Sign in to follow this  
Carob

4gb_patch

Recommended Posts

Is it needed to run the 4gb_patch utility on FSX on a 64-bit system?  I know it's recomended for FS9 but not sure after that.

 

Thanks.

Share this post


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

Because a 64bit system will allow you to use 4GB. Simple as that. Google for more info

 

BTW FSX on a 32 bit windows requires the 4GB patch, not just FS9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting.

 

Now I'm wondering why.  So, how come?

 

FSX SP2 and Acceleration don't need the patch because they already have the large address aware flag set. FSX RTM, SP1 and FS9 don't. Without this flag 32 bit applications will be limited to 2GB of address space, even on 64 bit Windows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not needed for the reasons goates stated. Large Address Aware FSX (SP2 or Acceleration) in a 64 bit OS can use up to 4GB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because a 64bit system will allow you to use 4GB. Simple as that. Google for more info

 

BTW FSX on a 32 bit windows requires the 4GB patch, not just FS9

Why would it be needed on a 32-bit system?  It can't use 4GB anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would it be needed on a 32-bit system?  It can't use 4GB anyway.

 

In a 32-bit OS, FSX can use more than 2GB if you tweak the OS to (again assuming FSX is large Address Aware so SP2 or Acceleration) 

So the patch is only needed if your FSX is RTM or SP1 regardless of OS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can the 4GB patch be used on the NOCD edit of the FS9.exe?

The NOCD edit of the fs9.exe as you call it is a crack file.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can the 4GB patch be used on the NOCD edit of the FS9.exe?

 

AFAIK, the above cited 4BG patch utility can be used on any 32-bit *.exe. :Idea:

 

Whether any "4GB-patched" executable may work properly after setting the "LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE" attribute 'active' is sometimes a function of other file "dependencies" used for sub-functions 'called' by a patched executable.

 

For example, external *.DLL files which are 32-bit which are linked to the original 32-bit executable may (rarely) show incompatibilities with the 'patched' version of the original executable they are linked with ...depending, IIUC, on how those DLLs are written and compiled.

 

 

Personally, I have yet to find a 32-bit executable which shows perceptible problems after setting the "LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE" attribute 'active' using the "4GB patch" referenced above.

 

I just keep a backup of the original file (...before patching it !) in a ex: ZIP or RAR file so that its file extension, date, and size etc. are unchanged if I ever need to restore it by extracting from the archive and over-writing the "patched" version because of a confirmed problem.

 

I find many 32-bit program excutables run better in Windows 7 Professsional 64-bit after setting the "LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE" attribute 'active' using the "4GB patch.

 

FS9, FSX RTM and SP1, Sketchup, and numerous other 32-bit programs both show significant differences in functionality after the 4GB patch is applied to them with no percetible problems seem to date (READ: after years of use in their patched state on Windows 7 Professsional 64-bit)

 

 

If a patched executable has a problem after patched as described above, AFAIK, it may be due to incompatibility of a linked file dependency in a ex: DLL file; so just restore the original *.exe file and note that the particular program file may not be "patchable". :wink:

 

Just keep backups of your originals and experiment ! :smile:

 

GaryGB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NOCD edit of the fs9.exe as you call it is a crack file.

Yes.  But that's what everyone uses.  is that a problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Risk of closure because someone wrote facepalm?

yeah, of course SMH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Risk of closure because someone wrote facepalm?

I believe a staff member has turned on the monitoring sign because the OP is talking about using the NOCD crack in FS9. Individuals who use cracked files can be banned from AVSIM as we do not tolerate any form of pirating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Yes. But that's what everyone uses. is that a problem?

 

This is what AVSIM's Terms of Service states;

 

Piracy, Key Sharing, Link Sharing, EULA Busting, etc.: Any message, post or topic heading that appears to advocate or perpetuates piracy, shares cracked software, links to or other like material, advocates avoidance of or contravening of End User License Agreements (EULAs) or can be interpreted as approval of piracy or EULA "busting", will be immediately removed and the poster banned. Piracy of software destroys the basis of our hobby and AVSIM enforces anti-piracy policies strictly. If you are a pirate, advocate piracy, or use pirated material, do not register. We place EULA busting in the same category.

 

 

You did read  them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what AVSIM's Terms of Service states;

 

 

You did read  them?

Sorry.

 

Sure, I read them.  About 100 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ISTR the problem of using the "large address aware" patch was that some clever programmers were using the msb of 32 bit addresses as a "flag" bit (since it was normally ignored).

 

scott s.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ISTR the problem of using the "large address aware" patch was that some clever programmers were using the msb of 32 bit addresses as a "flag" bit (since it was normally ignored).

 

scott s.

.

 

I think you mean PAE, not LAA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CAVEAT: Users of the "4GB patch" with legacy (FS9) products from Cloud9 / FSDreamTeam (aka "FSDT") may wish to review info linked from this older tutorial I wrote on use of the "/3GB switch" in 32-bit windows to set the LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE" flag and increase USERVA with 32-bit executables:

 

http://forum.simflight.com/topic/55994-set-fs-and-winxp-to-use-the-3gb-switch/

 

 

It is possible that newer updates for Cloud9 / FSDreamTeam "may" now support the default MS FS9.exe RTM version 9.0 and the FS9.1 patch / update FS9.exe, so users are advised to check first in the Cloud9 / FSDreamTeam support forums / download areas to confirm what their options are.

 

 

BTW: FS 9.1 "Patch" was the term used for that update package by ACES at that time ...and not 'Service pack'.

 

 

However, please note that as of the time of writing the above referenced tutorial, there were no other options available to end users of Cloud9 / FSDreamTeam to utilize for updating certain files integral to their products ...which would even work with the MSFS default FS9 executable; thus one was required to use "patched" FS9 executables to get their 'FSDT' products to work !  :Whistle:

 

Hope this helps ! :smile:

 

GaryGB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been fixed for years - all FSDT/Cloud9 products work with the patched versions of FS9 and FSX today.  In addition to the modification needed to the boot.ini for XP, you will need to use bcdedit for Win7 x32 to make the patch effective.  Instructions are here on the forum if you search.

 

DJ

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