working fine with your Titan.

Not the same!!!

 

TextureMaxLoad is in the [DISPLAY] section. It's values are normally numbers like 6, 12, 21, 27, 30 and so on. Should be a multiple of 3.

 

and

 

Texture_Max_Load is in the [GRAPHICS] section. It's numbers represent the resolution of the textures and has values of 1024, 2048 and 4096.

 

Spirit

Hello:

 

As spirit_66 alludes to above, TextureMaxLoad is distinct from Texture_Max_Load (aka "TML").

 

 

Furthermore most references to TextureMaxLoad (which is a tweak which IIRC has been in MSFS since at least FS9 if not earlier) suggest that it is not utilized by the FS rendering system except when one also uses "locked" frame rates

 

 

Some of the many links on this topic:

 

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/432461-why-is-texturemaxload-frowned-upon-now/

 

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/281312-texturemaxload-vs-texture-max-load/

 

http://www.simforums.com/forums/fsx-tweaks-demystified_topic37948.html

 

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?44877-FSX-CONFIG-A-MATHMATICAL-APPROACH-based-on-hardware-specifications

 

 

 

CAVEAT: As has generally been advised by those who have extensively tested many FS tweaks on high-performance computer systems:

 

Always fully optimize one's computer hardware, hardware drivers, Windows and process / service sub-system ...BEFORE attempting to test

 

* applicability of

 

* need for

 

* interaction between

 

...various tweaks on FS performance.

 

 

Hope this helps ! :smile:

 

GaryGB

...

Furthermore most references to TextureMaxLoad (which is a tweak which IIRC has been in MSFS since at least FS9 if not earlier) suggest that it is not utilized by the FS rendering system except when one also uses "locked" frame rates

...

 

Hope this helps ! :smile:

 

GaryGB

 

I don't think locked frames statement is true because mine aren't and there is drastic improvement in texture loading. Well, at least for P3D in my case.

Indeed, it might be that LM may have changed some of the internal FS code such that the P3D 2.x rendering engine behaves differently than FS2Kx / FSX with respect to TextureMaxLoad in that it may 'now' work ...without locked FPS.

 

I don't yet have P3D 2.x available to test at this time, so I can't test that theory.

 

 

I merely offered up some links on the history of the topic of using TextureMaxLoad to help with anyone testing it on their own system, since the obscure technicality of that tweak not being utilized unless FPS are set "locked" at a target Frame Rate (in prior versions of MSFS at least) ...had not been mentioned thus far in this thread.

 

[EDITED]

 

Some additional reading on the history and interaction of this and 'related' tweaks:

 

http://www.steve-lacey.com/2005/11/the_blurries

 

http://www.steve-lacey.com/2005/11/the_stutters

 

 

NOTE: As Steve Lacey pointed out, "When running with an unlimited target frame rate (or any target that your system cannot achieve), the fiber system is starved of time, work items take a long time to finish and you end up with a blurry terrain until (if ever) the system finally catches up."

 

 

AFAIK, this issue may compel utilization of yet another teak to compensate for not using "locked" FPS: FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION aka "FFTF"

 

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555738

 

http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/archive/2007/06/01/fsx-tweak-of-the-week-or-2.aspx

 

http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?212042-Giving-*******-his-own-post-*******-Altuve-that-is-*-FSX-important-*

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/263132-fiber-frame-time-fraction-value-and-its-effect/

 

[END_EDIT]

 

 

Hope this helps a bit more ! :smile:

 

GaryGB

Indeed, it might be that LM may have changed some of the internal FS code such that the P3D 2.x rendering engine behaves differently than FS2Kx / FSX with respect to TextureMaxLoad in that it may now work without locked FPS.

 

I don't yet have P3D 2.x available to test at this time, so I can't test that theory.

 

FPS locked here so maybe why I dont see any difference - lets be clear I have no problems to begin with - just always looking for that extra boost  

Thanks to everyone for the assistance.

-Stampee

Indeed, it might be that LM may have changed some of the internal FS code such that the P3D 2.x rendering engine behaves differently than FS2Kx / FSX with respect to TextureMaxLoad in that it may 'now' work ...without locked FPS.

 

I don't yet have P3D 2.x available to test at this time, so I can't test that theory.

 

 

I merely offered up some links on the history of the topic of using TextureMaxLoad to help with anyone testing it on their own system, since the obscure technicality of that tweak not being utilized unless FPS are set "locked" at a target Frame Rate (in prior versions of MSFS at least) ...had not been mentioned thus far in this thread.

 

[EDITED]

 

Some additional reading on the history and interaction of this and 'related' tweaks:

 

http://www.steve-lacey.com/2005/11/the_blurries

 

http://www.steve-lacey.com/2005/11/the_stutters

 

 

NOTE: As Steve Lacey pointed out, "When running with an unlimited target frame rate (or any target that your system cannot achieve), the fiber system is starved of time, work items take a long time to finish and you end up with a blurry terrain until (if ever) the system finally catches up."

 

 

AFAIK, this issue may compel utilization of yet another teak to compensate for not using "locked" FPS: FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION aka "FFTF"

 

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555738

 

http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/archive/2007/06/01/fsx-tweak-of-the-week-or-2.aspx

 

http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?212042-Giving-*******-his-own-post-*******-Altuve-that-is-*-FSX-important-*

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/263132-fiber-frame-time-fraction-value-and-its-effect/

 

[END_EDIT]

 

 

Hope this helps a bit more ! :smile:

 

GaryGB

 

 Hey Gary, thanks for the links, very interesting read so far.

 

Here's what I found in stutters one:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Steve Lacey Mod • 9 years ago

John - By default, the texture manager will upload a maximum number of texture's per frame. This is measured in bytes, and the default is the equivalent of three 256x256 textures with mips.

The 'three' comes from a configuration variable you may not be familar with. This is TextureMaxLoad in the DISPLAY section. The default is three.

This value is multiplied by the TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT configuration variable and divided by the target framerate only in the case where you have a target framerate set. With 'unlimited', the variable will have no effect. So, you can see that the value is a multiplier, rather than having any specific units.

 

 

Then a user asks:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John Farrie • 9 years ago

Steve

...

Can I ask a couple of things about this:

<ol>

<li>Is TextureMaxLoad specified in bytes or as the number of 256x256 textures

with mips. In other words, is the default TextureMaxLoad=3 or is it

TextureMaxLoad=131286 (where 131286 = 3 x 43,762 bytes)?</li>

<li>Which variable are you saying has no effect with 'unlimited', 

TextureMaxLoad or TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT?</li>

</ol>

...

And Steve replies:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Steve Lacey Mod • 9 years ago

John - correct, this is a parameter that is not written by default.

1 - Number of 256x256 textures with mips. The default is 3.

2 - TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT.

 

 

So it appears that TextureMaxLoad is not affected by frames unlimited setting? What do you infer?

Indeed, it might be that LM may have changed some of the internal FS code such that the P3D 2.x rendering engine behaves differently than FS2Kx / FSX with respect to TextureMaxLoad in that it may 'now' work ...without locked FPS.

 

I don't yet have P3D 2.x available to test at this time, so I can't test that theory.

 

 

I merely offered up some links on the history of the topic of using TextureMaxLoad to help with anyone testing it on their own system, since the obscure technicality of that tweak not being utilized unless FPS are set "locked" at a target Frame Rate (in prior versions of MSFS at least) ...had not been mentioned thus far in this thread.

 

[EDITED]

 

Some additional reading on the history and interaction of this and 'related' tweaks:

 

http://www.steve-lacey.com/2005/11/the_blurries

 

http://www.steve-lacey.com/2005/11/the_stutters

 

 

NOTE: As Steve Lacey pointed out, "When running with an unlimited target frame rate (or any target that your system cannot achieve), the fiber system is starved of time, work items take a long time to finish and you end up with a blurry terrain until (if ever) the system finally catches up."

 

[EDITED FOR CORRECTIONS]

 

AFAIK, this issue may compel utilization of yet another tweak to compensate for not using "locked" FPS: FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION aka "FFTF"

 

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555738

 

http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/archive/2007/06/01/fsx-tweak-of-the-week-or-2.aspx

 

http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?212042-Giving-*******-his-own-post-*******-Altuve-that-is-*-FSX-important-*

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/263132-fiber-frame-time-fraction-value-and-its-effect/

 

[END_EDIT]

 

 

Hope this helps a bit more ! :smile:

 

GaryGB

 

 

Please note that I corrected the spelling of 'teak' to "tweak" in my post above.

 

Also, perhaps I might have worded a couple of things more clearly in my original post ...to avoid confusion.

 

I do not know whether LM may or may not have changed the way that TextureMaxLoad works, and I presently do not have the means to test this FS Cfg file parameter ....in P3D 2.x.

 

I simply considered the possibility that perhaps there "may" have been a change made in the way the FS rendering engine deals with the TextureMaxLoad parameter in P3D 2.x, since DukeSan asserted evidence from his own experience that use of TextureMaxLoad appeared to have a substantial impact on his own P3D 2.x performance:

 

I don't think locked frames statement is true because mine aren't and there is drastic improvement in texture loading. Well, at least for P3D in my case.

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/453741-texturemaxload-27-instant-texture-loading/page-2#entry3098699

 

 

So now it is down to the interested users here to test how this parameter is actually working in P3D 2.x, bearing mind that the "original" MSFS specification for how TextureMaxLoad was intended to work in FS2Kx and FSX (within the context of ACES, NOT LM's version of the rendering engine code) was that,  IIUC, unless FPS were locked, the TextureMaxLoad parameter was not factored into the equation for performance at run time.

 

Hope this helps clarify the issues under consideration here a bit more. :smile:

 

 

PS: Please first remember and consider ber the well-intended caveat above:

 

"CAVEAT: As has generally been advised by those who have extensively tested many FS tweaks on high-performance computer systems:

 

Always fully optimize one's computer hardware, hardware drivers, Windows and process / service sub-system ...BEFORE attempting to test

 

* applicability of

 

* need for

 

* interaction between

 

...various tweaks on FS performance."

 

Then, if you are still in a mood for some in-depth experimenting and exploring  tweaks with P3D v1.4 and/or v2.x (in addition to many main stream tweaks discussed Ad Infinitum on FSX web sites for FSX, consider testing some of the "investigational" tweaks originally intended for FS9 (...some of which I personally have found to still work rather nicely in FSX  :wink:  ).

 

YMMV.

 

I accept no responsibility for what testing this info may do to anyone's "reality constructs", peace of mind, amount of residual hair left on their head (or elsewhere), AVSIM forums' bandwidth bill, or just how comfortable the job used to be in the quiet, ivory tower / padded cell of one's 'POD' over at LM ...after the P3D v2.4 update didn't fix as much as some had originally hoped.

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/329728-possible-new-tweak-for-fs9/page-2

 

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/autogen-radius.81821/

 

 

Happy testing !

 

GaryGB

Is there anyone who can provide a more solid description as to what this does from a technical standpoint? I think it is useless to just start throwing values out there and not understanding what is happening behind the scenes with the code. What this code did in FSX or what others said it did like boyte (please excuse the spelling of his name if wrong please),  may or may not be true today. Why not just find out exactly what it does from the LM dev's and go from there. To me this is useless not knowing what it does. Maybe you do see some change, but then something else is affected down the road and you have no idea where it came from. Sorry, it is more of the tweakmasters BS to me.

 

 

Bob

Hi Bob:

 

Would I be correct that you are referring to getting an explanation direct from someone on the development team at LM as to exactly what is now the effect in P3D 2.x (if any) of using a 'discrete entry' in one's P3D Cfg file for the TextureMaxLoad parameter ?

 

GaryGB

Hi Bob:

 

Would I be correct that you are referring to getting an explanation direct from someone on the development team at LM as to exactly what is now the effect in P3D 2.x (if any) of using a 'discrete entry' in one's P3D Cfg file for the TextureMaxLoad parameter ?

 

GaryGB

 

Hi Gary,

 

Well yes I posted this in my reply "Why not just find out exactly what it does from the LM dev's and go from there."  Thought it might be helpful. Do you remember the PM for FSX? He always provided a deep description of many of the entries in the FSX.cfg. It would be nice if indeed this will be something that is and will be used in the future that LM explain it. Why have a cfg if the entries cannot be changed, but change requires knowledge.

 

Regards

Bob

Hey guys,

This is from my notes but I've not checked it out properly.

 

Remember that if the result value falls outside of a reasonable range it is ignored, which may account for inconsistent results across systems.

[GRAPHICS]
TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=1024

[Display]
TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=30
UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT=30
TextureMaxLoad=? (depends on TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT, UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT, and TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD)



if (UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT > 0)

then
  MAX_TEXTURE_DATA = (TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD * TextureMaxLoad * TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT) / UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT

else
  MAX_TEXTURE_DATA = TextureMaxLoad * TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD

 

I've no idea of starting values.

 

Best regards
 

 

Do you remember the PM for FSX? He always provided a deep description of many of the entries in the FSX.cfg. It would be nice if indeed this will be something that is and will be used in the future that LM explain it. Why have a cfg if the entries cannot be changed, but change requires knowledge.

 

Regards

Bob

 

 

Indeed, the Blog of Phil Taylor blog continues to inform, inspire, and entertain < oops... I mean "facilitate learning" in the context of the LM Academic licensure imperative inherent in use of the P3D version of MS FSX-ESP >:

 

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ptaylor/

 

 

I sure like to see Phil in the FS forums more often. B)

 

GaryGB

 

 

 

 

Indeed, the Blog of Phil Taylor blog continues to inform, inspire, and entertain < oops... I mean "facilitate learning" in the context of the LM Academic licensure imperative inherent in use of the P3D version of MS FSX-ESP >:

 

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ptaylor/

 

 

I sure like to see Phil in the FS forums more often. B)

 

GaryGB

 

 

Yes, I think LM may have contacted him. That is just my opinion though  :ph34r:

Thanks guys.

I confirm that it works for me.

 

I added TEXTUREMAXLOAD=30, with no other tweaks, and I can notice much improvement in Drzewiecki's sceneries, where there are lots of custom textures. It seems that there is less lag to load textures.

HOWEVER, it seems more fps heavy, especially at the beginning, when textures are loading for the first time. I guess, this is some compromise between smoothness and maximum textures at once.