Sign in to follow this  
Kaaron Gillett

Addon aircraft performance and affinity mask tweak

Recommended Posts

I will be buying FSX:SE in a week or two and will buy my first payware aircraft. The system I'm going to be running it on isn't a tank like most of your PCs. I was wondering which aircraft is easier of the frames..Aerosoft's NEW a320/321, iFly 737 or PMDG 737.

 

Also I've been poking around elsewhere and came across the affinity mask tweak and how it supposedly allows FSX to use more cores? Can someone clarify this for me, I'd be very grateful

Share this post


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

fps wise the Airbus and the PMDG 737 should be on the same lenght. Can't speak for the iFly 737 tho.

 

How are your navigation skills? The Airbus is more user friendly, and you might enjoy more the automatic checklist it has with the copilot. 

For affinity mask and other tweaks to fsx.cfg check this pdf :)

http://forum.avsim.net/files/file/65-avsim-crash-to-desktop-guide-for-fsx-p3d-fs9/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to the forum. Be sure to check the SE compatibility of any complex aircraft before installing it. The developers are working hard to get caught up but there are still some problem spots (the PMDG 737NG is currently one of them). I'm sure all this stuff will be sorted out in the next few weeks but, in the meantime, just be aware that there are some issues yet to be resolved. Again, welcome.

 

Doug 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fps wise the Airbus and the PMDG 737 should be on the same lenght. Can't speak for the iFly 737 tho.

 

How are your navigation skills? The Airbus is more user friendly, and you might enjoy more the automatic checklist it has with the copilot.

 

For affinity mask and other tweaks to fsx.cfg check this pdf :)

 

http://forum.avsim.net/files/file/65-avsim-crash-to-desktop-guide-for-fsx-p3d-fs9/

My navigation skills are pretty good. I haD the QW 757 on my boxed FSX. I just feel the need for something a little more complex.

Welcome to the forum. Be sure to check the SE compatibility of any complex aircraft before installing it. The developers are working hard to get caught up but there are still some problem spots (the PMDG 737NG is currently one of them). I'm sure all this stuff will be sorted out in the next few weeks but, in the meantime, just be aware that there are some issues yet to be resolved. Again, welcome.

 

Doug

Thanks for the welcome Doug. I was afraid of forums before haha. I forgot the NGX doesn't work with SE yet. I'm being drawn toward the Airbus because by all accounts I heard its better on frames, plus it has an installer for SE. Saves me the headache.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PMDG 737NGX is not current available for FSX:SE  (although they are apparantly working on making it compatible), so that may sway your choice.

 

Personally, I think the iFly is miles behind the other two, in terms of visuals, modelling and texturing.

 

So I'd recommend the Aerosoft Airbus A320/A321 (or A318/A319) which has a native installer for FSX:SE and runs great on it.

 

[EDIT:  Oops, just read the bottom of your last post and see that you already spotted the above points! :smile:]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FSX:SE will automatically set the AF internally to work best on your system...

 

My advice? Forget about "tweaking" and spend more time flying! :Whistle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FSX:SE will automatically set the AF internally to work best on your system...

 

My advice? Forget about "tweaking" and spend more time flying! :Whistle:

Nice. Which is better on frames? PMDG 737 or aerosoft's a320?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Also I've been poking around elsewhere and came across the affinity mask tweak and how it supposedly allows FSX to use more cores? Can someone clarify this for me, I'd be very grateful

 

Setting an Affinity Mask, restricts the number of cores that FSX can use, it does not enable more cores..

 

The main reason is to free up a core for Windows to do it's thing without tripping over FSX.

 

So, for a quad CPU:  one core for Windows, three cores for FSX.

 

With hyperthreading enabled: two cores for Windows, six cores for FSX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Setting an Affinity Mask, restricts the number of cores that FSX can use, it does not enable more cores..

 

The main reason is to free up a core for Windows to do it's thing without tripping over FSX.

 

So, for a quad CPU: one core for Windows, three cores for FSX.

 

With hyperthreading enabled: two cores for Windows, six cores for FSX.

Ah, I see. So you'll get more cores to work with with an Intel processor right? Since AMD doesn't have hyperthreading?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, I see. So you'll get more cores to work with with an Intel processor right? Since AMD doesn't have hyperthreading?

 

Yes, but the value of hyperthreading for FSX, is not clear.  Many i7 users, myself included, have it turned off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but the value of hyperthreading for FSX, is not clear. Many i7 users, myself included, have it turned off.

I see. I'm getting a dual core i5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main reason is to free up a core for Windows to do it's thing without tripping over FSX.

 

 

I beg to differ with you on this. That may have been true prior to Windows 7 64 bit, but the OS task scheduler in Windows 7 (and especially Windows 8) does a more efficient job of partitioning CPU resources than any human can do manually. There is not a "Windows core". All that happens when one uses an AM to block either FSX or P3d from using a core is that the flight sim app has no access to that core, which often makes performance worse. The OS scheduler continues to put other threads on all available cores, including those being used either by FSX or P3d.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main reason for the AM in FSX/P3D is to ensure threads don't double up on cores in HT mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The simulator starts threads and they are assigned in turn to available LPs (logical processors). If we have HT on, then we have pairs of LPs on each Core. We want to ensure these threads miss out each alternate LP, so that we only get one thread assigned per core. We choose an AM with alternate LPs blocked. Bert's kind of right about leaving a core for Windows, but only that we may want to restrict the available cores used by the simulator so leaving others for other apps, if we have plenty of cores.

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