FSX-SE The Most Intense VAS/OOM testing you have ever seen **Videos**

[Bofajking 0]

I suggest against jumping to this conclusion, simply because the Aerosim airplane is nowhere near the vas footprint of the PMDG 777.

 

Huh? Who said anything about PMDG?

 

Check out this thread. http://forum.avsim.net/topic/458260-ms-fsx-vs-dt-fsx-se-the-conclusive-performance-benchmark/ that was FSX under lesser conditions with the same aircraft

 

FSX couldn't complete half of this pattern in the Aerosim 787 so what relevance PMDG has to this escapes me. 

 

EDIT: Just to add, I can't wait until some of the essential addons are updated. I currently run FSX-MS, P3Dv2, and XPX, so I really don't get into the popularity contest some here like to run, but this is actually pretty exciting.

 

I did buy FSX-SE during the sale, looks like I'll pick up another SSD and switch over completely once the addons catch up.

 

 

I hear you about the addons. The good news is that after the holidays, PMDG, HiFi/ASN, and pretty much every other developer has stated their commitment to develop for FSX SE. For now, not having my 777 and ASN kinda hurts but when they do come, by $4.99 will be the best I ever spent. 

[fluffyflops 1,848]

Let me guess Egll in the pmdg 777 causes an oom??

[Brian Doney 127]

I guess to make some happy you'll need to install FSDT and C9 KLAX at the same time...

[flightwatch 68]

 

 

Let me guess Egll in the pmdg 777 causes an oom??

 

 

Let me guess Egll in the pmdg 777 causes an oom??

Let me guess Egll in the pmdg 777 causes an oom??

Let me guess Egll in the pmdg 777 causes an oom??

 

 

On another note:  This was done using DX10.  I have no issues with oom's in FSX when using DX10 (scenery spikes are a different thing.)  It is dx9 where everybody runs into problems.  I would like to see you redo this using dx9 and see how it does then.

[Sbacchini 15]

Man, the pmdg defense league won't let one thread go immune.... VAS has nothing to with complexity of systems, they don't have anything to do with Address Space, but certainly they affect computing power. So, just because the 777 is better all around (I'm not negating that), the only important factors for this test are size of textures, complexity of the model, textures loaded, etc. What you can see on hi videos if you just open your eyes before shouting "PMDG, PMDG", is that FSX-SE surprinsigly is more efficient than FSX in VAS management. What we need now is another test, seeing how it changes overtime, if the same behaviour can be seen along an 5 or 7 hours flight.

 

Cheers!

[asanal 32]

MJ8400 ,during flight from KJFK to KORD at 22000Ft clear sky I think I got OOM

 

http://imageshack.com/a/img537/4849/bTmbhF.jpg

[charleslee201 19]

MJ8400 ,during flight from KJFK to KORD at 22000Ft clear sky I think I got OOM

 

http://imageshack.com/a/img537/4849/bTmbhF.jpg

Nope that's not a OOM its a microsoft visual c++ problem on your end

[Bofajking 0]

Let me guess Egll in the pmdg 777 causes an oom??

 

 

On another note:  This was done using DX10.  I have no issues with oom's in FSX when using DX10 (scenery spikes are a different thing.)  It is dx9 where everybody runs into problems.  I would like to see you redo this using dx9 and see how it does then.

 

No need to wait, just check out my other thread: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/458260-ms-fsx-vs-dt-fsx-se-the-conclusive-performance-benchmark/

 

That was done with DX9 and it performed identically only thing not included was KPSP, but same aircraft, 3 of the airports, same settings, etc. Finished with 700MB less VAS. 

[charleslee201 19]

Let me guess Egll in the pmdg 777 causes an oom??

EGLL(aerosoft ext ) with Ifly NGX ,and the cs 777 no ooms did a bunch of touch and go (dx 10)

[flightwatch 68]

No need to wait, just check out my other thread: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/458260-ms-fsx-vs-dt-fsx-se-the-conclusive-performance-benchmark/

 

That was done with DX9 and it performed identically only thing not included was KPSP, but same aircraft, 3 of the airports, same settings, etc. Finished with 700MB less VAS.

Very interesting indeed. I might have to look into this stream edition if others can verify your results. With dx10, I get scenery spikes. In dx9 with anything other than the q400, I get oom.

[BimmerCop 332]

Going to subscribe and wait for the naysayers to pop in for the usual drama. This should be a good one.

 

OP, thanks for your time and trying to bring some concrete data on how well FSX:SE manages VAS. Kudos, brother!

[KingGhidorah 209]

Is my negative presence required here to liven up this thread?

 

Really, thanks for taking the time to put some of this stuff together.  I have to say I got a chuckle out of the very definitive title of this topic.

[Fi5kuS 57]

It's very interesting indeed! I am one of the few who doesn't experience less OOMs with the DX10 scenery fixer, so my biggest and only problem in flightsim is the darn out of memory error. I sincerely hope we'll be able to test the really heavy add ons like the PMDG 777 soon though. 

[Boeing or not going 578]

Huh? Who said anything about PMDG?

 

Check out this thread. http://forum.avsim.net/topic/458260-ms-fsx-vs-dt-fsx-se-the-conclusive-performance-benchmark/ that was FSX under lesser conditions with the same aircraft

 

FSX couldn't complete half of this pattern in the Aerosim 787 so what relevance PMDG has to this escapes me. 

 

Because you are claiming FSX Steam Edition is the "cure for OOM" when you have not tested a high footprint airplane like the PMDG that causes OOM more than any other addon.

Man, the pmdg defense league won't let one thread go immune.... VAS has nothing to with complexity of systems, they don't have anything to do with Address Space, but certainly they affect computing power. So, just because the 777 is better all around (I'm not negating that), the only important factors for this test are size of textures, complexity of the model, textures loaded, etc. What you can see on hi videos if you just open your eyes before shouting "PMDG, PMDG", is that FSX-SE surprinsigly is more efficient than FSX in VAS management. What we need now is another test, seeing how it changes overtime, if the same behaviour can be seen along an 5 or 7 hours flight.

 

Cheers!

 

Who are you arguing with? Nobody here is the PMDG defense league. Pointing out the PMDG 777 leads to OOM errors because of the high vas, more than any other airplane, is all I did. And until you can test the Steam Edition with this airplane, claiming OOM's are cured is premature.

[Gokau 4]

Because you are claiming FSX Steam Edition is the "cure for OOM" when you have not tested a high footprint airplane like the PMDG that causes OOM more than any other addon.

 

Who are you arguing with? Nobody here is the PMDG defense league. Pointing out the PMDG 777 leads to OOM errors because of the high vas, more than any other airplane, is all I did. And until you can test the Steam Edition with this airplane, claiming OOM's are cured is premature.

Well if the OP has processor explorer on his system and could run another test, he could report on the VAS usage throughout the flight. Then all we have to do is add ~700 to 800MB to that.